Current Jump Range Calculation: Why?

[ziden]

Because FD wanted it this way for game play reasons. If jump range was based 100% on fuel capacity, the Asp would jump the same distance as several other ships.

It would then no longer be the specialised explorer ship it's designed to be. And the hauler would suddenly have its jump range severely limited, taking away one of its benefits. And we'd be able to jump hundreds of light years in one go, severely limiting the sensation of scale in the galaxy.

I could keep going.

I won't pretend to understand the theoretical science behind it. I'm certain there is some sound theory and probably some handwavium theory too. But the real answer is "because the developers wanted to add depth of ship variation" and jump range is one way of doing that.

I said it would be based on the fuel's maximum ability to make the ship travel. The ratios would remain the same, you would just be able to use more of your fuel tank in one jump. Mass and such would still take effect, you'd just be able to gain the full capability of your ship. So in other words an asp may be able to travel 100ly in one jump vs. a python who might only be able to hit 65. Reason? Larger FSD, large fuel tank, small mass. This makes sense. A python uses a large fsd as well and has a good fuel tank, but is moving a much larger mass and would require much more fuel than an asp.

Simply put, this would allow you to travel less distance than optimized travel or economic travel, but you'd get there faster.

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

Maybe you'll find this dev post helpful:



Each FSD lists these stats, the rest of it comes down to the overall mass of your ship (including fuel remaining in your tank and cargo).

Thanks for the quote. Basically arbitrarily provided limitations which the developer stated are subject to change.

 

[ziden]

What we're basically driving at is that the engine can only glug so much fuel in one go. You can carry more fuel than the engine can glug, but it can only glug so much.

As to why? Well, it turns out that superluminal flight is a tricky . Even the best Frame Shift Drives we can build have a range of about 30 Lights. They have a definite range, which burns a specific amount of fuel, and they can go So Far And No Further. The way FSDs get seemingly logarithmically more expensive as their range opens implies to me that the manufacturing costs, the tolerance of precision building it, the amount of Computer Welly stuffed into it are more and more demanding, the further the jump. But they can only be made *so good*. There are no 300-Light jumpdrives, nor 1,000-Light jumpdrives. It would seem there's a limit to the things, the same way we can't get 20GHz CPUs.

If we didn't have a gas tank plugged into it, it would be jump... refuel... jump. And as not all stars can be scooped, nor does every star have a gas station, that would break the game.

Hahaha, how is this game breaking? If you travel at max range, you run that risk. It's risk vs. reward. You can run out of fuel with the current mechanics as well. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to do it. I'm just wondering why the ability to travel at max fuel capability is not something that's even considered.

 

[Ydiss]

I said it would be based on the fuel's maximum ability to make the ship travel. The ratios would remain the same, you would just be able to use more of your fuel tank in one jump. Mass and such would still take effect, you'd just be able to gain the full capability of your ship. So in other words an asp may be able to travel 100ly in one jump vs. a python who might only be able to hit 65. Reason? Larger FSD, large fuel tank, small mass. This makes sense. A python uses a large fsd as well and has a good fuel tank, but is moving a much larger mass and would require much more fuel than an asp.

Simply put, this would allow you to travel less distance than optimized travel or economic travel, but you'd get there faster.

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



Thanks for the quote. Basically arbitrarily provided limitations which the developer stated are subject to change.

Fair enough. My answer is still the same though.

FD don't want us jumping hundreds of light years in one go. There might be an actual theory that limits the range but I won't pretend to know it. All I do know is the decision will have been for game play design reasons.

 

[ziden]

Fair enough. My answer is still the same though.

FD don't want us jumping hundreds of light years in one go. There might be an actual theory that limits the range but I won't pretend to know it. All I do know is the decision will have been for game play design reasons.

I can respect that. I just see it as a way to alleviate the headache of having to jump over and over and over to go (in my example I state 15 ly.)

I don't even know that ships would be able to jump hundreds of light years. Currently the asp (using fastest navigation) goes what, 120~ly unladen and fully upgraded? I'm estimating here but if you left the current jump variables in place and simply allowed the entire fuel tank to be considered, it would probably fall into 110 or less light years in one jump. Maybe even less, like 80-90. It's not as drastic as you may initially think. You'd be going less distance, but much faster.

Edit: Upon further research it does look as though the fsd's do have a max fuel intake per jump (6A pulls 8t of fuel.) I feel like this variable could be changed to take into account the ship's fuel tank rather than a fixed number (I updated my original post to include this.)

 

[Ydiss]

This might not be fd's reason but even 100ly jumps would trivialise travel and exploration. We currently have a max jump range of around 35ly - I know some can get higher but their modules aren't necessarily practical.

Being able to jump 35ly significantly increases the exploration value of the ship due to regions of space where stars are thinly populated. I imagine being able to jump 120ly would further trivialise that.

You'd also have lots more players getting stranded if we could burn our entire tank every single jump.

And the galaxy would feel smaller.

As I said before, I could come up with quite a few theories but the only one that counts is "because that's how FD wanted it".

 

[TriumphANT]

There are practical and logical considerations. Logically, the FSD has to work much harder keeping you on course for longer distances. A bit like an archer. It's much harder to hit a target 500m away than 250m. You don't want to meet the Thargoids, so your drive's maximum distance is always "safe" for the class of drive and your mass. Also, logically you don't expect your FSD to be able to charge up and utilise 16T of fuel in one single jump.

Practically, the amount of fuel used by the Cobra increases as the power of 2.15 of its jump distance. A fully kitted out Cobra will do around 20Ly in one jump using 3T of fuel (4A FSD) It has a 16T tank, so roughly you can do 100Ly in 5 jumps before running out of fuel. If you could set a course to use all 16 tons of fuel in one jump, your jump distance would be just over twice (2.2 times) greater than your 3T jump distance, i.e. about 44Ly. You'd literally arrive on empty after one jump. *shudders*

I think it works perfectly as it is!

 

[Ian Phillips]

I have thought that the lmiting factor is the energy required to make a jump. Formula's ect will tell you the amount of energy required to make a jump, and this is equivalent to x amount of mass (fuel).

The limiting factor in my mind is the capactiy of the FSD to take that amount of x mass and convert it to energy in one go. There is a limit on the amount of fuel a drive can use at any one time, and this would then be due to the capability of the drive to actually handle what is essentially a nuclear bomb going off under it's hood. Too big a bomb is - in this case - not a good idea!

 

[micky1up]

becuase thats how the game is !

i wonder why my bank account is limited to what i get paid why cant it be unlimited so i can do as i like with life

although i agree with forums and what they provide to the comunity somtimes i wonder why all the posts about wanting to change something with in the game to suit an individuals idea of what this game should be like FD decide that and some of the privilaged backers and rightly so

 

[ziden]

This might not be fd's reason but even 100ly jumps would trivialise travel and exploration. We currently have a max jump range of around 35ly - I know some can get higher but their modules aren't necessarily practical.

Being able to jump 35ly significantly increases the exploration value of the ship due to regions of space where stars are thinly populated. I imagine being able to jump 120ly would further trivialise that.

You'd also have lots more players getting stranded if we could burn our entire tank every single jump.

And the galaxy would feel smaller.

As I said before, I could come up with quite a few theories but the only one that counts is "because that's how FD wanted it".

Haha, ya I figure FD wants those limits, at least for now. I think the galaxy would feel about the same, you'd travel similar distances, just in less time. Going from Sol to Alioth might take half the jumps. In reality I think this would be good as players would be more encouraged to congregate and respond to events allowing for more player interaction.

And yes, exploring using max jump range might not be a good idea, but that's to a player's discretion. It would be as simple as having economic, fastest, and max as the navigation options. The changes would just alter how much fuel is being consumed in the jump or something. Fastest could use the variables already in place, but it'd be nice to have the option to drain the tank so to speak.

I've been around populated space, and it is small. It's just annoying that arbitrary limitations make traveling more time consuming than it has to be. There's a lot to be gained by it.


Edit: Think of it like a "Full Burn" from Firefly

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

I have thought that the lmiting factor is the energy required to make a jump. Formula's ect will tell you the amount of energy required to make a jump, and this is equivalent to x amount of mass (fuel).

The limiting factor in my mind is the capactiy of the FSD to take that amount of x mass and convert it to energy in one go. There is a limit on the amount of fuel a drive can use at any one time, and this would then be due to the capability of the drive to actually handle what is essentially a nuclear bomb going off under it's hood. Too big a bomb is - in this case - not a good idea!

Yeah the FSD's have a set "max fuel per jump" statistic which currently limits jump ranges. Fastest navigation uses the entire 8t for an A6 FSD. I just think it'd be nice to remove that limitation and instead modify FSD's to take into account the fuel tank capacity of the ship. Fuel efficiency should already be covered in the formula, but if not just add another equation to take into account ship mass and FSD size/quality.

 

[ziden]

becuase thats how the game is !

i wonder why my bank account is limited to what i get paid why cant it be unlimited so i can do as i like with life

although i agree with forums and what they provide to the comunity somtimes i wonder why all the posts about wanting to change something with in the game to suit an individuals idea of what this game should be like FD decide that and some of the privilaged backers and rightly so

You obviously didn't read anything in this thread, or perhaps it was all over your head. Either way, your reply is non-constructive and a waste. In the future, I might add, a grasp on grammar and punctuation may help people take your opinions more seriously.

 

[Ydiss]

I read the DDA and it doesn't mention the reason for the limit.

It mention misjumps though, which never made it to the game.

Perhaps allow a limit override that has a risk of misjump associated with it? Then the max fuel per jump has a logical safety reason.

 

[ziden]

I read the DDA and it doesn't mention the reason for the limit.

It mention misjumps though, which never made it to the game.

Perhaps allow a limit override that has a risk of misjump associated with it? Then the max fuel per jump has a logical safety reason.

Yeah see, I like that you're thinking. I'd be totally down for it to lower the integrity of the drive or something. Like taking the rev limiter off an engine or what not. I mean, all this is fiction, I just don't see a truly justifiable stone solid reason that the fiction has these arbitrary limits. I'm all about gameplay and fun for everyone. I'd like to see people who can't afford better ships (like an asp or better) be able to traverse populated space in reasonable real-time. I say this as someone who can afford any ship currently in the game.

Edit: Also consider how many players might not be participating in community goals and cool events because of range. If something is going to take them 30+ jumps to reach, they'll probably decline the opportunity. Buy a fuel scoop, cut the time in half or more.

 

[specialsymbol]

Its also a case of your engine being able to jump far enough.

Its like my car in a way. The fueltank can hold fuel for a 700km trip, but still the engine can only go about 175 km/h

How exactly did you bring up speed as a limitation for distance there?

I'm stunned.

 

[777Driver]

Have mentioned a few times that they seem to have modeled the jump mechanic on aircraft. Fill the aircraft up with full fuel/cargo and you wont make it to your destination due to being too heavy (aircraft burns too much fuel). You end carrying the extra fuel around as weight, the result is severely limiting and requires a fine balance. That is why big cargo aircraft fly routes that involve shorter hops.

An example of a trip 'London to Honk Kong' - Full tank would require you to carry less cargo or stop somewhere enroute. You only carry enough fuel based on your cargo load and minimum legal requirement for a diversion.

 

[Lupin]

Not sure what the problem is here if you have the jump range you can do 1 jump to system in range of your jump drive.

But on a route point of view the galaxy's and stars are moving.

To quote Solo "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it."

 

[forsaken1111]

Hm, I could see an opening here for a new FSD type. "Experimental streaming frameshift drive" which can draw from the whole fuel tank by streaming the required mass into the conversion chamber during the jump rather than gathering the whole amount in one go, but adding a mis-jump chance or less fuel economy or other side effect.

 

[ziden]

Hm, I could see an opening here for a new FSD type. "Experimental streaming frameshift drive" which can draw from the whole fuel tank by streaming the required mass into the conversion chamber during the jump rather than gathering the whole amount in one go, but adding a mis-jump chance or less fuel economy or other side effect.

