Camp 1: Delay
Camp 2: Instant
How do you make a compromise there? It's literally binary
The Galaxy - Is its size now considered to be a barrier to gameplay by the Developers?
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
Camp 1: Delay
Camp 2: Instant
How do you make a compromise there? It's literally binary
Camp 1: Delay
Camp 2: Instant
How do you make a compromise there? It's literally binary
Instant delay
Instant delay
[haha] It's all so simple!
YES!! INSTANT transfer of Ships!
Screw the "WE WANT IMMERSION" crowing! You can die and instantly arrive in a brand new ship, maybe tens of thousands of light years away - but pulling ships instantly is an "Immersion Killer" to some commanders! I think half the reason we have so much grind in ED is because of nutty commanders and their concept of "fun"
Screw the "WE WANT IMMERSION" crowing! You can die and instantly arrive in a brand new ship, maybe tens of thousands of light years away - but pulling ships instantly is an "Immersion Killer" to some commanders! I think half the reason we have so much grind in ED is because of nutty commanders and their concept of "fun"
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!
Actually, the really good, and topical, comparison someone did a few days back is with olympic athletes and doping. You know that some in your sport are dopers. You really do not want to dope. But if you don't you probably have no chance of winning. So what do you do?
Well, doping is against the rules and a dis-qualifier, so....
How would you police that in this situation?
- instant ship transfer in
- will to compete at a cg
I think FD could remove the ability to insta-summon a ship to an
active cg location and a surrounding bubble of several LY.
But would we like that to happen?
What about powerplay?
Last edited:
And others who jump in with insults without reading the points of those they cast as being dull and all about immersion.
1. Elite is fun for everyone, for different reasons.
2. It's not all about immersion. Read the threads. Seeing FSD drives become devalued, where you just bucket-Asp one ship to make the distance to then transport your FDL defeats the balances on the ship classes. That's not immersion. Games work on a reward/burden methodology. Give a big reward, like instant movement of an asset, there should be an equal cost to that benefit. There is none. Nothing. Reason why games don't do that is because it's been found to devalue gameplay. It's why cheat-codes tend to put people off games. Soon as it's easy, there actually becomes less reward. People move on. This isn't about immersion solely.
3. And before you attack immersion, that's exactly what Braben has been after all these years, make you feel "immersed!" There are restricts and concessions, immersion is the illusion of real not the belief it is real. Having something that cannot fit with the truthes of the Elite world does stick out and look badly, but it's not the only reason, it's just an obvious one.
That's also the only reason this game exists to begin with, or who do you think funded it?
That's nonsense and is indicative of the responses I've had that it's an ad hominem attack rather than anything constructive. I have said many, many times that it increases the gap between established/rich players and new/casual players. By definition I'm stating that I know there's a difference but I don't think it's a good idea to further amplify that difference.
As it stands FD have put rate limiters into PowerPlay mechanics to try and hold back some of the excesses that could be possible, but having *instant* ship transfers allows established/rich players to skew things even further in their favour.
Possibly the only realistic aspect of the new mechanic.
You think maybe they'll change Formula 1 rules so Delorean can finally compete? After all, doesn't seem fair that Mercedes and Ferrari has all the money.
\
Again, this seems to be deliberately misinterpreting my remarks - I didn't say that there was no benefit to the rich players, or that it should be removed, what I said was that this change gives rich/established players even more of an advantage - and it seems an odd decision to be widening that gap.
Funnily enough one of the main complaints in Formula 1 is that the current concorde agreement gives the top performing teams and some other powerful teams (for historical reasons) much more money - which cements their position. Force India and Sauber (iirc) filed a complaint with the EU commission on that and a lot of F1 journalists think it hurts the sport, compared to something like (for instance) the EPL where the division of TV money is much fairer because there's a general consensus that favouring the top teams too much is bad for the sport.
Again, this seems to be deliberately misinterpreting my remarks - I didn't say that there was no benefit to the rich players, or that it should be removed, what I said was that this change gives rich/established players even more of an advantage - and it seems an odd decision to be widening that gap.
Funnily enough one of the main complaints in Formula 1 is that the current concorde agreement gives the top performing teams and some other powerful teams (for historical reasons) much more money - which cements their position. Force India and Sauber (iirc) filed a complaint with the EU commission on that and a lot of F1 journalists think it hurts the sport, compared to something like (for instance) the EPL where the division of TV money is much fairer because there's a general consensus that favouring the top teams too much is bad for the sport.
NO!! LOGICAL TRAVEL TIME transfer of Ships!
Screw the "WE WANT EVERYTHING NOW" crowing! You can't travel anywhere instantly on any ship, even if just to a station a few light seconds away - but pulling ships instantly is an "gameplay mechanic that makes sense" to some commanders! I think half the reason we are getting so much moronic gameplay added to ED is because of selfie stick generation commanders and their concept of "fun".
Last edited:
I'm an engineer by trade and when I'm confronted with binary choices I try to reframe the choices so they aren't binary.Camp 1: Delay
Camp 2: Instant
How do you make a compromise there? It's literally binary
For example:
1. Would the delay camp accept a solution that was essentially instant in practice but was both lore friendly and had additional features that gave FD finer control than simple cost and distance limitations?
2. Would the instant camp accept a solution that sufficiently provided the ability to solve the problem of needing a certain ship with immediacy and allowed larger fleet management that wasn't as time sensitive?
I'm not saying this is the only way to reframe the debate or that I have workable answers to these choices but if the two sides could stop and realize they both want transfers, but with different features, there might be middle ground they could meet on if they took the time to rethink the debate.
Last edited:
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!
works both ways, though. Aluminum bats aren't allowed in major league baseball and recumbent bikes aren't allowed in professional bike races because they are TOO good at what they do
Last edited:
I appreciate what you're saying, but...
This isn't about us trying to come with terms, and treaties is it. FDev says this is how it's going to be. We may disagree, Odin knows I've disagreed plenty of times, but it is what it is.- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Right you are, and FDev have made the call
What do you care if thats the case anyway?
When I play ED I am not thinking about all those super rich commanders out there getting even more rich. I'm thinking about what I am doing with MY experience in the game.
BTW I will be wiping for 2.2 so I will be one of those 'poor' commanders again soon. Makes no difference to me. And Boomer is correct the very fact that some people can play for more hours a days already gives them an advantage, even instant ship transfer isnt going to change that fact.
I think a short delay is in order for this feature, you sacrifice quite a bit of believe-ability otherwise. You could calculate the delay using strait line distance divided by the ship's jump range and then multiplied by 15-30 seconds (time per jump). This would be a very short delay for the express purpose of keeping player's suspension of disbelief intact.
HOWEVER, I'd rather have ship transfers that are instant than have not transfers at all.
HOWEVER, I'd rather have ship transfers that are instant than have not transfers at all.