2.2's Instant Ship and Module Transport - Yay or Nay?

[Gaarp Kobayashi]

Aight guys and gals, almost 100 pages of posts per 24 hour about the topic. Think it's time to consolidate our very solid worries about "insta-puff" deliveries towards Frontier. We need someone to do it properly and send one, clear message to Frontier...

...WE NEED MR. OBSIDIAN ANT'S HELP ON THIS ONE!!!!!!!!

As a long-time fan of the game, brilliant jurnalist almost of Elite's realm, obviously aware of every aspect of it, I can assume he shares the point of view of the majority here.

Is any one of you out there Commanders, reading this, having some kind of friendly ties with Obsidian Ant?? Can we ask him politely to focus on this topic in one of his next videos maybe???

His voice will be heard by Mr. Sandro and his team for sure...

In his recent video he already adessed the forum and the concerns.

You're right!!!!! He did it already!!! I so love this guy!!!!!!!!! We're saved!!!!!!

OBSIDIAN ANT encourages everyone even to involve in this thread, to MAKE FRONTIER HEAR US OUT!!!!!!

Check it yourself guys and gals:

[video=youtube_share;IQVIAeJyhoM]https://youtu.be/IQVIAeJyhoM[/video]

It's gonna be allright guys, do remember the FUEL feature wasn't oryginally in the game as well, only beacause of massive feedback of early backers it was introduced. SO THERE IS HOPE!!!!!

 

[znôrt]

"CMDR death" mechanism currently in place. On ship destruction, you are instantly brought back to the last starport you docked at (even if you're on the other side of the galaxy) minus a rebuy cost (or back in your original start point and Sidewinder but losing your ship) If you wanted realism from this perspective (FSD and hyperspace be damned), you would have to spend an ungodly amount of time drifting in your escape capsule waiting to play the game again, if your ship were destroyed. And maybe hope that somebody doesn't happen upon your capsule and blow it up.

this has been solved before, and very neatly. see ... eve, *cough*

thanks for bringing up the issue.

hey, frontier, please stop the teleport nonsense AND take some serious look at the death mechanism in 2.2. yes pleeeeaaaasse? [heart]

 

[Winterwalker]

Interesting if your ship wasn't always guaranteed .. to arrive in tip top mint condition every time, or even at all (or stripped of modules by unscrupulous shipping companies). After all, there might be some less than professional delivery drivers out there?!

[video=youtube;2Q6_9A90cUk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q6_9A90cUk[/video]

 

[Jack Schitt]

Anyone who claims not to see the problem with this has either never had to consider the meta, or is already deeply invested in the meta and is drooling at the prospect of being able to drop to a 1D FSD and a 2T tank on all of their combat ships, thus gaining manoeuvrability increases, better heat management, more power for weapons and more scope for offensive Engineer modifications, all for the price of a stripped-down DBX and the cost of a magic warp ticket.

The notion that Sandro et al have come up with this proposal without being able to see the consequences is worrisome. The notion that they have seen the consequences and are going to commit to it anyway is even more worrying, and would represent the single biggest slide on the game <-> simulation spectrum since launch IMO.

Even if, as I and a few others have speculated, this is being done for technical reasons rather than gameplay reasons then they still need to seriously rethink it. It totally changes the dynamic of multiple craft ownership. I would go so far as to say that if ship transfer has to be instantaneous because server load would be too great doing it any other way, I would rather not have it at all.

Perhaps someone would like to interview David Braben about this proposal?

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Agree. I find the way that Sandro casually announced this change was shocking. He usually sees the full implications of what he is talking about. But this change would be HUGE, not a small thing, not just a convenience factor. But a complete rewrite of the core game mechanics by circumventing the whole jump range ecosystem.

...

From that, I'd say FD are hustling to get their huge load of cool new mechanics in place... and a push-button ship transfer is, quite simply, very very cheap in terms of dev hours.


The push-button style action is extremely low-risk - likely a single database field update. Its UI side is straightforward, and pretty easy to test.

From the livestream, it looks like it might be implemented in their dev version already.


