Weren't you the same guy telling Orville and Wilbur Wright to give up after the first try?
[Feedback] Once again, docking computer should not be module.
- Thread starter Wyrm
- Start date
Weren't you the same guy telling Orville and Wilbur Wright to give up after the first try?
![BigBANGtheory [VR]](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/71/71385.jpg?1644873788){kind=avatar}
Docking computer and auto pilot should imho be a no slot reward for Elite status as its just a QoL thing at that point its not like you haven't travelled 100's of 1000's of LY already and probably manually docked a 1000 times too, skill no longer matters because you do it instinctively. You wouldn't even use one in a small-med ship anyway if you were Elite.
Meanwhile the neysayers could be shadow banned to their own instance so they can be collectively miserable together listening to REM and do Prosaic parties instead of lying on a bead of nails claiming it to be a new design of gaming chair.
Meanwhile the neysayers could be shadow banned to their own instance so they can be collectively miserable together listening to REM and do Prosaic parties instead of lying on a bead of nails claiming it to be a new design of gaming chair.
Elite is a computer program. Its not set in stone and they could change it tomorrow if they wanted to. The devs are never going to know how players feel about their design decisions unless we tell them and as the already numerous changes to this game have proved, if enough people feel the same way, the devs often DO make changes. So sorry but you're completely wrong.
Last edited:
On the same token however, if you remove all fun from a game for the sake of realism/challenge, you get a more nuanced game less people are going to enjoy.
Even games like ARMA have to make some concessions, like a HUD when IRL, no soldier currently has the nano/cyber augmentations to get a convenient HUD.
What is SO desperately wrong about a convenient docking program? It's not going to unbalance much of anything, it literally only has use to make a seasoned pilot let go of the stick for about 1-3 minutes (unless it malfunctions) after a long career of mastering landing.
And besides, even going by realism, a separate computer roughly huge enough to obscure a spot meant to hold a ton in mass (Despite somehow weighing NOTHING) needing to plug into an existing flight computer? That's ridiculously stupid... That should be a program or a Disc that simply goes into the existing computer, hardly a whole module.
A little convenience is NOT going to hurt the 'challenge' of this game. Trust me, a docking program is not gonna make it any easier when I go down in combat...
We seem to be pretty much in full agreement here, in fact my entire post that you quoted was just saying that there's no reason why the docking computer cant be fun, convenient, requires trade-offs AND ALSO makes sense all at the same time. The problem I and many others have is that as its currently implemented, the docking computer it is fun, convenient, requires trade-offs and is so ridiculously stupid and unrealistic that it actually hurts to try and explain to yourself why a computer program should take up an entire module slot that could otherwise be used to hold 2 tons of cargo (or more for ships without size 1 slots). This is really not good for the overall enjoyment of the game.
We can do better, we should do better. Many aspects of ED prove that both realism and fun are completely possible and compatible. Lets apply the same thinking to the docking program and other game "software" so that it also makes sense in ADDITION to being fun and convenient. There's no reason that making something "fun" must automatically mean it has to be illogical and stupid (like a computer program taking up tons of space).
Last edited:
Yes, I agree. They really need to do a better job of finding the happy medium.
They made this game from scratch, one of the two people who made the first game (By themselves) are leaders, and really, the devs in general are seasoned. I know they can do better.
Game designers in FDev are very good, as well as coders.
Its just often feels like FDev doesn't have QA division at all. Or that its so small and poorly funded, that there is lots and lots of unbalanced and 'boring' stuff in game. As well as bugs that not get fixed for over a year : P
The docking computer removes certain reptile-level satisfactions of personal superiority. Which ones, I can't say, due to mods.
Let's just call it Ego.
As someone who started flying at age four, these posts attacking the DC are just more Smilin' Jack doing his Hangar Flying. All traffic at stations would be under ATC's control. The only reason the DC and manual exist, is to please the old masochistic mode versions of Elite. I've grown beyond that.
At least eight in@#$%^&*(LOSS OF SIGNAL)
Let's just call it Ego.
As someone who started flying at age four, these posts attacking the DC are just more Smilin' Jack doing his Hangar Flying. All traffic at stations would be under ATC's control. The only reason the DC and manual exist, is to please the old masochistic mode versions of Elite. I've grown beyond that.
At least eight in@#$%^&*(LOSS OF SIGNAL)
Yes, I'd like to have a docking computer without losing a slot, currently a size 3 slot. It's stupid that it's not included as basic ship functionality, given that your ship can land on a planet when you are in your SRV. I'm an explorer, so I'm gone for months at a time without docking practice. It's nice to have one less thing to worry about.
Yes, I can fly my ship. Yes, I can dock it. No, I shouldn't have to waste 8 tons of cargo space for what should be a simple computer program, so I can multitask while the ship is docking. It's a convenient QoL option; it should be included with the ship (or a separate software module).
Yes, I can fly my ship. Yes, I can dock it. No, I shouldn't have to waste 8 tons of cargo space for what should be a simple computer program, so I can multitask while the ship is docking. It's a convenient QoL option; it should be included with the ship (or a separate software module).
Last edited:
All modules takes internal slot, and tend to give ship an advantage. Discovery scanners, limpet controllers, surface scanner, fuel scoop, planetary vehicle hangar, AFMU, fuel tank and so on. All those modules give a clear usage and advantage. Docking computer have no more functionality than external lights, wing beacon or orbit lines. Any player that played game for more than one day will be able to finish docking faster manually. And docking computer itself is just for a lazy gameplay, where you arrived to station, and engaged docking computer, while finishing your dinner or something
So, remove docking computer from modules list, and put it as optional function in system menu. That is, make all ship having docking computers, without spending internal slot on it, and let players decide whenever they want to use it or not.
Ok... first off, the DC isn't exactly a large (it fits in class 1 slots) or expensive (4500 credits). It does offer an advantage, it docks your ship for you. In some situations, its not a bad thing. I learned how to dock a ship manually by watching the docking computer. It can also be good for the really big and sluggish ships (conda, cutter, corvette, t9). Put it on the smallest slot, and you don't really lose much. It has a tiny power draw and weighs nothing. You complain about "spending an internal slot on it," but what are you really sacrificing? Odds are 4 tons of cargo space at worst. You don't bother with a class 2 fuel scoop, fuel tank, or afmu. I will give you that disco scanners and limpet controllers might have an argument, but not a very convincing one.
Also, if this is feedback, then you should have posted in the suggestions and feedback forum.
- - - Updated - - -
what ship are you in where you are wasting 8 tons of cargo space, Also cargo space on an exploration ship?
I haven't used a DC since I joined the VR club. The depth perception and special awareness are on another level, though, in VR. I don't think I needed it before, it was certainly quicker/easier and I hadn't learnt enough about outfitting my ships for specific tasks. Now that I have a [slightly] better understanding of ship configs, it's simply not often I have a spare module spot... I can always use more hull reinforcement on my Vulture!
Any VR uses in this thread, did you find the same?
Any VR uses in this thread, did you find the same?
I assume that was to me?
Warning, everyone who feel touchy about perfect landing without any scratches, should not watch following video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ydu-SnjarLo
Normally though i allow for DC to kick in right after i pass mail slot
Most of the approach at greater than Mach 1, impact was at 297 m/s, or Mach 0.9/1,069.20 km/hr. 664.41 statute MPH. 577 KIAS. Comedy gold for legislators trying to defend "our pilot freedoms"!
That's some toaster rack. And, no bent hull, with all that inertial moment. And going from 297 m/s to 42/m/s, in one second, puts the lie to "no artificial gravity".
- - - Updated - - -
Lucky you. When I'm dead tired (which is when I get time to play), that DC is a lifesaver against the landing time sink/pilot error.
The 'DC gives an advantage so should take a slot' argument doesn't fly - no pun intended - because by that same logic, so does FA off and it doesn't use a slot. It comes integrated. Which is the suggestion in this thread by some that support integration of DC.
Ship recall while in SRV is also an integrated function, no trade off slot needed. Should I continue? There are many, many more examples of functions that are directly integrated into the ship, and gives advantage in either time or performance by using it.
If you want to be against DC integration 'just because' or personal preference for game mechanic - that's fair. That's your opinion, and under a 'just because' or personal preference reason, there's no real right or wrong. But when you attempt to rationalize why DC should not be integrated because it's somehow special, gives advantage, saves time, etc, etc. - then your argument loses all credibility because it can be so readily contradicted with actual facts present in other integrated, non-slot using functions similar to DC.
It's a module, go add cruise or remote start to a car and see what it costs. Dreaming is free tho.
Might even be pretty expensive. But if the mechanic told me that he would have to remove one of the passenger seats to make room for it, I think I would be tempted to get a second quote.
I'm in an Asp Explorer. It has no size 1 slots. That seems very wrong, since it's a ship built for exploring and scanners only need a size 1 slot.
The 2 size 2 slots have a Advanced Discovery Scanner and a Surface Details Scanner installed. That means the Docking Computer goes in a size 3 slot (8 tons). If the Asp had 2 size 1 slots in place of one of the size 2 slots, it wouldn't be as big a deal. I'd like to put in a second AFMU. When I return after months of exploring, having a DC means I have one less thing to worry about. When I'm in the bubble, it would be nice to have the extra cargo space.
I find docking to be tedious and not fun, so I almost always install a DC, but it's stupid that it takes a slot at all, particularly now that there are even more items which compete for that slot, like: SLFs, AFMUs, and SRV hangers.
I'm fine with paying extra for a DC, my beef is the slot it requires.
^ I agree 100%
I think there would be quite an uproar, if SRV ship recall required a special computer and associated slot.
Last edited:
This^^ Its not wrong that the DC costs something or even that it costs a lot. But its definitely stupid and illogical that it costs literally tons of space on your ship for what amounts to a mere computer program. The planetary approach suite is also a computer program which is arguably far more complex than the DC and it comes standard with every single ship and takes up no mass at all. This is how computer programs should be done in ED.
I dont think that the DC should come as standard or cost nothing, I think there should be a trade-off for it but whatever the trade-off it absolutely MUST MAKE SENSE! Having it take up 2 tons of cargo space (at minimum) is totally ridiculous and detracts from the enjoyment of the game. Being forced to make trade-offs is good gameplay, but good gameplay does not automatically imply that something has to be stupid and illogical.
Last edited: