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

[Mohrgan]

Ive already replied directly to you in another thread addressing your points directly. You chose to ignore that and simply post almost exactly the same again - despite the fact that I explained why this increases the gap between rich/experienced players and despite the fact that I explained how this favours hauling/fortifying over PvP play styles. I've addressed your points directly, you ignore the explanations and just keep posting "people are only cry babies about RP/immersion".

This feature isn't self balancing - it's easily explained why and I have done that. If you want to dismiss those points off hand then do so, but don't pretend that the argument hasn't been made and don't pretend that that's not what you're doing.

I would be pleased if you woulde "leave me (you) to my (your) self evident superiority." Like you promised. It's not healthy to argue with someone who attempts to distort what you say, put words in your mouth, and attempts to chase your opinion away. You will just have to find someone else to dump your ire on. Fly Safe Commander, I said Fly Safe..... o7

 

[LeoBartlet]

I share your sentiment there.
When pp hit, it was the people keeping me in a power,
together achieving a goal.
If the galaxy simulation is stale and lifeless,
as it is imo currently, you need social aspects to be the focus,
not convenience features that cause another uproar.

How very dare Frontier even consider making one little thing convenient for both old and new players.

Here is a very simple list of suggestions for people.

Don't like PP? Don't do it.

Don't like CQC? Don't do it.

Don't like ship? Transfer Don't use it.

Don't like a particular career path in the game (trading, combat, exploration)? Don't do them.

Don't like engineers? Don't use them.

It really is staggering at times how self absorbed this forum can be.

 

[Colonel Kenney]

 

[jprelph]

How very dare Frontier even consider making one little thing convenient for both old and new players.

Here is a very simple list of suggestions for people.

Don't like PP? Don't do it.

Don't like CQC? Don't do it.

Don't like ship? Transfer Don't use it.

Don't like a particular career path in the game (trading, combat, exploration)? Don't do them.

Don't like engineers? Don't use them.

It really is staggering at times how self absorbed this forum can be.

Which would be fine if there weren't competitive aspects to the game. If you are playing PP and the other side use ship transfers to increase their fort/prep capacity by 30% then you have to do the same otherwise you lose. It's the same with engineer mods - easy to ignore until you're losing in PP or PvP because your opponents have ships that jump further, fly faster, hit harder and shrug off damage more easily.

 

[LeoBartlet]

Which would be fine if there weren't competitive aspects to the game. If you are playing PP and the other side use ship transfers to increase their fort/prep capacity by 30% then you have to do the same otherwise you lose. It's the same with engineer mods - easy to ignore until you're losing in PP or PvP because your opponents have ships that jump further, fly faster, hit harder and shrug off damage more easily.

If and it's a very big if the transfer of ships was to have a negative impact on any aspect of the game im confident that Frontier would seek to balance it out.

They've not even ironed out the limitations on ship transfer yet the forum echo chamber is up in arms at the very idea of it.

 

[Julio Montega]

How very dare Frontier even consider making one little thing convenient for both old and new players.

Here is a very simple list of suggestions for people.

Don't like PP? Don't do it.

Don't like CQC? Don't do it.

Don't like ship? Transfer Don't use it.

Don't like a particular career path in the game (trading, combat, exploration)? Don't do them.

Don't like engineers? Don't use them.

It really is staggering at times how self absorbed this forum can be.

You really didn't get the point, did you?
This game should be about people,
to "blaze their own trail",
not to sooner or later have to
accept a mechanic as optimum
and live that.

It simply kills diversity, as can be seen
in PvP meta.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

How very dare Frontier even consider making one little thing convenient for both old and new players.

Here is a very simple list of suggestions for people.

Don't like PP? Don't do it.

Don't like CQC? Don't do it.

Don't like ship? Transfer Don't use it.

Don't like a particular career path in the game (trading, combat, exploration)? Don't do them.

Don't like engineers? Don't use them.

It really is staggering at times how self absorbed this forum can be.

Yeah, I get you, and you're not the first one going through that.
But you can't build a game on features half people avoid. It's not how it works. When the list of things you don't like add up, you just stop and go play something else. And it's fine really, not that big of a deal, but the galaxy for players who like the game just became a bit more lonely.

You have to do things knowing that it could make everyone happy. You have to compromise. The international federation of chess (if it even exists) can go "well now, all pawns are considered queens". deal with it, or don't, pretend nothing happened, but those are our rules now.
Silly example I suppose, but you need a consistent set of rules for everyone, imagination is not enough, make compromise.

 

[Jypson]

Yeah, I get you, and you're not the first one going through that.
But you can't build a game on features half people avoid. It's not how it works. When the list of things you don't like add up, you just stop and go play something else. And it's fine really, not that big of a deal, but the galaxy for players who like the game just became a bit more lonely.

You have to do things knowing that it could make everyone happy. You have to compromise. The international federation of chess (if it even exists) can go "well now, all pawns are considered queens". deal with it, or don't, pretend nothing happened, but those are our rules now.
Silly example I suppose, but you need a consistent set of rules for everyone, imagination is not enough, make compromise.

Make everyone happy? There's nothing under the sun FDev could do to make everyone happy. Elite: Dangerous draws a pretty diverse crowd my friend.

 

[Sans Daring]

You have to do things knowing that it could make everyone happy. You have to compromise. The international federation of chess (if it even exists) can go "well now, all pawns are considered queens". deal with it, or don't, pretend nothing happened, but those are our rules now.
Silly example I suppose, but you need a consistent set of rules for everyone, imagination is not enough, make compromise.

That's it. It's got to reflect your player base as broadly as you can. Can't please everyone, but you should aim to keep your loyal users happy as well as ensuring your game is open to attract new blood.

The issue really is if this had been the ideology set from the get-go or an evolution of a prior game mechanic ideology, it wouldn't get this reaction. It gets the reaction because it very much defies what the game has become, alienating a part of its loyal user base. You can't tell them "just deal with it" when, as exciting as it sounds, there is no argument I've seen that compare this move to any other made in Elite. It stands against Braben's ideology, it stands against the universe they've created, and ultimately it doesn't sit with the games prior incarnation. Ship transfer, yes, that's fine as you can do that in any real-situation so it stands to reason it would work here, but there has to be some form of limit/burden for the big reward. It doesn't feel real (to me), and it massively changes the goal posts (for everyone - FSD alone becomes devalued, and thereby the balance between the ships are immediately lost before you look any deeper).

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

Make everyone happy? There's nothing under the sun FDev could do to make everyone happy. Elite: Dangerous draws a pretty diverse crowd my friend.

I reckon. In this case, it's not that big of a deal as the effort is minimal, it's just 3 lines of code and no development time lost. But clearly, for some bigger features, they should know their audience better and compromise better (who said CQC?). "making everyone happy" does not really stand for a feature everyone will love and do, more for features that don't cause such debate (who said "war").

 

[LeoBartlet]

You really didn't get the point, did you?
This game should be about people,
to "blaze their own trail",
not to sooner or later have to
accept a mechanic as optimum
and live that.

It simply kills diversity, as can be seen
in PvP meta.

Again I'll say if you don't liee it don't use it.

Also its not killed anything as it's not even on the live servers or out for beta testing. Personally speaking I'll fly the same ships after it drops as I do now.

 

[jprelph]

If and it's a very big if the transfer of ships was to have a negative impact on any aspect of the game im confident that Frontier would seek to balance it out.

They've not even ironed out the limitations on ship transfer yet the forum echo chamber is up in arms at the very idea of it.

That's because they've ruled out the one limitation that could balance it - a delay. It's not possible to use cost to balance features in ED anymore because there are too many players for whom the bank balance simply became an irrelevant and very large number a long time ago. Heavy PP haulers will spend 100m in a week without even thinking about it. The only way to make the cost a balancing factor would be to make it insurmountably high - but that shifts the balance in a different way so that newer/casual players could never use the feature. You couldn't even scale the cost on ship value because the obvious "abuse" mechanics involve using the feature to summon a taxi ship (such as an Asp) and a haulage ship (e.g. a T9) - which aren't particularly expensive ships.

What worries a lot of players is that this was announced as a quick "QoL" patch as though it was going to make everything better with little side effects, but the problem is that the player base is very efficient at working out the obvious abuse mechanics in the game (it's happened many times before).

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

Again I'll say if you don't lie it don't use it.

Also its not killed anything as it's not even on the live servers or out for beta testing. Personally speaking I'll fly the same ships after it drops as I do now.

Again, a game need a set of consisten....
Oh, nevermind. We're going nowhere with this

 

[jprelph]

Again I'll say if you don't liee it don't use it.

Also its not killed anything as it's not even on the live servers or out for beta testing. Personally speaking I'll fly the same ships after it drops as I do now.

Again though - if it puts someone at a competitive disadvantage how do you say to people "don't use it if you don't like it"? If your PP Power can no longer undermine an enemy because they can fort quicker and wider - leaving them more time to undermine you - what do you do? Aren't you then just forced into using the mechanic to finish your fort quicker?

 

[Jypson]

Again though - if it puts someone at a competitive disadvantage how do you say to people "don't use it if you don't like it"? If your PP Power can no longer undermine an enemy because they can fort quicker and wider - leaving them more time to undermine you - what do you do? Aren't you then just forced into using the mechanic to finish your fort quicker?

Isn't that the nature of competition though? It's like if you're a slalom skier back in the day with straight skis. Parabolic skies come around and you don't like them because....reasons. Parabolic skies are better thus you must get you some new skies or compete in a different sport...or maybe a Private Group for straight skies only!

 

[Boomer Kay]

Again though - if it puts someone at a competitive disadvantage how do you say to people "don't use it if you don't like it"? If your PP Power can no longer undermine an enemy because they can fort quicker and wider - leaving them more time to undermine you - what do you do? Aren't you then just forced into using the mechanic to finish your fort quicker?

You make no sense any more.
On one hand you acknowledge that there's players that have all the odds stacked for them because they can dump huge resources into an activity.
On the other hand you're concerned about some competitive balance that doesn't exist in the first place because there's players that have all the odds stacked and can dump huge resources (including 10 hours gameplay a day) into an activity.

Grasping for straws.

 

[Ozram]

I figured it out. This is all about the developers fantasy wet dream where DRM is respected even in the new Wild West of Elite dangerous. The difficulty is not in manufacturing your ultra "unique" heavily engineered craft, it's in access. Just like the game or Netflix, you have the right to one copy running at a time, unless you pay for more (buy another of the same ship). You can have that special, ultra engineered torpedo restocked at any station, regardless of factional standing because war is no excuse for breaching DRM rights and restrictions. Corporate ownership reigns supreme. In that light, as the highest aspiration and fantasy of the corporate world, instant, 3D printed uniqueness is quintessentially desirable as a feature for all to become accustomed to. Perhaps once we all have 3D printers in the home it will be like this: you can buy that pair of designer 3D sandals, but you can only make one copy. If the original is destroyed or you have gone traveling, you can print another copy depending on the privileges afforded to you in the contract (subject to change without notice).

 

[Brian of Ardagh]

Isn't that the nature of competition though? It's like if you're a slalom skier back in the day with straight skis. Parabolic skies come around and you don't like them because....reasons. Parabolic skies are better thus you must get you some new skies or compete in a different sport...or maybe a Private Group for straight skies only!

Not to be contrary but in every competition reasonable people can draw lines on the limits of progress. In sports, organizations limit doping and other physical enhancements. It might be prudent to restrict powered skis!

 

[Jypson]

Not to be contrary but in every competition reasonable people can draw lines on the limits of progress. In sports, organizations limit doping and other physical enhancements. It might be prudent to restrict powered skis!

I'm not sure about 'reasonable people' drawling lines, but officiators (read FDev) do

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

All this talk of 3D printing, and this article just popped up, lol!

Auto, aerospace industries warm to 3D printing :

http://www.japantoday.com/category/technology/view/auto-aerospace-industries-warm-to-3d-printing

 

[Brian of Ardagh]

I'm not sure about 'reasonable people' drawling lines, but officiators (read FDev) do

True but officiating bodies do take their cues from the community that they officiate and what reasonable people consider fair competition.

I hope FD will find a reasonable compromise that neither side will be 100% happy with. That's usually how you can tell that the officials have come to the best solution. There's a saying here in the US that the best Supreme Court decisions are the ones where neither side felt like they "won."