Patch Notes Update Update 1.1.05 incoming (19.02.15)

[AtheosisX]

I guess that is true...

...as long as you completely disregard the tens of thousands of systems in the game which ARE dynamically altered in regards to economy, system states, faction balances, missions, NPC traffic, exploration data, conflict zones and a whole bunch of other stuff based on this so called "nonexistent" background simulation...

Is there some bugs in the system currently? Yes and they are being addressed.

Is your statement above true? No. Not even close.

Tweaking numbers and altering actual game content on the fly are not even remotely the same. The proof is right there in front of you. They only add this stuff during server maintenance because that's the only way they can.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I was going to go on an extended rant about how you people are assuming so damn much about Frontier'sFrontier's background simulation architecture but I'm gonna curb that response by saying that you people have no clue how their systems work, or why they seemingly have to manually add stations. You're probably the same kinds of people that lost their damn mind that the servers has to reboot for a few minutes daily, and maybe that is when they could add stations automatically.

Not that they would since they've stated before that they're not completely ready for the background simulation to run rampant, unchecked.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The toxicity, entitlement, expectations, and pompous know-it-all attitude prevalent on these forums makes League of Legends look tame.


I guess my response was long afterall.

We're toxic, entitled, and pompous because we are calling a spade a spade? Do you actually even know how P2P works? There's a reason why a game that only ever renders the game world on players' computers can't have a true background simulation, and there's probably no way to get around it. The truth hurts sometimes.

 

[AlianAnt]

Tweaking numbers and altering actual game content on the fly are not even remotely the same. The proof is right there in front of you. They only add this stuff during server maintenance because that's the only way they can.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



We're toxic, entitled, and pompous because we are calling a spade a spade? Do you actually even know how P2P works? There's a reason why a game that only ever renders the game world on players' computers can't have a true background simulation, and there's probably no way to get around it. The truth hurts sometimes.

All right, man. You're so right. Ya got me. You're not expecting ludicrously high standards. Not at all. Tell ya what, assuming you're right, please show me side by side, on a weekly basis, Elite Dangerous as it is, and the fantasy that runs through your mind where the game has a 350 person development team, unlimited funding, and stastate-of-the-art server architecture on top of not having a monthly subscription.

I can't understand why you people hate FD so much. You're all acting like little babies. Holy crap they added a station in a patch. Burn and pillage. FD lies. Not a true sim.

Im nit hurt at all, even a little bit, because they added a station in a patch. Expectations take precident over reality for you, not me. But I'm sure you've got all the solutions.

 

[Azraphael]

Im not sure if anyone has started experiencing this and I haven't read all the threads in this post but since yesterday I've noticed taking damage for no reason at all in my clipper in stations, floating stationary with no other ships near, I've also noticed npc clippers getting stuck in the postbox' in three stations (Abe in Shapsugabus, Suzuki in Lumastya and Hunziker in Aymifa). Obviously when they die they fill the entrance with debris, so then I have the choice of waiting for ship to enter/leave and clear the debris (which has never happened) or slowly push through it myself, so far the damage to my ship has been about 1 million (clippers aint cheap to buff the scratchs out). Anyone else seen this?

 

[ColdGlider]

When a station or anything else is added to the game it has to be done on the files on players' computers because they are what is "hosting" everything in-game. There is no way to alter those files on the run, that's why even the smallest changes need patches.

Was the patch required maybe because this was the first time an "under construction" station model was being used? I'm asking because I really don't know: but if so, naturally you'd need to transmit the data for that new 3D model to every client. That would be much different than just "adding a station" that used a model already on the client.

Anyone else think this particular dialog should be moved to the general discussions board? It seems to be getting more philosophical and broader in terms of overall game architecture (not to mention enflamed) and less about the specific issues with this patch.

 

[Jack Luminous]

It's just the same few people who insist on pushing their views on their perceived faults of the game on everybody, day after day, thread after thread, and behaving very naughtily. Well, we all have our pastimes...

 

[Reithan]

All it is is a number tracker. It hosts nothing of substance and does not run any kind if true, persistent simulation. When a station or anything else is added to the game it has to be done on the files on players' computers because they are what is "hosting" everything in-game. There is no way to alter those files on the run, that's why even the smallest changes need patches.

In a way, everything in a program is just 'number tracking', unless they're adding a totally new type of station, or a totally new model for a station, really the only 'update' that would need to go out is something like [systemID;stationType;X,Y,Zcoordinate;stationName;population;economy1;economy2]. A lot of people forget that the majority of the game is also procedurally generated. So, to say it would be impossible to do something like this on the fly, even if it's client side, is just silly. Especially when you have games like SC2 or GuildWars that can stream in entire game patches while you're still playing. Streaming client-side patching on the fly is a reality these days.

 

[Wyngale]

Thanks so much for fixing that exploration bug, had a bunch of data waiting to be sold.

I'd be even happier if it were retroactive (sold a bunch before I noticed it).

 

[Eightfingers]

Nice!

Always good news.

 

[Snowstormy]

I figured out a bug.
Not sure if it was mentioned before, but i dont want to read through 18 pages of "well done" and "good work".
My Point Defense Turrets do not work on enemy missles/mines. Furthermore they sometimes shoot my own missles which instantly turns me hostile to the whole Warzone.

 

[Jack Luminous]

I figured out a bug.
Not sure if it was mentioned before, but i dont want to read through 18 pages of "well done" and "good work".
My Point Defense Turrets do not work on enemy missles/mines. Furthermore they sometimes shoot my own missles which instantly turns me hostile to the whole Warzone.

Have you ticketed this? Also, please use the thread devoted for bug discussion.

 

[Serpent]

Still no input from the devs in relation to the exploration bug not being fixed after all?

If I missed some feedback please let me know. This is an important thing to all explorers out there.

 

[maddog_uk_69]

It's just the same few people who insist on pushing their views on their perceived faults of the game on everybody, day after day, thread after thread, and behaving very naughtily. Well, we all have our pastimes...

It's just the same few people who insist on pushing their denial of the game's faults on everybody, day after day, thread after thread, and behaving very naively. Well, we all have our pastimes...

 

[Jack Luminous]

It's just the same few people who insist on pushing their denial of the game's faults on everybody, day after day, thread after thread, and behaving very naively. Well, we all have our pastimes...

Heh, nice one. What I would like to see is constructive discussion instead of "I want this / why oh why / this sucks" defended with "you don't know anything". The fanboi analogue is hardly taking the discussion anywhere. The dev team is working hard and most of the players are more or less happy to see development continue - it's just the loud minority who are actually complaining about getting new patches, not getting a pink pony yesterday, the dev team's plan being so different from what they would like to see, and most of all, other players being happy with what is going on in the development. Why hang around here moaning if the game is so terrible? Why not have patience and come back a few months from now to see what kind of a beast ED has become?

 

[TPRDroid]

I agree Jack. Most of us are quite happy with the way the game is developing. Some people want instant gratification and whine whatever the game is. I doubt they like any game they've bought in the past and are willing to find fault in everything. Spoilt little brats. ED is not the usual COD or any of the other FPS games they're used to. It is an organic, living, evolving game which will only get better and I personally am happy to assist the devs as they progress the game to what will be an awesome game. Even that is a stretching target. Because of EDs open-ended nature there probably won't be a completion date. After all, they have the whole universe to design. No small task when you think about it. At least they listen to their customers and will try to include as much of the feedback they've received as possible, within the limitations of what is possible with code.

 

[Nekolo]

keep that awesome work up

 

[Zoy]

The gall with which people like you demand a 100% automated, perfect system leaves me completely speechless. I don't know where to start.

+1 here.
As players, we should not be concerned about development practices (especially when we cannot possibly have the big picture of what the FD team do in their working day). Perhaps automation of this is on the list but at a lower priority? Maybe doing it like this for now frees up significant resources to implement more important features?

I think it is valid to call out the effects of this approach, so you could say "I don't like the server downtime this approach implies", or "it's a bit unrealistic that station changes only happen on Thursday mornings"

Personally, I think this is a great new feature and I trust FD to improve it over time

Keep up the good work FD - and thanks!

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

Thanks so much for fixing that exploration bug, had a bunch of data waiting to be sold.

I'd be even happier if it were retroactive (sold a bunch before I noticed it).

There is no sign that they have fixed the 'common' exploration selling bug. They do claim to have fixed a 'rare' one, but despite requests have not said what it was that they fixed.

 

[BaronDeKalb]

Thanks for the patch.
Traveling seems a bit faster, and it feels nice.
My Sound has improved, less crackling, while selecting things.
Overall Sound is also much better.
High Sec is working nicely.

Had a great time playing today before me nap.

Just Missing the Baron's RareBreed don't forget about the poor ole Baron, i can almost buy me RareBreed Python and i need some stock to give away!!! So please add the BaronsRareBreed Rum

 

[Sacman]

I guess that is true...

...as long as you completely disregard the tens of thousands of systems in the game which ARE dynamically altered in regards to economy, system states, faction balances, missions, NPC traffic, exploration data, conflict zones and a whole bunch of other stuff based on this so called "nonexistent" background simulation...

Is there some bugs in the system currently? Yes and they are being addressed.

Is your statement above true? No. Not even close.

Ok ... our views of a dynamic gameworld are different and i accept that fact.

 

[Tinman]

Tweaking numbers and altering actual game content on the fly are not even remotely the same. The proof is right there in front of you. They only add this stuff during server maintenance because that's the only way they can.

Where did I write anything about game assets being done on the fly?

What I wrote was that economy, mission, exploration data/tracking, bounties, system states, faction influences, data used for NPC traffic/signal sources and similar metadata is indeed dynamic and handled by a central galaxy server that everyone connects too. Which leads me too...

We're toxic, entitled, and pompous because we are calling a spade a spade? Do you actually even know how P2P works? There's a reason why a game that only ever renders the game world on players' computers can't have a true background simulation, and there's probably no way to get around it. The truth hurts sometimes.

The background simulation is NOT rendered on our computers. As soon you do something in regards to the things I listed above you connect to the persistent servers which updates the game world in some small way based of that data. P2P connections are only used for connecting to other players. There is no truth in your statement above.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Ok ... our views of a dynamic gameworld are different and i accept that fact.

Which is probably the core of the issue.

Could you please define clearly what you would consider to be dynamic?