The Galaxy - Is its size now considered to be a barrier to gameplay by the Developers?

[Ytheleus]

I would like to suggest a compromise idea that should help to meet the needs of time-poor players without radically altering the psychological scale of the galaxy.
I'm not claiming it's original, just that it's something I want to say.

Allow pilots to also send ships ahead of their journey to any known shipyard station (because shipyards have facilities to store ships indefinitely), through a point-to-point ship transport mechanism, initiated from any shipyard, going from any shipyard with an owned ship, to any known shipyard. Even a considerable transfer delay time would cease to be a penalty provided that the player anticipates and plans their (general, approximate) movements, and credit cost would be less critical to game balancing.

I would like to ask again that the current plans be put on hold temporarily and reexamined in the light of the many viable objections and the considerable player support expressed for them. It really needs to be worked through again I think. There's nothing wrong with making a mistake, but ignoring a flashing red warning sign with klaxons is usually less advisable.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I asked you to explain to me how the feature would be used to spoil or break the game for other players. You replied with a scenario about describing how it could be used to quickly hunt for people. I broke down your scenario with the fact that instancing would probably ruin it more often than not. You've provided nothing else outside of your well known disdain for "non consensual" pvp to explain how this feature would hurt the gameplay of others.

That is what I am waiting for.

The ability to summon combat ships to anywhere in the galaxy (with a suitable dock) with no real effort other than to scoot there in an AspX significantly reduces the effort required to lift to a distant location - I doubt that this ability will be used only for good (in terms of seeking out other players who may not be looking for unwelcome interaction with others). So, there is the probability that the feature facilitates this type of play.

Using instancing as a reason why it won't happen is not to guarantee that the matchmaking system will not instance the hunter with the targets - and "more often than not" implies at least some cases where it's not ruined (for the hunters anyway).

 

[Jex =TE=]

Ok disclaimer : overcaring mode active

The thing is (for me) that even with a delay, let's say half an hour at least, you still would have access to this QoL improvement and your "fly all my ships" experience.
You're a bit disappointed, annoyed with the delay but half an hour is still vastly faster than carrying 20 ships around. It's a win-win scenario for you.

Now you take away the delay, you're perfectly happy but my experience has been broken : it would not need to be if you could wait half an hour. But there, in this scenario you defend, I completely lost my suspension of disbelief and parts of why I love the game. You gain something, I lose one.
So it's between you facing a little annoyance and me facing huge disappointment. *Overcare off*

Yeah, I can pretend nothing happened, that is what I will do, but selfishness! this world is selfishness! *overcare overdrive*.

The devs went from having to individually fly your ships 1000 LY or whatever, each on, one by one to....

Entire fleet instantly printed whever you are.

 

[Jypson]

You cannot have instant travel and then introduce the missions, depth and possibilities that a delayed mechanic would offer. Once this cat is out of the bag you guys that are pro instant travel will accept nothing other than that. Frontier will have boxed themselves into a corner with a cheap, depth free, expansion free cheap mechanic. It looks like they are going with that, and many of you guys in favour of instant will feel like you have won, the reality is we will have all lost the opportunity for a more plausible, richer and able to be built upon mechanic.

I shall copy/paste for my own convenience as I've answered already

It's a separate mechanic you see

The player gets his ship when they want it (QOL), and, players get more missions for ship transfers, protection or attack or whatever. It's not a actual players ship in question of course, just additional gameplay, just like people want!

Now if your concern is harvesting salt by destroying another players ship while it's not under their control...that's a different conversation

 

[MadDogMurdock]

It's instant in gameplay, not in-universe - your ship does not refuel or load cargo or repair instantly, either. It's no different than that. We all assume time passes to do those things but accept that it's done instantly for gameplay purposes.

Ah ok, so can we just quietly drop the whole 3D thing, it's not helping.

 

[Julio Montega]

I shall copy/paste for my own convenience as I've answered already

You know about mission board reset stuff sorbago etc. right?
How will instant transport be different from that,
even with an alternative coded in aswell?

Who would use that alternative and why?
The fast, cheap way would be there,
so why not abuse it to the max if you can
to get an advantage.

It seems to me the game-code is not large enough for both,
there is a standoff at high noon.

Whether instant or not, the feature will benefit everyone.
But the instant reads to me like mission board resets.

 

[mossfoot]

Ah ok, so can we just quietly drop the whole 3D thing, it's not helping.

That would be preferable to me, yes

But if they insist on incorporating it lore-wise, I'll find a way to make it work in my head-canon. Already got a number of ideas floating around.

 

[Jex =TE=]

However it's doing it, could they piggyback some commodities prices onto the transmission so that I can do a little insider trading?

LOLOLOL

Yes, it's a wonder how the most sought after data in the universe happens to be the one nobody is looking into in terms of getting it out there. Another roll your eyes moment in Elite logic. Now we have another massive fail in logic all hand waved away with "3d printers"

 

[Privata]

In a perfect world, I would agree with both of you. However, Elite: Dangerous is also a game to be played, and concessions need to be made to enrich the players experience as well.

But magic ship transfer takes more away than anything else.

If anything magic ship transfer could be seen in the same light as removing content from a game.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

The devs went from having to individually fly your ships 1000 LY or whatever, each on, one by one to....

Entire fleet instantly printed whever you are.

That is indeed a sligh change in philosophy, yes... At least, they change things...

Unrelated but your profile instantly reminded me of :

 

[ph1Lt0r]

But magic ship transfer takes more away than anything else.

If anything magic ship transfer could be seen in the same light as removing content from a game.

For me I see it as removing tedium from a game rather than content. Jumping, pitching to destination, pushing jump button does not seem like content to me. (IMHO)

 

[Jypson]

You know about mission board reset stuff sorbago etc. right?
How will instant transport be different from that,
even with an alternative coded in aswell?

Who would use that alternative and why?
The fast, cheap way would be there,
so why not abuse it to the max if you can
to get an advantage.

It seems to me the game-code is not large enough for both,
there is a standoff at high noon.

Whether instant or not, the feature will benefit everyone.
But the instant reads to me like mission board resets.

No, I don't know what mission board reset stuff sorbago etc. is. Whatchya mean? Anywho, The transferring of ships and "Ship Transfer Gameplay" is a completely separate process.

"Ship Transfer Gameplay" is just the gameplay that people are clamoring for. Move ships, protect ships, attack ships, all that good stuff. It doesn't actually have anything to do with players ships getting from A->B, it's just more gameplay that lends to the belief that ships are indeed getting transferred about.

 

[Privata]

Ah ok, so can we just quietly drop the whole 3D thing, it's not helping.

I dont think any of the devs said 3D printing was how magic ship transfer is being done.

Samarco said it was :
Rebuilt at the station based on the fact you own the ship (if thats the case the ship needs its engineer mods removed and wear and tear removed as well otherwise its just an official cheat)
On a (unseen) giant transport ship

The 3D printing was said by the lave radio crew and samarco gave a casual ''yes'' but I dont think he ment ''yes'' to the idea of 3D printing of large ships (that have bolt marks and you can see that machines built them via how the textures are on them) but rather that they will have a lore reason.

The only ships that get 3D printed are the ship launched fighters , and my guess is that they are a bit different from the variations that the feds and imps use.

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

For me I see it as removing tedium from a game rather than content. Jumping, pitching to destination, pushing jump button does not seem like content to me. (IMHO)

It removes ship roles such as multi-roles and long range fighters.
Now we just need a tASPxi and one other ship for every role and we shall never use the shipyard again... its kind of sad.

Plus the original idea was that we used the shipyards to get fast replacement ships if need be.
I say , it should be cheaper to buy a new ship than transfer your original.

Maybe to ballance this out during war times shipyards produce some fighters ranging from eagles and vipers for poor system and the rest for the rich ones.

 

[Julio Montega]

No, I don't know what mission board reset stuff sorbago etc. is. Whatchya mean? Anywho, The transferring of ships and "Ship Transfer Gameplay" is a completely separate process.

"Ship Transfer Gameplay" is just the gameplay that people are clamoring for. Move ships, protect ships, attack ships, all that good stuff. It doesn't actually have anything to do with players ships getting from A->B, it's just more gameplay that lends to the belief that ships are indeed getting transferred about.

I can only voice my opinion, and it is against having two solutions, but one thought through,
interactive and immersive one.

