Nobody's every come up with that one!
The Galaxy - Is its size now considered to be a barrier to gameplay by the Developers?
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
Nobody's every come up with that one!
I don't really care if they are going to add Time or Distance limitations, I only care if they do one of them, I mean travelling this way on a "end" game ship should be costly as much as a ROBIGO/SOTHIS run would profit about it...
I mean, A CUTTER ,ANACODA, CORVETTE should be very costly to move, and ships like Eagle , Viper , Cobra, should not be really a issue...
Because this guys COULD AND WILL UNBALANCE any system they'd go if they want to...
Imagine a CG, where 2 guys come with 2 CORVETTER with 8.000 MJ shields and sit on the docking area? Noone would be able to dock there... this should be WAY costly to move... My math to it would be:
Caped at 100Ly
I Think a GOOD Equation would be:
SV = Ship Value
JR = Jump Range
LYd = LY distance
PT = Penalty Threshold
(SV*0.0001)* LYd * (PT / JR) = Price
This means that:
(PT = 20)
An Expo conda(284M,39Ly) would at 100Ly distance cost 14.5M to move around, BUT
An Corvette with small jump range(14Ly) and same value(248M) would cost 40.5M to move around.
The lower you set the PT the less is costly for the Combat builds, and the HIgh Jump range ships is EVEN cheaper...
(PT = 13)
The same conda , same distance= 9.5M
The same Corvette = 26.3M
And in both cases if someone THINK on Exploiting the game by having 2D frame drives on theirs ships This would happen
(PT=20)
Corvette 0.2 Ly jump range = 2.8 Bilions
(PT=13)
Corvette 0.2 Ly jump range = 1.8 Bilions
So this IS a good way of making FSD matter for any ship, and we would not see some guys just teleporting ships around like crazy....
I mean, A CUTTER ,ANACODA, CORVETTE should be very costly to move, and ships like Eagle , Viper , Cobra, should not be really a issue...
Because this guys COULD AND WILL UNBALANCE any system they'd go if they want to...
Imagine a CG, where 2 guys come with 2 CORVETTER with 8.000 MJ shields and sit on the docking area? Noone would be able to dock there... this should be WAY costly to move... My math to it would be:
Caped at 100Ly
I Think a GOOD Equation would be:
SV = Ship Value
JR = Jump Range
LYd = LY distance
PT = Penalty Threshold
(SV*0.0001)* LYd * (PT / JR) = Price
This means that:
(PT = 20)
An Expo conda(284M,39Ly) would at 100Ly distance cost 14.5M to move around, BUT
An Corvette with small jump range(14Ly) and same value(248M) would cost 40.5M to move around.
The lower you set the PT the less is costly for the Combat builds, and the HIgh Jump range ships is EVEN cheaper...
(PT = 13)
The same conda , same distance= 9.5M
The same Corvette = 26.3M
And in both cases if someone THINK on Exploiting the game by having 2D frame drives on theirs ships This would happen
(PT=20)
Corvette 0.2 Ly jump range = 2.8 Bilions
(PT=13)
Corvette 0.2 Ly jump range = 1.8 Bilions
So this IS a good way of making FSD matter for any ship, and we would not see some guys just teleporting ships around like crazy....
I still don't understand the argument that 'instant' will unbalance certain elements of gameplay like pp.
PP players who take it seriously will maximise their gameplay to achieve their objectives. Just the same as min maxing for pvp combat.
What difference does instant Ship Transfer make.
Doesn't a round of PP take a week? Even under normal circumstances it will take any one Player or Group of Players to get their maxed PP built ship to wherever they need it in less than an hour anyway.
Newer players with less in the bank will benefit because they will be able to get straight into the action with an instant Ship Transfer, maximising and making their game time more productive and efficient; and landing into bigger and better ships.
Imagibe playing with a group of friends who are all more experienced and cashed up. They invite you to meet up and go do a CG or some Pp somewhere.
You turn up in your eagle or your Hauler believing you made the right choice. Everyone else is flying ieagles and vipers and adders. You have some of them at your home base and didn't realise they would be better suited for the evenings play session.
A. You lose time going back and forth transporting ships, by the time you get sorted, it's way past your bedtime and everyone else has finished already.
B. Instant transfer, play with your friends, maximise your game play and efficiency.
Competitive players will always be competitive and always panic when elements are introduced that might make them look bad or have to work harder or seemingly give someone else an advantage.
Rich or poor, noob or starkiller, ships transfer will be available to all. No imbalance.
Seems to me non competitive players don't give a monkeys, and the roleplayers... They'll get over it once they realise how convenient it is. They always do. Just like instant rebuy and respawn.
PP players who take it seriously will maximise their gameplay to achieve their objectives. Just the same as min maxing for pvp combat.
