Nav Beacon Discussion - How to make Beacons relevant and engaging!

[ZygoUgo]

Rather than adding new mechanics why don't you simply add a fine for avoiding the nav beacon, and have (depending on security level) certain numbers of police wings patrolling the sun in supercruise. That way there is a higher risk of being caught in higher security systems, but to keep on avoiding the nav beacon builds up your fine.
The nav beacons should in my belief be more meeting and mission places rather than beginners bounty hunting sites anyways.
More NPC wanteds could avoid the nav points giving bounty hunters the motive of patrolling the sun, getting through would mean hoping the police are already distracted with someone else or running cold.
Avoiding the nav beacon and being caught could result in a higher fine or destruction if wanted.

 

[Perseus]

I like the idea of having the nav beacons relevant.I wish misjumps were a feature of the game and using nav beacons avoided this risk. Misjumps could then be an occupational hazard for the explorer or desperado.
It might also be an idea to have more than one nav beacon around a star, maybe you could choose prior to jumping.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

I like the idea of having the nav beacons relevant.I wish misjumps were a feature of the game and using nav beacons avoided this risk. Misjumps could then be an occupational hazard for the explorer or desperado.
It might also be an idea to have more than one nav beacon around a star, maybe you could choose prior to jumping.

That would be cool actually. Jumping directly to a known nav beacon could even reduce the spool up time of the jump engine or reduce fuel cost.

 

[KaizoMK]

Rather than adding new mechanics why don't you simply add a fine for avoiding the nav beacon, and have (depending on security level) certain numbers of police wings patrolling the sun in supercruise. That way there is a higher risk of being caught in higher security systems, but to keep on avoiding the nav beacon builds up your fine.
The nav beacons should in my belief be more meeting and mission places rather than beginners bounty hunting sites anyways.
More NPC wanteds could avoid the nav points giving bounty hunters the motive of patrolling the sun, getting through would mean hoping the police are already distracted with someone else or running cold.
Avoiding the nav beacon and being caught could result in a higher fine or destruction if wanted.

Mostly because fines are a joke for the most part, especially since you can immediately pay off that fine. A bounty would be too much of an irritation.

There are a lot of complaints about time sinks or it being a bad thing to force players to do things, and in a way I understand that feeling. But if it's coupled with strong context, and other "time sinks" were alerted, it would be a massive improvement. For instance, if jumping directly to a station from a nav beacon were an option, it'd take the same amount of time, even if you were forced into the beacon.

That said, I rather prefer the idea of making it an option. But there ought to be strong incentives and consequences regarding that option. Choices and meaning/context to those choices are what we need more of.

 

[Perseus]

I agree, there could be reasons to visit or avoid all having pro's and con's. Maybe even a new profession type for the explorer - planting beacons around 'unseeded' stars. This could tie in with factional ownership of the system.

 

[ZygoUgo]

Then perhaps the fines could be fairly large, it would still damage the pocket over profit, the damage of which would build up with continued avoidance. The fines could be 400cr minimum, but then 0.2% of your bank account on top for avoiding the nav beacon if caught

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Then perhaps the fines could be fairly large, it would still damage the pocket over profit, the damage of which would build up with continued avoidance. The fines could be 400cr minimum, but then 0.2% of your bank account on top for avoiding the nav beacon if caught

For that to be even feasible you need to restructure the whole "Crime and Punishment" in the game.

Pad Loitering: DEATH
Murder: 6000 Fine
Avoiding Nav Beacon: 0.2% of your total assets

Really?

 

[KaizoMK]

Then perhaps the fines could be fairly large, it would still damage the pocket over profit, the damage of which would build up with continued avoidance. The fines could be 400cr minimum, but then 0.2% of your bank account on top for avoiding the nav beacon if caught

Ugh, the thought of just toying with money is shallow and boring though. The best case scenario is that it'll be overall inconsequential, until it becomes ridiculous for only starting players, because money becomes trivial at the end of the game.

I'd rather see danger in a more engaging way - attracting negative attention and interdiction by bypassing the beacon, and consuming more time. Reward the player by supplying them safety and saved time in the form of a micro jump to their intended station.

Money consequences are boring and put a heavier focus on cr/h, adding more of this isn't a good idea. :/

 

[Zeta Legion]

The criminal justice system of ED needs a total overhaul to be sure.

I mean fines are absolutely useless as a preventative measure. I've racked up MILLIONS in fines smuggling and haven't paid a single credit.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

The criminal justice system of ED needs a total overhaul to be sure.

I mean fines are absolutely useless as a preventative measure. I've racked up MILLIONS in fines smuggling and haven't paid a single credit.

A better way to handle crime would IMHO to let it affect what services you can access. Sure, you might not have committed a crime against a specific station but there are ways to have FUN with us when we have been bad boys and girls.

-Increase costs of ALL services with the active bounty (Want to refuel that 400 credits, that's 6400 credits due to your outstanding bounty.)

Oh, that ship will now cost you +6000 credits due to that bounty, and each and every single module will be more expensive as well.

Now your INSURANCE just jumped by +6000 credits as well...

Now your crime will DIRECTLY impact your bottom line, which can affect your insurance in the end.

 

[GunnerBill]

Make beacons a positive thing.
All this talk of fines and interdictions - meh!

Seriously why not have speed cameras and a link to the HMRC website at Nav Beacons.

I know we can all visit Nav Beacons to do our tax returns

 

[Quineloe]

That's the thing though, in a high security system it'll have several heavily-equipped police waiting anyway. Consider that to enter a high security system, you're going to have to drop into a beacon with a few Anacondas scanning all ships that come in. It's going to be quite difficult (although rewarding) to slip into the system through their scans..

I am talking about the current game. In a high security system that still means only vipers and rarely an Anaconda. If you want to threaten a wing of 4 combat ships, you need at least a dozen big combat ships with the current AI mechanics. The whole scenario to work would require a massive reworking of the police system to begin with. Only if that is in place, if a high security system were actually worthy of its name and players could expect to be somewhat safe in them we can think about giving the players who go after other players better tools. If police ships were to lock into ongoing interdictions (a feature desperately needed in itself imo) and not show up 3 minutes later. If police ships came in a force that pirates would have to fight them off instead of just ignoring them as they scoop up the pirated cargo.

It would suddenly make sense to equip strong shields on a trade ship, because if you only have to last against your attacker longer than your attacker lasts against a full wing of police ships. Right now it's pointless, because your relatively unarmed trade ship doesn't stand up to a pirate ship no matter if you have 100 or 300 MJ on your shields.

 

[Bambi]

Didn't read too much of the three pages. But one noteworthy thing is that what sets Elite (1984) apart from Frontier and Dangerous is that things can actually happen to you along the travel from the outskirt to the station. Replicating that experience of jumping in, and seeing things happen along the way to your destination is fairly important. And right now there's just not a lot of stuff that happens in supercruise.

 

[ZygoUgo]

Well I'm just thinking along the lines of the easiest way to implement it, as this is the most likely way it will happen. Interesting consequences will come of it with pirates avoiding the beacons, and yes 0.2% of assets for being caught, this after all would be a tax for continuing the security service.
Patrolling bounty hunters would be the real risk.
0.2% taxes would keep the threat relevant in the end game, surely anyone with a pile of money would still feel it a risk to avoid the beacon, just for the moral sake of having to pay a hefty tax
Beacons would become safer meeting places and therefore more relevant to multi stage missions, but the sun would become more dangerous for all who wish to fuel scoop, but for those just dipping in and out of the system the risk would be much lower considering the small amount of time they will spend there.
NPC's would have to follow this behaviour too to make it work, meaning also that the sun becoming more of a danger zone to both traders and pirates means that risky multi stage missions could send you there too

 

[Ulfar]

Time to wade into this debate again.

The op's idea adds no extra time to multi jump traveling, as you can activate your jump drive from normal space just like SC. It adds a very short time at your destination as you enter super cruise.

The camping issue is not a downside but an upside and would lead to a more interesting, logical and dangerous game. To lessen the effect jump in should be within 50km random, so you are not going to get insta-locked and blown away ala EVE. You might get followed into super cruise.

I actually think the nav beacon should be at a lagrange point. This barrelling towards a sun when you exit hyperspace is downright dangerous.

I would have a station or outpost at the nav point giving you access to missions, bulletin board, fuel, ammunition etc.

NAV beacons would have a reason for people to be there with these changes which would make some sense, at the moment they are a massive immersion breaker.

NPCs would not meet at a NAV beacon as it stands because it is dangerous, they would meet at a station where it is safe and can refuel. As for unexplored systems then have the barreling towards the sun as currently, this can be explained within the theme of the game in that you nav computer will only jump to the nav beacon if it is present and only defaults to the sun when there isn't. I didn't realise there weren't nav beacons in all systems, if there are then every system has been explored.

If they aren't going to be changed then they need to be removed, much like a lot of other things that break immersion because Elite Dangerous has little to no internal logical consistency.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Is this sort of comment really necessary? Seems designed to get the thread arguing about the game modes, rather than the OP.

The OP does not mention anything relating to the game modes at all, the purpose of the thread appears to be from the desire to add verisimilitude to the nav beacons by giving them a believable reason to exist!

Really no need for mode-panic knee jerk reactions is there?

Humour, plus a bit of a carry over from the Open vs Solo debate i must admit. But there is an element of prophecy in there as well. If people are wanting to enter a system, but Group "Programmers" are blockading the nav beacon, i'm sure quite a lot of players would choose to switch modes to get past the blockade.

 

[KaizoMK]

Humour, plus a bit of a carry over from the Open vs Solo debate i must admit. But there is an element of prophecy in there as well. If people are wanting to enter a system, but Group "Programmers" are blockading the nav beacon, i'm sure quite a lot of players would choose to switch modes to get past the blockade.

If there's a player driven blockade, then sure it can be avoided a la solo.

However, if it's a blockade that a group of npc's have a vested interest in, that can be programmed by fd. This has a lot of potential for special events that everyone can enjoy.

 

[Cmdr Moritz]

Interdiction in SC I have no problem with.

What the proposal would do is enforce a drop to normal space on all players entering a system with a Nav Beacon (but not at those without - making it seem even more gamey) to suit the play-style of those who want to camp out at Nav Beacons in the hope of scoring some PvP.

It would reduce the game to one of the very first Alpha scenarios where all players arrived next to the beacon. Camping was common.

But that could easily be adjusted by making the sphere for random drop-ins larger, making it less likely to drop out in top of the campers? -Just a thought other than shutting it down completely.

Its all about how the implementation is handled and the balance adjustments afterwards

 

[edgar]

Generally enhancing the role of the nav beacon could also add things that help differentiate systems from each other:

- Billboards (like the ones in CQC) around the beacon that indicate the Economy Types of the various Commodities Markets available in the system, and their locations. Perhaps other types of information about the System (States, Influence, etc) could be displayed in some way here too.

- Convoys of ships arriving at the System, with appropriate chatter, determined by the current States in the system (Navy during war, NPC bounty hunters & mercs arriving during times of Lockdown, Traders in Boom, on top of a normal flow of traffic).

- Some sort of (non Mission-giving) bulletin board directing travelers to the various Stations and Outposts in a system, which signposts the Mission Types that may be likely to be found there. NPCs hanging around the beacon waiting to offer missions to travelers, or to urge them to visit a location deeper within the system to get a mission.

- The NPC cops in the "Checkpoint" locations we currently have - move them to the Nav beacons so they actually have other ships to interrogate during Lockdown or times of conflict.

- to generally make Authority actions in a system make a bit of sense, Police Patrols in the system could converge on the nav beacon - have a constant & strong Authority (relative to system Security Rating) presence at the beacons, and have them go on REAL PATROLS, where police Wings leave behind the main force at the beacon, jumping to supercruise periodically to mount patrol of the system. Have Police Wings return to the beacon, and chatter about their patrols.

The beacons could be a shop window to each (populated) system, giving a hint of the current States, wealth levels, security, etc. Rather than an annoying distraction they could be made into places we want to visit, that offer opportunities, and could be atmospheric and offer information about a system beyond the Minor Faction side-panel.

It could also be reasonable that the "interdiction" that pulls you into the beacon is selective: it could target ships based on Reputation (or lack thereof), with the System's controlling faction (Hostile 75% chance of getting pulled to the beacon, Unfriendly 50%, Neutral 25%, Friendly 10%, Allied <5%).

 

[DrakeAurum]

How about this for ease of use:

If you plot a multi-leg hyperspace route, then you only drop out at the nav beacon on your last stop. On the intermediate stops, you jump out in supercruise as normal, allowing you to fuel scoop or quickly resume your journey.

If you head in-system from one of your stop-offs, nothing stops you, but if you then dock at a station before dropping in at the nav beacon, you receive a fine - small for your ship itself, maybe 800 credits, but an additional 100 per ton of cargo for customs violation.