In fact you will aswell profit from the convenience, if you allow to quote myself:
"I am all up for a time delay, aslong as i can send the ship to another
destination than the player location."

With a single thought on planning ahead you conveniently skip double or triple the trek
and can have the fleet where you want it, even relaying the ship you just left at the outpost
to your original home, if so desired.

The mission board stuff was referring to a mechanic that tries to add immersion,
by limiting the amount of missions and the kind of missions to a manageable
degree, preventing mission stacking up to the 2-digit line.
It is bypassed by logging on and off to refresh the mission board so you can stack as many
missions possible for money farming.

This does not mean i am against a rework and revamp of missions,
to take larger cargo-holds into account and compensate accordingly.

 

[Zambrick]

For me I see it as removing tedium from a game rather than content. Jumping, pitching to destination, pushing jump button does not seem like content to me. (IMHO)

Nope you are forgetting the most important part. Every 10 jumps or so you will have to get fuel. That means you have to fly around in a circle for about 30 seconds. If you dont do that like a million times then you are just breaking immersion in a game that is based in 100% reality. As people seem to claim.

Also you can pull ships directly to a space station in the bubble instantly. That breaks the game because it takes a whole 20 minutes cross the entire bubble in a ship that has 15ly jump drive.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

I dont think any of the devs said 3D printing was how magic ship transfer is being done.

Samarco said it was :
Rebuilt at the station based on the fact you own the ship (if thats the case the ship needs its engineer mods removed and wear and tear removed as well otherwise its just an official cheat)
On a (unseen) giant transport ship

The 3D printing was said by the lave radio crew and samarco gave a casual ''yes'' but I dont think he ment ''yes'' to the idea of 3D printing of large ships (that have bolt marks and you can see that machines built them via how the textures are on them) but rather that they will have a lore reason.

The only ships that get 3D printed are the ship launched fighters , and my guess is that they are a bit different from the variations that the feds and imps use.

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


It removes ship roles such as multi-roles and long range fighters.
Now we just need a tASPxi and one other ship for every role and we shall never use the shipyard again... its kind of sad.

Plus the original idea was that we used the shipyards to get fast replacement ships if need be.
I say , it should be cheaper to buy a new ship than transfer your original.

Maybe to ballance this out during war times shipyards produce some fighters ranging from eagles and vipers for poor system and the rest for the rich ones.

Just pursuing all the rabbit holes that come up on this.
So far I think we've pretty much dismissed any technology-based lore solutions so we may as well forget that altogether.
The programming angle has been pursued and we've come up with a relatively simple timed implementation as well as an instant implementation that is even less effort than the one proposed.
We've examined the effect it'll have of ship builds due to min/max tendencies.
The cost angle has been explored and it may as well be zero due to either 'trivial' or 'barrier to gameplay' considerations.
The distance limit has also been dismissed as just a different version of the barrier than the one we have now.
We've examined the impact on the use of Shipyards and Outfitting.
We've looked at the impact on Powerplay.
We've looked at how it makes all CGs the same regardless of location.
We've looked at many many potential exploits.

So basically, still a bad idea on almost every level.

 

[Jypson]

I can only voice my opinion, and it is against having two solutions, but one thought through,
interactive and immersive one.

In fact you will aswell profit from the convenience, if you allow to quote myself:
"I am all up for a time delay, aslong as i can send the ship to another
destination than the player location."

With a single thought on planning ahead you conveniently skip double or triple the trek
and can have the fleet where you want it, even relaying the ship you just left at the outpost
to your original home, if so desired.

The mission board stuff was referring to a mechanic that tries to add immersion,
by limiting the amount of missions and the kind of missions to a manageable
degree, preventing mission stacking up to the 2-digit line.
It is bypassed by logging on and off to refresh the mission board so you can stack as many
missions possible for money farming.

This does not mean i am against a rework and revamp of missions,
to take larger cargo-holds into account and compensate accordingly.

We are of two opinions it seems, which is fine. I'm sure whatever the verdict, we'll both keep trucking along

> Ahhhh, gotchya. I just call it the Bulletin, oops.....Mission Board shuffle How does that relate to ship transfers though, I'm missing the connection.