What difference does instant Ship Transfer make.
Doesn't a round of PP take a week? Even under normal circumstances it will take any one Player or Group of Players to get their maxed PP built ship to wherever they need it in less than an hour anyway.
Newer players with less in the bank will benefit because they will be able to get straight into the action with an instant Ship Transfer, maximising and making their game time more productive and efficient; and landing into bigger and better ships.
Imagibe playing with a group of friends who are all more experienced and cashed up. They invite you to meet up and go do a CG or some Pp somewhere.
You turn up in your eagle or your Hauler believing you made the right choice. Everyone else is flying ieagles and vipers and adders. You have some of them at your home base and didn't realise they would be better suited for the evenings play session.
A. You lose time going back and forth transporting ships, by the time you get sorted, it's way past your bedtime and everyone else has finished already.
B. Instant transfer, play with your friends, maximise your game play and efficiency.
Competitive players will always be competitive and always panic when elements are introduced that might make them look bad or have to work harder or seemingly give someone else an advantage.
Rich or poor, noob or starkiller, ships transfer will be available to all. No imbalance.
Seems to me non competitive players don't give a monkeys, and the roleplayers... They'll get over it once they realise how convenient it is. They always do. Just like instant rebuy and respawn.
The non competetive players... and the roleplayers... will flock to Mobius and solo. Insta ship gratification (or whatever it's called) will undoubtably be yet another poorly thought out and implemented game mechanic open to abuse by certain sections of the playerbase.
I suspect it'll divide the playerbase further and be just one more nail in the coffin of open play. CG's will become barren in open due to the sheer amount of engineered nonsense and E-peen on display.
Just my 2p worth.
Last edited:
I can only agree, but with some notes and suggestions:
1) As we have already saw current interface implementation for this "ship recall" - or better "summon" - it requires player's ship to be docked at a station with appropriate services. So to minimize alteration to "this" mechanics - less work to implement - we can suppose that current player's ship must also be docked at a station in order to use "transfer" services. So, not "anywhere" as you proposed.
2) As an explanation of the backhroud, one can suppose that we need to hire an npc courier to arrage the things, an it's better to search for one on a populated station.
3) Here is my fully detailed schema I've proposed in the another thread (sorry for self-quote)
Bigger size should mean more possibilities and more variety. Not more travel time.
The idea that the sense of scale comes from being forced to spend more time traveling from A to B is ridiculous. You see a small dot in space, you land on it and see it's actually a gigantic planet, then you go out in your srv and realize that your ship is also gigantic, and BOOM. Sense of scale.
The idea that the sense of scale comes from being forced to spend more time traveling from A to B is ridiculous. You see a small dot in space, you land on it and see it's actually a gigantic planet, then you go out in your srv and realize that your ship is also gigantic, and BOOM. Sense of scale.
Any instant distance short-cuts affect time-space contimuum related issues by default - breacking cause-consecuence scheme.
I don't know well PP mechanics, but there are many aspects of the game that can be affected - all time-dependent, like:
- CG's with low "win" conditions (rare trades?),
- all CG's that can be affected by BGS .
- any type of in-game activity (treasure hunting? searching for unknown?) that is time and distance crucial.
By the way, all effects related to primetime/timezone differences will be augmented.
What will be the results of dangerous games with this little time-space "cheat"?
As I saw it (simplistic way):
Two players in system A have got the message that there are 10 cookies in system B far-far away.
Player A - using fastest ship - travels as quick as possible to system B - planning to eat cookies one by one.
Before - Player B can do the same thing, both are competitive. Or player B, using a ship with big-big mouth, but a bit overweight, takes his own pace an arrives in system B a bit later and at once eats all remainig cookies? that was not already eaten by player A. Player's A progress depens on distance AB - the time he gained earlier. Both players remain competitive.
Now - Player B also do the fast travel thing, then "summons" his other ship with a big-big mouth and eats all 10 cookies at once. Player A is no more competitive. For him an event of reason chain breakig takes place - player B in his big ship cannot be there at the same time as A.
Unless a majority of players are interested in them, the game should not be balanced around community goals.
Amen to this!
I say you should make this suggestion into its own thread.
Then we sit and wait for about a year for Frontier to implement it, like with your other thread about plotting and security levels!
[haha]
Oh, increasing players participation in CG's and other "social" events looks like FD goal, not mine.
Also, as I've said - I'm absolutely agree that this game requires the possibility of the ship's transfer - from the very begining when I've heard for the first time about the plans to implement it (in April).
But I'm completely disagree with this "tricky" feature of ship's magic recall FD presented to us, erroneously naming and annoncing this as so awaited "ship transfer" feature. FALSE. FD implemented particular - and in general situation - the worst case of "transfer" - "recall" case. And as it is really the worst case - that nearby doubles the time to wait in real situations (or, better to say - today's game mechanic) - they are trying to "cover" this disign inconsistence with magic "instant teleportation", or "magic" printing as Michael tried to explain here.
The argument that "ship transfer" can facilitate accesibility of the game content for all players - yes, true and evident. Also this is so far the only possibility to at least decrease for the players this endless and chain of loading screens. But this is also true for any implementation of ship transfer, instantaneuos or not.
Evidently I'm not a naturally English-speaking person (so I've checked Oxford Dictionary). But the new feature to "recall" your, presented by FD, is not at all the promissed possibility of the ship's "transfer", as they try to "sell" this to all players. It's only one particular case. As I've said - the worst.
Check my post here #1827 as how this can be done without alteration and minimum effort.
I've posted here in response the schema that follows the same idea, but use only existing (or pretending to exist) game machanics. Minimal effort for FD to implement really brilliant feature
If the contents is correct compared to the size, there is not a problem
Last edited:
So lets not be hypocritical - if you travel - the screen just fades and the next moment you're at the destination, no ship flying, just call Scottie to beam you up. How about that? huh?
Also, you can't die for real in videogames. Its some kind of technical impediment...
Last edited:
Does the galaxy offer too big an arena to to add more realism to the game without making gameplay too cumbersome, I would say no. Because in a real scenario of humans populating the galaxy we would find out more about how the universe works and that would mean we would discover ever more exotic technology to explore it more conveniently. In effect that is what we have been doing all along. The devs are just doing this in a game format before we have actually reached that stage in our development by using their imagination. We want and like convenience now, and will also want that in the future as well, because time is even more valuable in RL than it is in a game. In essence the devs are just mirroring what would happen anyway. How it happens is another matter.
The real challenge in ED (as it would be in the future), but is more problematic in a game, is that the size of the galaxy will mean people outside of the bubble (as is the case in most areas in the bubble) players will have less contact with each other. Although this is offset quite a bit because it offers players a choice of a more solo or more multi-player experience that they can switch between at their desire.
The real challenge in ED (as it would be in the future), but is more problematic in a game, is that the size of the galaxy will mean people outside of the bubble (as is the case in most areas in the bubble) players will have less contact with each other. Although this is offset quite a bit because it offers players a choice of a more solo or more multi-player experience that they can switch between at their desire.
That's not being hypocritical. It's still a non argument. You are dead. You are now out of the game. What happens out of game does not happen in game. No lore needed, nothing is magic.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
But as has been said multiple times, ANY non-instant transfer is a lot more work than the trivial amount of work to implement instant. And FD have essentially said that it ain't going to happen if it is more work. So the only way we can get an in-game sensible transfer is if the pull instant from 2.2. That will cause another riot by the instanters. That genii is out of the bottle. Whatever FD do or do not do, they have problems ahead.
This is not true, at least for me. I'd prefer the scanning of planets to be far more involved and require actually visiting them and surveying them in detail requiring flying skill, rather than "scanning" them from a far away. Yes, it would take a lot longer but it would also be an activity. A bonus for finding interesting or useful (as in mineral reserves) geology would also be an enhancement. The "point your ship at the body, fly to xLs and watch a twirly thing" mechanic is rather boring and takes no skill at all.
And again... Competitive players will utilise whatever gameplay mechanics are available to 'win' instant transfer will be universally accessible.
Powerplay revolves around 7 days. No impact here.
CGs have limitless amounts of cookies. Everyone gets a share. No impact here.
30 minute delay on ship transfer or instant.
It makes no difference.
I have awoken, back to business!
Here's why I think Ship Rentals don't mitigate a timely no ship retrieval scenario.
1) Unless every station is like Jameson Memorial, you're not going to be getting the ship you need, but you might get something close...maybe. Unless we can rent a 'clone' of one of our ships, no dice.
2) RNGineers: My ships are pimped out man, I got them set up with some decent aftermarket equipment that make them all awesome at what they do. Unless we can rent a 'clone' of one of our ships, no dice.
3) Like the late-great Scotty once said, "I know this ship like the back of my hand!" My ships are an extension of myself. A cobbled together rent-a-truck just isn't going to cut it! Unless we can rent a 'clone' of one of our ships, no dice.
Ship Rentals sound awesome, I hope it gets implemented, but a ship retrieval replacement, it is not.
Actually, so would I, as long as they rebalanced the payments. Making it take longer to do the scanning, if the gameplay was good, would be great: but only as long as they increased the payments. Exploring is already very badly paid compared with other stuff. Indeed, given how slow and clunky the exploration data selling interface is, you can probably earn as much doing the pseudo-exploit de jour (Sothis mission stacking, I believe) for 5 hours as you get selling data for 5 hours that took you many months to gather.
Last edited: