[Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

Nerwesta
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed, 17. May 23, 21:29

[Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Nerwesta »

Howdy,

Like many people I was pretty excited to see the mini-DLC 2 "Envoy pack" unveiled.
However, after reading a lot of opinions raised by the community here or elsewhere, I might have some grudge about the cloacking mechanic, a feature seemingly asked by long standing players.
( which I'm not so I won't spend a lot of words here writing for them )

This feature should have been something for vanilla alongside an update for every ships.

To me the ships and particularly the Envoy are unique enough to raise excitement, wishlists and in the end to be a good content from Egosoft.
The ships, alone.
To back that up, the Hyperion had no such interiors nor moving parts, was simpler design-wise and above all, didn't have that gimmicky mechanic.
However, if we've got a mini-DLC #2 in the first place, it likely meant the first one had as a bare minimum decent to very good sales, per Egosoft's words :
Depending on the success of the first Mini DLC, we may follow up with similarly sized DLCs to accompany other free base game updates. As you can see, our focus in 2025 is on consistent, impactful improvements to the base game and, as in the past, those base game updates will be free to existing X4 players, with Mini DLC purchases supporting ongoing development.
https://store.steampowered.com/news/app ... 8304123197
( plus the good reviews on Steam )

So, what are the incentives to make a full blown mechanic under a mini-DLC ?
If Egosoft wants to really make a case on how important the Envoy is, there are plenty of ideas to please most people like having a better and free cloacking device on that one, while the others would have only a "Mk. 1".

Don't get me wrong the suggestion isn't necessarily because we have to buy that, but because we are having a feature that's been asked by many people, under a single & personal ship, on a DLC.
The game is championing itself ( for a good reason ) to have a simulated galaxy full of possibilites with everyone playing by the same rules, yet ... this one feels unfair.


I really hope Egosoft can acknowledge that opinion.
Realistically if a positive case has to be made, I would hope the said feature could be offered for any ships later one after the DLC is sold enough, which I'm sure it will. :mrgreen:

Thanks for reading.
Raptor34
Posts: 3546
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Raptor34 »

It already is with the purple radar detection range reduction mod. I'll note that all it says in the description is radar evasion, nothing implies invisibility like say Starcraft cloaks.
Nerwesta
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed, 17. May 23, 21:29

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Nerwesta »

I'm thinking about the full package, including the "faction camouflage protocols".
Raptor34
Posts: 3546
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Raptor34 »

Like that Moreya that can disguise itself already? We don't yet know what it's even capable of when disguising itself, like have we heard what happens when we shoot other people?
flywlyx
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by flywlyx »

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:44 Like that Moreya that can disguise itself already? We don't yet know what it's even capable of when disguising itself, like have we heard what happens when we shoot other people?
The current Moreya system disables camouflage once you start attacking other ships, and I assume the same mechanism will apply here.
Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:24 It already is with the purple radar detection range reduction mod. I'll note that all it says in the description is radar evasion, nothing implies invisibility like say Starcraft cloaks.
The current radar range reduction is almost like invisibility, once you’re out of radar range, NPCs act as if you don’t exist, even if you’re still within their weapon range.
Raptor34
Posts: 3546
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Raptor34 »

flywlyx wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:00
Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:44 Like that Moreya that can disguise itself already? We don't yet know what it's even capable of when disguising itself, like have we heard what happens when we shoot other people?
The current Moreya system disables camouflage once you start attacking other ships, and I assume the same mechanism will apply here.
It should. Yet hearing how people are talking about it you'll think it's some wonderous new mechanism that enables whole new styles of gameplay instead of seeming more like a RP tool.
Nerwesta
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed, 17. May 23, 21:29

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Nerwesta »

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:44 Like that Moreya that can disguise itself already? We don't yet know what it's even capable of when disguising itself, like have we heard what happens when we shoot other people?

What kind of bad English did you see on my thread that doesn't mention vanilla and every ships ? Besides the Moreya is a very specific case I'm not sure it could hold firm here.
Yes we didn't see how the Envoy is fully capable of, but from the description it's worthy enough to discuss.

edit : I may have wrongly read your sentence, I thought you wanted to say that Moreya already exists, therefore what I suggest is void. Apologies otherwise.
flywlyx
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by flywlyx »

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:04 It should. Yet hearing how people are talking about it you'll think it's some wonderous new mechanism that enables whole new styles of gameplay instead of seeming more like a RP tool.
I actually think it’ll be a bit different—it should allow choosing different factions, unlike Moreya’s version, which is fixed to Yaki.
Nerwesta
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed, 17. May 23, 21:29

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Nerwesta »

Hence my "specific case", also my thread is all about the ships in general, not a tiny fighter under a plot.
( does it desactivate when finishing it though ? )
flywlyx
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by flywlyx »

Nerwesta wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:11 Hence my "specific case", also my thread is all about the ships in general, not a tiny fighter under a plot.
( does it desactivate when finishing it though ? )
Since version 7.0, the camouflage function remains on the Moreya, and we’ve been given a switch to toggle it on or off.
Nerwesta
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed, 17. May 23, 21:29

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Nerwesta »

I see, thanks for the heads up.
Raptor34
Posts: 3546
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Raptor34 »

flywlyx wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:10
Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:04 It should. Yet hearing how people are talking about it you'll think it's some wonderous new mechanism that enables whole new styles of gameplay instead of seeming more like a RP tool.
I actually think it’ll be a bit different—it should allow choosing different factions, unlike Moreya’s version, which is fixed to Yaki.
That of course. But what I don't know is whether there would be any actual useful difference.
Like if they can land on enemy stations I can do that and turn off turrets, easier than waiting for some neutral transport to do the same. It's just that ultimately, does it even matter? Players already rarely engage factions, and those who do would like the challenge not being able to simply outrange them provides.
Besides that, I can already do what I need to do in hostile space with a fast scout ship anyway. Literally how I laid out my anim- I mean Xenon surveillance network.
jlehtone
Posts: 22559
Joined: Sat, 23. Apr 05, 21:42
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by jlehtone »

flywlyx wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:16
Nerwesta wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:11 Hence my "specific case", also my thread is all about the ships in general, not a tiny fighter under a plot.
( does it desactivate when finishing it though ? )
Since version 7.0, the camouflage function remains on the Moreya, and we’ve been given a switch to toggle it on or off.
Or on the Katana, isn't it?

However, Moreya, Katana, and the camouflage are all from a DLC, so no more in "vanilla" than the Envoy will be.

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:34 Besides that, I can already do what I need to do in hostile space with a fast scout ship anyway.
Exactly. I have had no need to pretend to be someone else.
In fact, the forced camouflage in that above mentioned story was annoying. :rant:
Goner Pancake Protector X
Insanity included at no extra charge.
There is no Box. I am the sand.
flywlyx
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by flywlyx »

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:34 That of course. But what I don't know is whether there would be any actual useful difference.
Like if they can land on enemy stations I can do that and turn off turrets, easier than waiting for some neutral transport to do the same. It's just that ultimately, does it even matter? Players already rarely engage factions, and those who do would like the challenge not being able to simply outrange them provides.
Besides that, I can already do what I need to do in hostile space with a fast scout ship anyway. Literally how I laid out my anim- I mean Xenon surveillance network.
Yeah, it would fit better as part of a pirate gameplay rework, and only for certain limited Raider variants. Giving an Asgard camouflage just wouldn’t make sense.
LameFox
Posts: 3642
Joined: Tue, 22. Oct 13, 15:26
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by LameFox »

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:04 It should. Yet hearing how people are talking about it you'll think it's some wonderous new mechanism that enables whole new styles of gameplay instead of seeming more like a RP tool.
Most alternate styles of gameplay in X4 *are* basically RP. Functionally you can be a friendly war profiteering trader (probably it's most well-developed playstyle) and achieve everything.
***modified***
blackphoenixx
Posts: 289
Joined: Mon, 31. Jan 22, 14:43

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by blackphoenixx »

Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:04
flywlyx wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:00
Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:44 Like that Moreya that can disguise itself already? We don't yet know what it's even capable of when disguising itself, like have we heard what happens when we shoot other people?
The current Moreya system disables camouflage once you start attacking other ships, and I assume the same mechanism will apply here.
It should. Yet hearing how people are talking about it you'll think it's some wonderous new mechanism that enables whole new styles of gameplay instead of seeming more like a RP tool.
Not wondrous and new, but it does? The Moreya camouflage isn't exactly useful outside of its questline or exploring Xenon sectors since nearly everyone else is hostile to Yaki.

The ability to disguise ourselves as a faction that doesn't get shot on sight by 90% of the universe will open up some options for pirate gameplay that simply aren't available right now, especially if it lets you land on otherwise-hostile stations to hack terminals.

It doesn't need to give us the option to attack while disguised to be useful. Just being able to do what normal pirates do would already be a pretty nice benefit.
User avatar
PersonyPerson
Posts: 266
Joined: Sat, 20. Oct 18, 12:50
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by PersonyPerson »

Just to clarify, the "Cloak" and the Faction "Cover" (or Camouflage) are described as being two seperate features. One does not already exist inside the game (Cloak), the other one does albeit in a limited capacity for the player (Cover). You guys are talking almost exclusively about the "Cover" system.
Nerwesta wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:13 If Egosoft wants to really make a case on how important the Envoy is, there are plenty of ideas to please most people like having a better and free cloacking device on that one, while the others would have only a "Mk. 1".
Assuming this is referring to cover, how would this even work? If say for example there was a base game version of a "lesser" form of Cover that only existed on player-flown pirate oriented ships for a limited time before having to recharge, then I can imagine that being more annoying than useful. Just before you're about to get into the blindspot of a station, it runs out of charge and the station blows you up. Or if you're worrying so much about the charge that you then regularly leave it until too late, where you get detected before enabling cover with sector security then swarming down upon you. Then people with such experiences on their backs would still make threads of "Why isn't the Mk.2 version of Cover in the base game" anyway.

Not that it matters because the Cover mechanic as it exists now is not tied to a ship module that you can just equip, take off or upgrade at a whim.
User avatar
grapedog
Posts: 2513
Joined: Sat, 21. Feb 04, 20:17
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by grapedog »

Yes, so I can attack terran ships in terran space, cloaked as a Paranid or Teladi, and they lose rep... not me. And if I do it enough, i set the two factions towards conflict!
Raptor34
Posts: 3546
Joined: Sat, 12. Jun 10, 04:43
x4

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Raptor34 »

PersonyPerson wrote: Sat, 16. Aug 25, 15:07 Just to clarify, the "Cloak" and the Faction "Cover" (or Camouflage) are described as being two seperate features. One does not already exist inside the game (Cloak), the other one does albeit in a limited capacity for the player (Cover). You guys are talking almost exclusively about the "Cover" system.
Isn't cloak just the superior hull mod silhouette or w/e it's called you can slap on any ship? From the description it just makes you harder to detect, i.e. reduce radar detection range.
grapedog wrote: Sat, 16. Aug 25, 17:33 Yes, so I can attack terran ships in terran space, cloaked as a Paranid or Teladi, and they lose rep... not me. And if I do it enough, i set the two factions towards conflict!
Any evidence that this is what's intended? Current cover system already doesn't do that, and nothing I've seen indicates that Egosoft would add something as OP as this.
Nerwesta
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed, 17. May 23, 21:29

Re: [Suggestion] The cloacking mechanic should be vanilla

Post by Nerwesta »

LameFox wrote: Sat, 16. Aug 25, 07:36
Raptor34 wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 23:04 It should. Yet hearing how people are talking about it you'll think it's some wonderous new mechanism that enables whole new styles of gameplay instead of seeming more like a RP tool.
Most alternate styles of gameplay in X4 *are* basically RP. Functionally you can be a friendly war profiteering trader (probably it's most well-developed playstyle) and achieve everything.
Agreed 100%, besides the Envoy screams being a RP prone ship too.

edit : same for blackphoenixx's point.


PersonyPerson wrote: Sat, 16. Aug 25, 15:07 Just to clarify, the "Cloak" and the Faction "Cover" (or Camouflage) are described as being two seperate features. One does not already exist inside the game (Cloak), the other one does albeit in a limited capacity for the player (Cover). You guys are talking almost exclusively about the "Cover" system.
Nerwesta wrote: Fri, 15. Aug 25, 22:13 If Egosoft wants to really make a case on how important the Envoy is, there are plenty of ideas to please most people like having a better and free cloacking device on that one, while the others would have only a "Mk. 1".
Assuming this is referring to cover, how would this even work? If say for example there was a base game version of a "lesser" form of Cover that only existed on player-flown pirate oriented ships for a limited time before having to recharge, then I can imagine that being more annoying than useful. Just before you're about to get into the blindspot of a station, it runs out of charge and the station blows you up. Or if you're worrying so much about the charge that you then regularly leave it until too late, where you get detected before enabling cover with sector security then swarming down upon you. Then people with such experiences on their backs would still make threads of "Why isn't the Mk.2 version of Cover in the base game" anyway.

Not that it matters because the Cover mechanic as it exists now is not tied to a ship module that you can just equip, take off or upgrade at a whim.
We aren't, as I understood we are talking about both abilities the Envoy is marketed on. I mentioned cloak but I hope you get my drift, I specifically made a precision about " the whole package ".
Case in point people are talking about the Moreya juste above your message.

About your second point, I don't know, there are many possibilities to tackle that issue, be it smaller stations doesn't see you as much as bigger ones with lots of buildings and guards.
Meaning you won't approach a Shaft or HQ as easily as the Envoy, makes sense, I'm not a game designer, perhaps there are better ideas in there.
The game allows us to think about many parameters here, so again there isn't solely a one path to have something functional within it's bounds.

That's exactly what I would like, for those who want to RP as a pirate for example, no need to lock that on a mini-DLC. Egosoft could put that stuff under a very expensive research, being a very expensive item, so you don't slap those on any of your fighters without trying to make a steady profit first. Again, a lot of ideas to think about.

Bottom line, Envoy shouldn't get that exclusivity, especially as a mini-DLC, I feel like that's unfair.


PS : I opened the door Egosoft could make those means available globally later on, perhaps on a mini-update for Pirates once the Envoy sells well ( I can guess ) so I hope it can be acknowledged people are debating on that.

Return to “X4: Foundations”