What is it a simulation of? An impossible galaxy with arbitrary (but reasonably coherent) rules.
Reducing distance costs by 50
- Thread starter Ziljan
- Start date
What is it a simulation of? An impossible galaxy with arbitrary (but reasonably coherent) rules.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I see elite as 2 layers really.
A fairly accurate galaxy simulation
with a less simulatory game added on top.
Whether the game is technically a simulator or not matters far less to me as to whether or not the game sticks to its own internal rules or not.
Some may argue a game with FTL travel and a flight model more akin to WWII figher planes and a watered down Newtonian flight model choice can never be considered a simulation. Whether this is true or not to me is not really important.
BUT other rules ARE important to me.... instant travel with ship delivery would have been a massive mistake from my view. As would fast travel of our CMDRs - something some people have asked for. The whole "unique" engineering items is also a consistency issue... either they are unique and therefore not reproducible or they are not - once more its in the wording imo.... the Engineers could have given us the blue print to remake our weapons/gear once we get one we like.
carrot - we get a good role and we can apply it to all of our ships / weapons.
stick - we get blown up and we have to go back to the engineer, complete with the items needed to make it - to get it remade - we get stock replacements off insurance..
net outcome, probably neutral but its more consistent imo.
I get why loading / refueling / ship destruction is instant AND I accept it (though i personally would prefer some sort of "event" to happen to cover these things even to give a nod to realism even if largely accelerated).... but to me these things should be as far as it goes... everything else should be consistent within the rules of the game.
The 3D printer for SLFs..... imo was poorly thought out... imo its all in the wording. if the SLF bay was a modular construction factory where the ships were pulled out of a container and some parts assembled on the fly then personally i think this would have fit better in the game... because if we have 3D printing of ships, why am i flying all over the bloody place looking for bits of blown up ships etc as materials?
ultimately the bottom line is with the devs however, it does not matter what i think, i can just give my views, and if it rings true with the devs should they read it then, great..... but if not, well, i dont want to fall out with anyone over it.
A fairly accurate galaxy simulation
with a less simulatory game added on top.
Whether the game is technically a simulator or not matters far less to me as to whether or not the game sticks to its own internal rules or not.
Some may argue a game with FTL travel and a flight model more akin to WWII figher planes and a watered down Newtonian flight model choice can never be considered a simulation. Whether this is true or not to me is not really important.
BUT other rules ARE important to me.... instant travel with ship delivery would have been a massive mistake from my view. As would fast travel of our CMDRs - something some people have asked for. The whole "unique" engineering items is also a consistency issue... either they are unique and therefore not reproducible or they are not - once more its in the wording imo.... the Engineers could have given us the blue print to remake our weapons/gear once we get one we like.
carrot - we get a good role and we can apply it to all of our ships / weapons.
stick - we get blown up and we have to go back to the engineer, complete with the items needed to make it - to get it remade - we get stock replacements off insurance..
net outcome, probably neutral but its more consistent imo.
I get why loading / refueling / ship destruction is instant AND I accept it (though i personally would prefer some sort of "event" to happen to cover these things even to give a nod to realism even if largely accelerated).... but to me these things should be as far as it goes... everything else should be consistent within the rules of the game.
The 3D printer for SLFs..... imo was poorly thought out... imo its all in the wording. if the SLF bay was a modular construction factory where the ships were pulled out of a container and some parts assembled on the fly then personally i think this would have fit better in the game... because if we have 3D printing of ships, why am i flying all over the bloody place looking for bits of blown up ships etc as materials?
ultimately the bottom line is with the devs however, it does not matter what i think, i can just give my views, and if it rings true with the devs should they read it then, great..... but if not, well, i dont want to fall out with anyone over it.
Last edited:
I'd replace here "thinking" with "paranoic" and "players" with "munchkins". Then it would be correct sentence.
Prices for transfer should be halved once more, as well as delays. That's my personal thinking.
Yes. I am just pointing out that it is arbitrary. The galaxy is not accurately simulated at all. (Faster than light travel is impossible (even if space compression fsd type travel might be), is outside the future light cone and therefore breaks causality (I think) and sub -light speed travel effects and gravitational time effects are not simulated. It would break the game.). We all have preferences for which bits of fantasy are good and bad, but that is all they are. I guess the trick is to balance a coherent fantastical framework against ‘good’ game play mechanics, which again is personal taste. But some of the unnecessary jumpy, jumpy time sink should be addressed, in my view.
It's true, I have a great deal of faith in people. We can occasionally step outside ourselves and surprise. Like when 70% of us voted for realism. Now that was nice a surprise
Last edited:
Credits are irrelevant,it should cost so little that anyone could afford to use ship transfer as and when they fancy. Why limit it to the people that spammed robigo for the past 6 months.
I support that too however, USS's were meant only as a place holder. FD knew they were terrible but have now decided to stick with them.
Not going to long range SC trips doesn't address the issue of nothing to do. People are doing something else and not playing the game during these periods. If you're watching netflix, you're not playing the "game" - ED is a game, a game is something you play - why are you not (not "you" you lol) playing the game? Because there's nothing to do and this needs to be addressed.