Contrast that to the addition of a timer. It was noted a while back in this thread how people saw weird locations of their host ship, when they were driving an SRV; It appeared on the map as being, say, back in Sol.

Presumably ships couldn't be "between places"... not pure on-file ships that weren't being flown around as the player's current ship.

A ship "in transit" will have the exact same issue... which means back-end dev work, lots of testing, more risk, etc.


So I guess they are simply putting out the "positive spin" side of things, which is aimed at presenting this new ship transfer feature as having "convenience" benefits for all players.


In reality, I think the "convenience" benefits are more on the development team side.

 

[Lobstris]

this has been solved before, and very neatly. see ... eve, *cough*

For the uninitiated, is there a link to a summary of what Eve does?

 

[znôrt]

For the uninitiated, is there a link to a summary of what Eve does?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay_of_Eve_Online#Death

to expand: getting your pod killed is not easy unless you are very new to the game. the pod is blazing fast, actually the fastest ship in game by far, and is free to head to whatever station ... to buy another ship, and possibly get a partial refund if it was insured.

 

[Yaffle]

Anyone who claims not to see the problem with this has either never had to consider the meta, or is already deeply invested in the meta and is drooling at the prospect of being able to drop to a 1D FSD and a 2T tank on all of their combat ships, thus gaining manoeuvrability increases, better heat management, more power for weapons and more scope for offensive Engineer modifications, all for the price of a stripped-down DBX and the cost of a magic warp ticket.

Of course, there is the meta-meta, which would mean if every CG is a nest of vipers uber conflict ship wings then more poeple will head to PG/Solo, killing open even more. This is not in the interests of the avid PvP player either.

 

[Lobstris]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay_of_Eve_Online#Death

Ah! Wikipedia! Forgive me! Yeah - better than Elite. Still need to tie off consistent loss of materials vs. trade data vs. bounties/missions etc.

Problem is the limited persistency the p2p/server system currently offers for dumping cargo and inventory to be collected after death, or for exploration data pods etc.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

Yup I don't play in Open as a general rule and being a player who drifts from CG to CG when I don't have a plan or goal, this change will not motivate me to try Open again.

 

[Elderoy]

snip
The notion that Sandro et al have come up with this proposal without being able to see the consequences is worrisome. The notion that they have seen the consequences and are going to commit to it anyway is even more worrying, and would represent the single biggest slide on the game <-> simulation spectrum since launch IMO.
snip

It's even worse than that, it removes completly the game aspect of managing modules & fleet IMHO, as you can exploit this very feature to have what you want anywhere.

 

[deathcoy]

Of course, there is the meta-meta, which would mean if every CG is a nest of vipers uber conflict ship wings then more poeple will head to PG/Solo, killing open even more. This is not in the interests of the avid PvP player either.

Well Open PvP is kinda crap anyways with majority already in Private and Solo and players combat logging, influx of grieving has already happened ages ago driving away people from Open. Moreover with ED's P2P infrastructure, players are already fragmented in the first place. The only saving grace for PvP scene is revitalizing Arena and might as well make main game PvE only. Or let us invade any Private Server.

 

[Karl Marx]

Here's my 2 cents:

You should only be able to transfer a ship that is also available for sale at the destination of that transfer. This could be looked at as buying a new ship and remotely selling the old one. This gets around the immersion issue that comes with instant transfers. Perhaps you would have to add 10% of the value of the ship as the fee since when selling ships, the sale price is always 10% lower than what you paid for it anyway.

 

[lysan]

From that, I'd say FD are hustling to get their huge load of cool new mechanics in place... and a push-button ship transfer is, quite simply, very very cheap in terms of dev hours.


The push-button style action is extremely low-risk - likely a single database field update. Its UI side is straightforward, and pretty easy to test.

From the livestream, it looks like it might be implemented in their dev version already.


Contrast that to the addition of a timer. It was noted a while back in this thread how people saw weird locations of their host ship, when they were driving an SRV; It appeared on the map as being, say, back in Sol.

Presumably ships couldn't be "between places"... not pure on-file ships that weren't being flown around as the player's current ship.