 

[Weps]

Using instancing as a reason why it won't happen is not to guarantee that the matchmaking system will not instance the hunter with the targets - and "more often than not" implies at least some cases where it's not ruined (for the hunters anyway).

You're just being polite.

The instancing system is designed to match people together - if given the chance to do so, it will do so. Of course it fails sometimes, there's the Ignore feature, but saying that in most cases it will fail to match people is false.

 

[Julio Montega]

We are of two opinions it seems, which is fine. I'm sure whatever the verdict, we'll both keep trucking along

> Ahhhh, gotchya. I just call it the Bulletin, oops.....Mission Board shuffle How does that relate to ship transfers though, I'm missing the connection.

Yes you got it.
It is instant to refresh it right?
It is instant as proposed to get your ship, right?
That is the correlation.

Where the mission board (bulletin) tries to represent the system and
factions within generating missions based on their state,
the relogging bypasses that, to the extent that credit farming is sped up
by a great degree.
A lot of people use it for convenience, reducing the original purpose
and representation of that mechanic.


IMO same applies to an instant-solution of ship transfer.
Even if we had a mechanic generating missions along with it,
people would simply bypass it, due to conveniently having
to use less time.

Thus that "feature" is used less and less, as it is not "economical".

See the point?

 

[jprelph]

First off, thank you for that link! I had tried looking back through, but wasn't able to find that information. It was also really well put, I liked your example that you used.

If I may offer a counterpoint, I see this as helping the casual player. Being able to get back safely and quickly is going to be a boon for all skill levels.

The CGs, I still don't see how this can be an issue? You get your ships there a bit faster, that's pretty much it. If it's a cargo run type CG, you still have to haul stuff everywhere. I mean, maybe on your initial trip out to the location to pick things up, it'll be just a bit faster. I donno, I don't see any of these things as an issue as everyone has access to them.

Also, I would like to say, please don't see my passion as a personal attack. We all love Elite Dangerous, and we all have our issues with it. I respect everyone on this forum and love talking and debating with you all! Please let me know if one of my rants/posts comes across as a personal attack, and I will edit it or ask a mod to remove it.

That being said, I am guilty of throwing around immersion like a four letter word. I apologize for that and will refrain from doing so in the future. I really do want everyone to enjoy this game and I truly hate when such a topic comes up because it so severely can divide the community. That being said, much respect, and fly safe cmdrs. Back to the debate!

Thank you for the considered response. One thing I would say is that I don't think getting back more safely helps lower-skilled players - it makes the game easier but then there's less chance for them to learn and improve. Making a game easier for a quick "QoL" patch seems an odd side-effect.

Where this really does affect newer players is that this magnifies differences between players. For example a new player in an Asp may be able to haul ~100t of fort per trip, and may make 4 trips per hour, so there per-hour rate is 400t of fort. They can do maybe 10% fortification for a system in an hour - so it feels like they're making an impact. Currently I can do around 300t/trip in my Anaconda or 450t/trip in my T9 (which is fitted out with reasonable defences). The hourly rate for both (because the Anaconda is faster) is around 1200t/hour - so 3x a newer player. If they're using an Asp then this new mechanic doesn't improve their hauling capacity much, but it does for me. I can make the 9 jumps out with the T9, and only take 3 jumps back in an Asp, so suddenly I can fit four trips in in with the T9 rammed to the gills, so the multi-role Anaconda loses it's benefit and I'm suddenly making 4x the difference or a newer player - it minimises their chance to make an impact and shifts the balance of PowerPlay again so that suddenly powers can fortify

CGs that involve hauling can be similarly affected - anything that involves hauling in one direction (ie. take commodityX to placeY). If you find somewhere that sells commodityX cheaply you can use a hauling ship to take the commodity to placeY and then swap to your "taxi" long range ship to get back to the place that sells the commodity. This again is easier and of more benefit for the players who have the most money (ie. where any cost associated with a ship transfer doesn't really affect them) and who have the larger ships.

I don't think increasing the gaps between new and established players in terms of their capabilities helps - I think it puts someone off if they think - yay, I helped fort/prep/expand that system a bit - but then they realise the gap between their capability and more established players has got bigger and their contribution has been minimised.