Put it this way, I'd rather have soemthing to do in my ship on these long routes than grind for the awful Engineers stuff. We already had the ships and modules, they just added...more modules....and? What benefit does an a class anaconda have over an a class anaconda - none.
What benefit does an fully modded Ana have over a fully modded Aan - none. Everyone is grinding to get to the same place they were before. I'd rather have stuff to do on my ship like repairs or maintenance of something since we're SC'ing more than any other activity we do.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
That doesn't make sense. If we had instant ship transfer, it would have broken the game - how is that paronic?
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Then you misunderstood his post. Glaxxon, Glaxxor or whatever his name is broke it down on page 1 or 2 if you need it
Last edited:
Slippery slope fallacy, remember?
Right now it is your word against mine. You say "it would have broken", I say "it would have improved". So?
but we again start that very flame. I don't want to. I know that all arguments will be ignored...
Then you misunderstood his post. Glaxxon, Glaxxor or whatever his name is broke it down on page 1 or 2 if you need it
No, I didn't misunderstand his post. I think you've misunderstood mine though.
I am aware of Ziljan's concerns - I just don't think a nice gesture on the part of the devs must neccessarily lead to player unrest through a convoluted line of reasoning. Sometimes a spade is just a spade, not a spade that if used will open the depths of hell, thus releasing all manner of shortcomings and causing people to revolt against said spade. The fact that it was piggybacked onto a change meant to make things easier for us players is what caused the facepalm. It's almost a literal embodiment of the phrase "this is why we can't have nice things."
I did link an Occam's razor image somewhere back there.
Also there's an uncomfortable undercurrent of "to justify the validity of the 70/30 split prices must be kept unreasonable" if you read too much into it, which is just as unpleasant as the idea that players will revolt over a QoL improvement if it's, er, improved, but won't if it remains expensive. I have chosen not to accuse Ziljan of that kind of thinking though, because *I* might be reading too much into things.
So there. Hopefully that's cleared things up. Now I will return to gazing in uncomfortably rapt fashion at Ziljan's Gaius Baltar avatar.
[heart][squeeeee]:x[uhh][redface]
The real issue is that people want to change features that haven't even been implemented or were implemented for a very short amount of time.
Like, these guys are wizards that can predict the future and announce in game doom if Frontier don't make their game following their prophecy.
How about we test things out for an extended period of time before changing them ?
Like, these guys are wizards that can predict the future and announce in game doom if Frontier don't make their game following their prophecy.
How about we test things out for an extended period of time before changing them ?
Last edited:
If you paid any attention to the original sausage making process when people were supplying their personal (and varied) reasons for wanting ship delays, then you'd know that this isn't just a "spade". It's a fulcrum. Tip it too much and it becomes an anvil, which is fine if you're the fire or the hammer. But if this thing tips over, then most of us would wind up getting dipped in oven and/or being hammered.
There is no wizardry or soothsaying here. I am just remembering what other people have written and coming to the logical conclusion of their stated beliefs and motivations.
Last edited:
Woah! Whoa! Whoa!
Back up!
WHO'S FAULT WAS IT TO IMPLEMENT DELAYS AGAIN?
Frontier wanted to go ahead with instant.
So lets not place the blame about it 'Being a waiting game' on their shoulders. They implemented delays because WE asked for it.
Okay, so how about we make it a bit more concrete. Make your prediction: At which date will all these doomsaying come true, and please specify the exact nature of these disasters waiting to happen.
none of these people ever provided any noteworthy argument against instant transfer. there were just whining for some reason still unknown to me. any statement from those people was like "I believe this will break the game, and my belief is strong!", nothing more.
They had successfully whined delays.
Now we see FD make changes to the transfer mechanics. And this means previously implemented mechanics were wrong. Thus your original post is also wrong. I hope they (FD) will do more changes in the same direction, and if they will - it will prove that you are wrong again.
Should I explain the above statements?
I didnt ask for it. People like Ziljan asked for it. Some of them, like Ziljan, did not even want ship transfers to be a thing at all.
Add me to that list, please. To show you how uninterested in the feature I am, I don't even know what the time & cost associated with transferring ships was in the first place, much less what they've been reduced to. At best I'll use this feature once or twice in my entire career (potentially less, mind you) to rebase a fleet. Why do I feel this way? Because I don't own a ship I'm not prepared to spend months flying exclusively, much less be caught flying one that I can't figure out to keep myself busy in.
Now module storage, that's a quality of life improvement I can get behind!
Yes. It did seem to be mostly people with no intent on using the feature themselves trying to ruin it for everyone else.
Ditto Sothis. Ditto Combat Logging. ad infinitum, ad nauseium.
How about... now bare with me because this is a seriously radical idea that's waaay out there.... How about we let people play the game the way they want to without attempting to make psuedo-psychological predictions on the mentality of an entire playerbase just to push a single individual's agenda about how they feel ship transfers should be while claiming it's all for the benefit of the future of ED.
For example I know for a fact that I will not be any more encouraged to use taxis the way you just outlined than I was before. No offense intended to you Ziljan, but I trust FD's credentials to make these decisions more than you.