A ship "in transit" will have the exact same issue... which means back-end dev work, lots of testing, more risk, etc.


So I guess they are simply putting out the "positive spin" side of things, which is aimed at presenting this new ship transfer feature as having "convenience" benefits for all players.


In reality, I think the "convenience" benefits are more on the development team side.

Then they should have said so, "look guys, we want to make the ship transfer, but there are complications, so in the beginning it will be "instantaneous", when we sort out the background mechanics, we will add it to the mechanics""

Or, GOD forbid, they could have started a discussion with the community how to do this, because this is not new, and they don't need to hide what they are doing in this matter.

 

[znôrt]

Ah! Wikipedia! Forgive me! Yeah - better than Elite. Still need to tie off consistent loss of materials vs. trade data vs. bounties/missions etc.

first sensible link i stumbled upon, i did play eve some years ago and there are far better references but, you know ...

Problem is the limited persistency the p2p/server system currently offers for dumping cargo and inventory to be collected after death, or for exploration data pods etc.

yeah, well, these are very different games, so what works for one hasn't to work for the other, but seems a good inspiration or starting point to me!

 

[Parmo]

<snip>
I’m sure this is full of holes - but hey, I bet there’s plenty of you out there to fill them ;-) Again, this is just my idea.

Ducking and covering,

Cheers,

CMDR UnahaClosp

Yes it is. full of holes.
But the instant transfer mechanic is a galaxy wide hole which is going to have a major impact on how ED is perceived and how it will be played.
And no one knows how this will unfold. Players, in Solo, in Open, in Groups will adapt their tactics and strategies to use this facility which may well cause the schism between Solo and Open modes to widen and deepen. CGs for one will be pretty schizophrenic being stretched over Solo and Open. PvP players will have instant access to all of their ships within a CG's area of action - which may well make more players go into Solo.
I don't know what the unintended consequences of instant transfer will be: a long term decline in 'realism' and consequently a long term decline in long-term players? Which will be countered by trying to entice new customers with short-term 'instant gameplay' features.
The Rise and Fall of Elite.

 

[znôrt]

Here's my 2 cents:

You should only be able to transfer a ship that is also available for sale at the destination of that transfer. This could be looked at as buying a new ship and remotely selling the old one. This gets around the immersion issue that comes with instant transfers. Perhaps you would have to add 10% of the value of the ship as the fee since when selling ships, the sale price is always 10% lower than what you paid for it anyway.

this is a very original idea. crafted modules are lost, i assume.

cool, but i'd still like to have *my* ship 'shipped' to me in the old fashioned way, whatever it takes

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

"navis appareat" I thought it was sci-fi not Hogwarts...

 

[znôrt]

"navis appareat" I thought it was sci-fi not Hogwarts...

lol, that's why the update is called 'wingardians leviosa'!

 

[JosiahD]

Anyone who claims not to see the problem with this has either never had to consider the meta, or is already deeply invested in the meta and is drooling at the prospect of being able to drop to a 1D FSD and a 2T tank on all of their combat ships, thus gaining manoeuvrability increases, better heat management, more power for weapons and more scope for offensive Engineer modifications, all for the price of a stripped-down DBX and the cost of a magic warp ticket.

The notion that Sandro et al have come up with this proposal without being able to see the consequences is worrisome. The notion that they have seen the consequences and are going to commit to it anyway is even more worrying, and would represent the single biggest slide on the game <-> simulation spectrum since launch IMO.

Even if, as I and a few others have speculated, this is being done for technical reasons rather than gameplay reasons then they still need to seriously rethink it. It totally changes the dynamic of multiple craft ownership. I would go so far as to say that if ship transfer has to be instantaneous because server load would be too great doing it any other way, I would rather not have it at all.

Perhaps someone would like to interview David Braben about this proposal?

Agreed. I for one see this insta-teleport/transport of ships as another nail on open play's coffin for me. Thus far I've tried to play in open more than not, but each time a change like this occurs that can result in serious consequences, such as those many of us believe will occur in this case, it's another reason to stay away from open....period.