This is a really constructive reply. I like the way you think man. An experimental FSD available on all craft. See the reason I feel this is so important is because not everyone spends 5 hours a day on this game. Casual/solo players get left out of discussions because they are just that, casual/solo, and aren't the hardcore grinders. People who want to participate in community goals and galaxy events but hesitate because it's 30~ jumps away. If we could cut that in half, that'd be better for the community imo. You'd still have restrictions (fuel capacity, ship mass, fsd size/efficiency, etc...) it would just allow you to use more fuel per jump rather than condensing it to just a sip per jump.

As I said before, you're jumping to an astral body, not through a warpgate nor to a nav beacon.

 

[ziden]

Not sure what the problem is here if you have the jump range you can do 1 jump to system in range of your jump drive.

But on a route point of view the galaxy's and stars are moving.

To quote Solo "Traveling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star, or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it."

I'm not too sure where the correlation meets. In military and civilian aircraft you do have safety regulations regarding how much fuel must be kept in reserve in case of emergency circumstances (e.g. airport is snowed out), but still a plane will travel using engines that constantly draw from its fuel reservoir.

I think in Elite Dangerous they look at supercruise as pulling from the reservoir tank and the FSD takes a chunk of fuel from your tanks for a frameshift. As the moderator stated, it may be to cause an explosion, but I feel that the way a frame shift works in a fictional environment can be open to change. If you're frameshifting a larger distance, why not just pull more fuel as it spools up? As may have been stated before it's folding space to avoid breaking the laws of relativity. So as it's folding space, why not allow it to fold more space using up more fuel in a less efficient manner solely for the purpose of being faster in real time?

See, I'm not trying to make ships jump farther in *total jump range* I would just like to see ships able to jump to their fuel tank's capabilities. Like the example I gave, my viper had to make 8+ jumps to travel to a star 15 light years away. If there wasn't this restriction I could've jumped that distance. In fact i wouldn't even care if they added a modifier that said for every light year over optimal jump range fuel cost increases by x factor. That's still acceptable to me.

Edit: I've seen a lot of posts about people complaining about jump ranges of particular aircrafts. Implementing a new jumping mechanic would alleviate a lot of this. People want to be able to move through populated space in reasonable real-time. Now that wings are being implemented it would be even more useful as people who are located 200~ ly's apart would be able to meet up much quicker, especially if one of them is in an earlier ship like an adder or eagle.

Edit #2: Also, can we all remember that we are still in a "development phase" of this game? This is by no means nowhere near a finished product. Constructive criticisms of current game mechanics can go a long way in helping to create a game that is enjoyable, challenging, and open to a broad audience.

 

[777Driver]

I don't get why people are trying to change something that has been around for a very long time and works very well. You want to jump further? Get a better FSD and configure the ship for range. My Anaonda & even little hauler could do 100LY in 4 jumps or less, how easy do you want it to be?

It is simple if you look at Hyperjumps (Not SC) as an aircraft's capability to reach it's optimum cruise alt for range, it all depends on the aircraft's total gross weight - Empty weight + cargo & fuel load) and the efficiency of the engine installed. You want to increase range and cruise at the best optimum alt? reduce payload, in many cases reduce fuel load.

 

[ziden]

I don't get why people are trying to change something that has been around for a very long time and works very well. You want to jump further? Get a better FSD and configure the ship for range. My Anaonda & even little hauler could do 100LY in 4 jumps or less, how easy do you want it to be?

It is simple if you look at Hyperjumps (Not SC) as an aircraft's capability to reach it's optimum cruise alt for range, it all depends on the aircraft's total gross weight - Empty weight + cargo & fuel load) and the efficiency of the engine installed. You want to increase range and cruise at the best optimum alt? reduce payload, in many cases reduce fuel load.

Because this game is still in beta. This is a Work In Progress. Questioning status quo is what creates change. You say it works very well, I disagree. There's posts on this discussion board that also disagree. We've all spent money and time on the game and have equal opportunity to question its mechanics. That's how they become altered, that's how things improve.

The example you give still takes the entire aircraft's capability to fly a particular distance (and we're talking about distance) based on fuel capacity... Your metaphor actually encourages what I've been talking about. Taking a longer jump (say 20 light year in a ship that currently only jumps 10) would require more fuel thus being less efficient. Still, you'd have the CAPABILITY to do so.