Opinion: 10 LY range for colonization is ridiculously low.

Jmanis

Jmanis
KKomrade Sylas said:
No you won't be able to build cities. They haven't confirmed you won't, but they also haven't confirmed you won't be able to ride a dinosaur like a horse either. I wouldn't get hyped out of something I made up in my head when they haven't confirmed nor hinted at that
Click to expand...
Lol.. FD better get in the door now and be clear this isn't the base building update, and is just the "place new ports so we don't have to" update.

Not that i expect more than that, but sounds like others might 😆 otherwise it'll be Odyssey and ship interiors all over again!
 

Tifu

Tifu
Agony_Aunt said:
The update we all want!
Click to expand...

Be warned, I'm a Pokémon fan so would love to have alien pets in ED. Specially ridable ones 🏇
1000001356.jpg
 

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
John Xenir said:
[...]

And what do you base your presumption on, as well as why do you perceive it a "problem"? Does it really require - after 10 years of existence - to keep reminding people this game can be played however one wants?
Click to expand...
Good point. Let me use your point for myself: I want to play it without gankers and squatters.
 

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
John Xenir said:
Cool, there's a whole mile-long thread you where can express your desire for gankless experience.
It's just not here so let's stay on point.
Click to expand...
My argument is valid. No matter if it appears on another thread or not. Please read the second part of my argument: I think that squatters and colony litterers should be kept away from scenic vistas and planets. Our RL world has national parks and wildlife resorts for a reason.
Still, I have to hear a second argument why the colonization range should go beyond 10 ly. The first being that some home systems are so deeply inside the bubble that it may be impossible to colonize beyond a small area.
So what is your argument why you need to colonize a far distant system?
 

John Xenir

John Xenir
You argument is valid - I did not deny that. It's just not on subject with this thread, basic netiquette. (And please don't make me feel old saying you've no idea what it is... I'm not THAT old!)
It's also not necessary to quote response that you directly reply under - do you always repeat what someone said in a conversation one-on-one, a second before answering them face-to-face? I would love to see that...

Anyhoo, to answer your question: it's not about why I need to colonize a far distant system (is there even close distant one?). It's just simple logic, at this stage: who colonized Colonia and how? I don't see rosary of settlements all the way from Sol to there. So if they did it, it's possible, therefore 10Ly limitation is arbitrary and can be changed to whatever.
I'm just like that. If what's already in the game flies in the face of later-introduced changes, creating paradox, then I see absolutely no reason to take it at face value, because that's a poker face with a concrete-floor-thickness make-up on it, that tries hard to not laugh.

Still, in one of my earlier responses I have displayed my opinion that this 10Ly value is likely for beta-testing only and we may see its reiteration when it actually goes live, so we all may be wrong about going to jousts about it.
 

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
John Xenir said:
…

Anyhoo, to answer your question: it's not about why I need to colonize a far distant system (is there even close distant one?). It's just simple logic, at this stage: who colonized Colonia and how? I don't see rosary of settlements all the way from Sol to there. So if they did it, it's possible, therefore 10Ly limitation is arbitrary and can be changed to whatever.
…
Click to expand...
In game reason: because a hundreds of years old cyborg bartender saved enough money to buy a station with a long range hyperdrive and mis-jumped.
Out of game reason: FDev put it there as a place for players who don‘t want to be involved into the bubble‘s shenanigans.
 

Michael Ryan

Michael Ryan
Jinx Chrome said:
Still, I have to hear a second argument why the colonization range should go beyond 10 ly. (...)
Click to expand...

With 10 Ly distance even if you want to connect Colonia and Bubble you need 40 years.
10 Ly is not colonisation it's just bubble expansion.

For me totally enough is the reason: "because player wants to make own base fat away from the bubble". The argument about uinouched systems in galaxy is invalid, Galaxy is enormous huge...

Even if we let 10.000 players possiblity to colonise one system per day. You need 100.000 years to colonise whole galaxy.
 

K Olley

K Olley
Jinx Chrome said:
Please don’t take my point that yours leads to a circular argument all too serious: "But how do we supply the colony? Let‘s use a carrier!"
I love the DSSAs and don‘t care (aka use) any others than them.
Click to expand...
First part of the colony would be agricultural, everyone needs food, the second mining, to provide the raw materials for expansion and trade, followed by extraction, refining and light industrial, then it would be a case of gradual expansion and a reliance on certain amount of supply until they have got their own high tech facility up and running.
 

John Xenir

John Xenir
Jinx Chrome said:
In game reason: because a hundreds of years old cyborg bartender saved enough money to buy a station with a long range hyperdrive and mis-jumped.
Out of game reason: FDev put it there as a place for players who don‘t want to be involved into the bubble‘s shenanigans.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, it's not a contest of who can come up with more or less in-game justification for colonizing range expansion. The discussion is about extending it, and all you do is dilute the thread with your aimless arguments.
The fact to the matter is: nobody has to justify to you why they want what they want. Longer range would allow anyone eager to get out there and litter the galaxy with small settlements, to do just that. Whether you are or aren't in that camp is irrelevant. If you choose to present your argument why you think it should stay at 10Ly, it may contribute positively and additively to the conversation.
What you do now is the opposite of that - it's splitting hairs and not really being interested in someone else's point of view, proven by your immediate counter-argument when responded to your original question.

There's an invitation here for you to share your opinion - take it or leave it. But I won't get bogged down trying to prove to you why I see things how I do, because you're not interested in hearing that. You're just interested in proving to me that you subjective point of view is more objective than my subjective point of view, and that's futile, on top of being not on subject.
PS: I know the term "point of view" is synonymous with "subjective", but I deliberately used such phrasing to contrast it with objectivity.
 

Alien

Alien
John Xenir said:
Unfortunately, it's not a contest of who can come up with more or less in-game justification for colonizing range expansion. The discussion is about extending it, and all you do is dilute the thread with your aimless arguments.
The fact to the matter is: nobody has to justify to you why they want what they want. Longer range would allow anyone eager to get out there and litter the galaxy with small settlements, to do just that. Whether you are or aren't in that camp is irrelevant. If you choose to present your argument why you think it should stay at 10Ly, it may contribute positively and additively to the conversation.
What you do now is the opposite of that - it's splitting hairs and not really being interested in someone else's point of view, proven by your immediate counter-argument when responded to your original question.

There's an invitation here for you to share your opinion - take it or leave it. But I won't get bogged down trying to prove to you why I see things how I do, because you're not interested in hearing that. You're just interested in proving to me that you subjective point of view is more objective than my subjective point of view, and that's futile, on top of being not on subject.
PS: I know the term "point of view" is synonymous with "subjective", but I deliberately used such phrasing to contrast it with objectivity.
Click to expand...
To most people, a post like this is labelled "rude" or "negative" or "argumentative". To me, he's just being honest and expressing his opinion passionately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom