Patch Notes Update Elite Dangerous 2.2.03 - Update incoming.

[KellyR]

Yes, Electronic countermeasures. What we have now isn't ECM, but an arcade-like, dumbed-down EMP device. With the advent of specialist crew stations, it's possible that might finally now be expanded upon.

I don't need to suggest an alternative. I don't need to contract plague, either, to know it would be bad for me.

Well, if you or someone doesn't come up with another solution, then the interdiction mechanic won't change. So since you don't have any solution, there is no need to berate it; cause it won't change unless something else is ready to replace it. Since you don't have any ideas, and no one else seems to, it's going to stay the same. May be tweaked a bit but the basic mechanic is here to stay.

 

[Lokus Midgard]

I probably could think one up if someone wanted to pay me for doing so. Since I'm not employed by Frontier, however, it win't make any difference.

It's like telling me I should enjoy living in a crappy apartment, because that's just how it is and I should go and design one if I want an alternative. Regardless of not an having any training in architecture or not in charge of a construction company, that doesn't change the fact my landlord should know better and be making an effort to improve my situation to a superior standard.

 

[kalnedrilith]

are you an entitled millennial, or someone who cares?

- .... . / ... .-- --- .-. -.. / --- ..-. / - .-. ..- - ....

"nobody is paying me to fix i, so i won't" = entitlement attitude

"hey, this front step is wobbly, but the landlord won't fix it. i know how to reinforce it without damaging it... i'll take care of that." = person who cares about their living situation and others around them.

nobody is paying me, so i'm not going to try to come up with a solution" = entitlement

"hey, this mechanic/function is problematic; i think i can come up with a better answer to improve everyone's enjoyment, here's my idea" = improving the entire community

 

[KellyR]

are you an entitled millennial, or someone who cares?

- .... . / ... .-- --- .-. -.. / --- ..-. / - .-. ..- - ....

"nobody is paying me to fix i, so i won't" = entitlement attitude

"hey, this front step is wobbly, but the landlord won't fix it. i know how to reinforce it without damaging it... i'll take care of that." = person who cares about their living situation and others around them.

nobody is paying me, so i'm not going to try to come up with a solution" = entitlement

"hey, this mechanic/function is problematic; i think i can come up with a better answer to improve everyone's enjoyment, here's my idea" = improving the entire community

Exactly!!! Have some rep.

 

[Lokus Midgard]

It's nothing to do with entitlement and everything about calling a spade a spade.

You like circle-chasing? Good for you! I don't begrudge you a moment of it. I'm aure there were some people who loved the mini-game you had to undertake to unlock stuff, back in the first 'Mass Effect' game, too - which didn't prevent Bioware realising it was stupid and that most players didn't care for it (going to the ooint of even joking about it in the sequel).

But let's be honest. It's a QTE-like mini-game and many of us find it dull. Whether or not you like it, is besides the point.

I have a heavy dislike of the dumbed-down version of ECM Frontier have given us, too. Probably the one area where mini-game-like tasks might actually ​fit, depending on their take, if they bothered to make it the diverse and useful gadget it should have been (especially if ECCM was also implementd to counter it, as I've written elsewhere).

Does that mean I should voluntarily take the time to run down several different proposals for an ECM replcement? No. No, it does not. And acknowledging that they've unterpreted it as a weird, arcade-like EMP device doesn't make me 'entitled'. It just makes me accurate.

I don't need to detail an interdiction mechanic replacement, just because circle-chasing is what it is. To think otherwise is to assume there's no possible way it could be improved or replaced and I refuse to think that.

Can it be replaced? Of course. Should it be? If the proposition is an improvement (if not, try again).

I'm not seeing why this is so controversial. Of course circle-chasing can be improved upon, just like ECM should (indeed, there's a much stronger case to be made for that being critical). I'm not the one being paid to come up with said improvement, though.

I could also reiterate the need for an in-cockpit padlock-to-target/navpoint/landing pad view, so that VR and non-VR users will have balance (and to generally improve safety), but I have no idea how to code it and wouldn't even attempt to suggest how the team would, either. However, it's been a part of combat flight sims since at least the early nineties, if not before. So, it's reasonable to think that it's possible.

 

[KellyR]

It's nothing to do with entitlement and everything about calling a spade a spade.

You like circle-chasing? Good for you! I don't begrudge you a moment of it. I'm aure there were some people who loved the mini-game you had to undertake to unlock stuff, back in the first 'Mass Effect' game, too - which didn't prevent Bioware realising it was stupid and that most players didn't care for it (going to the ooint of even joking about it in the sequel).

But let's be honest. It's a QTE-like mini-game and many of us find it dull. Whether or not you like it, is besides the point.

I have a heavy dislike of the dumbed-down version of ECM Frontier have given us, too. Probably the one area where mini-game-like tasks might actually ​fit, depending on their take, if they bothered to make it the diverse and useful gadget it should have been (especially if ECCM was also implementd to counter it, as I've written elsewhere).

Does that mean I should voluntarily take the time to run down several different proposals for an ECM replcement? No. No, it does not. And acknowledging that they've unterpreted it as a weird, arcade-like EMP device doesn't make me 'entitled'. It just makes me accurate.

I don't need to detail an interdiction mechanic replacement, just because circle-chasing is what it is. To think otherwise is to assume there's no possible way it could be improved or replaced and I refuse to think that.

Can it be replaced? Of course. Should it be? If the proposition is an improvement (if not, try again).

I'm not seeing why this is so controversial. Of course circle-chasing can be improved upon, just like ECM should (indeed, there's a much stronger case to be made for that being critical). I'm not the one being paid to come up with said improvement, though.

I could also reiterate the need for an in-cockpit padlock-to-target/navpoint/landing pad view, so that VR and non-VR users will have balance (and to generally improve safety), but I have no idea how to code it and wouldn't even attempt to suggest how the team would, either. However, it's been a part of combat flight sims since at least the early nineties, if not before. So, it's reasonable to think that it's possible.

Well, I just don't see how it's different than chasing a shape around with a circle which is what we do in combat. And what Fighter Jets do in dogfights in real life. You say trying to escape is dull, but I've found it adds to the fun of the game. That's just my opinion, of course. But I think that a lot of other people have the same opinion. And I just don't see how else it can be done, short of no escape possible with the intended victim dropping automatically, which is not an option. And I've thought long and hard about this. Unlike you, I'm willing to indulge in some thinking to try to provide an alternative. And I see none. No matter how you go about it, it's going to be something similar. And it is not a mini game. It is a core mechanic of the game just like combat, docking, landing. As for Quicktime Event, no, it's really not as they don't use Quicktime. They use their own in-house Cobra software.

 

[STKDirty]

What about something like a new module that counteracts the fsd interdictor? Based on the strength of the FSD counter-interdictor and the strength of the FSD interdictor modules a weighted random roll determines if you beat the interdiction or not. Everyone is debating and not offing alternatives, so I thought I'd get that started. Take it for what it's worth.

 

[KellyR]

What about something like a new module that counteracts the fsd interdictor? Based on the strength of the FSD counter-interdictor and the strength of the FSD interdictor modules a weighted random roll determines if you beat the interdiction or not. Everyone is debating and not offing alternatives, so I thought I'd get that started. Take it for what it's worth.

This sounds like it might be workable. Don't know for sure as I don't know how the interdiction code works with supercruise code. But at least someone is suggesting something.

 

[Paddywan1138]

Brill Guys.

Canny Wait to get stuck in.

 

[Shar]

Deleted....

 

[Kar]

I might be talking ahead of time but....why is not there any comment on the fix of the SRV Scanner? Is it fixed and not mentioned or it is still bugged?

 

[Noddie]

Interdictions are fixed now.

You can still lose, of course, but they're doable, mostly.

Personally, I try to avoid presenting my thrusters to the ship targeting me.

 

[Radex]

Thanks for NPC fixes!

 

[Lokus Midgard]

Well OK, what if anything do you propose as a means of a ship's computer HUD or otherwise instrument panel/lamps/dials/indicators indicate you're ship is being grabbed by a tractor beam (for want of a better idiom), and the means to escape from it?

The interdict could be dropped from ED, but then that'd mean no tractor beam tech - how do you go after crims?

Like I already pointed out, it needs to be a more interesting mechanic which isn't so frustrating.

Here's an actual QTE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBeoj8u47Po The outcome here is successfully avoiding/not avoiding death using a similar 'aligning your ship to achieve 'x' affair.

You get QTEs in computer games, not real life.

Also, it's not a QTE. An ILS is a guideline to assist with showing how close or off course you are with an approach vector. You only use it if you want to come in for a landing. If planes suddenly forced you to land, any location, any time, without warning and you only had a few seconds to line up, there might be some kind of superficial similarity, but it doesn't generally happen that way. ILS is something you generally activate from a fair distance away and gradually waves you in (a little like the lights on the outside of the stations). It's not an insta-death thing you only have few seconds to 'win' at.

 

[KellyR]

Like I already pointed out, it needs to be a more interesting mechanic which isn't so frustrating.



You get QTEs in computer games, not real life.

Also, it's not a QTE. An ILS is a guideline to assist with showing how close or off course you are with an approach vector. You only use it if you want to come in for a landing. If planes suddenly forced you to land, any location, any time, without warning and you only had a few seconds to line up, there might be some kind of superficial similarity, but it doesn't generally happen that way. ILS is something you generally activate from a fair distance away and gradually waves you in (a little like the lights on the outside of the stations). It's not an insta-death thing you only have few seconds to 'win' at.

So then suggest some alternative. Saying it sucks but then offering no suggestion on how to improve it is not helpful at all. And figuring that solving it is not your job is just entitlement mentality. I think FD tried other things, but this was the best they could come up with. Not saying there isn't something better, but they were under deadline and had a fairly small pool of ideas to work with. I know, 200 to 300 employees. That's still small potatoes when it comes to the 700k who purchased the game. And you say it's boring and uninteresting. That's your opinion. I think it's just fine the way it is. I've had quite a few interdiction fights (some of which I lost btw) that were a total blast. Of course my opponents and I seemed to be fairly evenly matched, but it took a lot more than just seconds. I was in one that lasted more than 2 minutes. Neither of us could seem to get the upper hand. I finally just submitted, thanked him for the fun time and dropped 15 tons of cargo. That was a thoroughly enjoyable experience.

 

[KellyR]

I probably could think one up if someone wanted to pay me for doing so. Since I'm not employed by Frontier, however, it win't make any difference.

It's like telling me I should enjoy living in a crappy apartment, because that's just how it is and I should go and design one if I want an alternative. Regardless of not an having any training in architecture or not in charge of a construction company, that doesn't change the fact my landlord should know better and be making an effort to improve my situation to a superior standard.

I'm not saying you should tell them how to code it. That's their job and they do it very well. What I'm saying is you should suggest a mechanic that can replace the current mechanic. If they think that mechanic is workable, then it's up to them to write the code that actually makes it work. And saying 'it's not my job to make suggestions' really is entitlement mentality.

If everyone thought like you, no one would have ever suggested anything to FD. And we'd still have crappy payouts on missions and Super unbeatable AI running around.

 

[NW3]

Like I already pointed out, it needs to be a more interesting mechanic which isn't so frustrating.

Granted, interdiction could be more interesting, but I personally don't find it frustrating. Sometimes a mini-game can last nearly a minute of intense back-and-forth, but I haven't lost one in many months.

I hate the idea of an interdictor counter measure. It would fill a slot and there aren't enough slots as it is.

Unless someone can propose an idea for a better mini-game, I say leave it as-is, since I find the current implementation satisfying.

In fact, I'd like to see FD implement something similar for the FSD (line up the next star), so that you could chain-jump to speed up long distance travel.

 

[who?]

Like I already pointed out, it needs to be a more interesting mechanic which isn't so frustrating.

I agree, I think it has suffered from unclear feedback (sometimes interdictions succeed in a few seconds for no obvious reason, others fail in a few seconds, equally unexplained) and bugs (flickering interdiction indicator, escape vector hopping around the screen) that don't really help.

As a replacement (/alternative) I'd love to see FSD disruptor torpedoes and mines. Essentially, they're just un-piloted ballistic drones with a short-range supercruise FSD which fire off a FSD disruption pulse on a timer. You use the torpedoes if you're chasing someone, and use mines if you're being chased. The torpedoes and mines do appear on both players' scanners, if you see them and react in time you can get out of the range of the pulse.

Ideally you could have different timers(/fuses) on both, a shorter fuse gives the target less time to react but increases the chance you'll be hit and they won't. So you'd have to keep an eye on the distance to target and your closing rate. That would add a little nuance to the gameplay.

If you fire a torpedo and it disables the target, you auto-drop at their location (probably what you'd want). If you drop a mine and it disables the target, they drop and you don't (again, probably what you'd want.

 

[KellyR]

Now this is what I'm talking about. Suggestions. Not how to implement them, but the actual result once they are implemented if they are. Thanks who?. Have some rep.

 

[ChaosCloud]

- Added new military slots to the following ships:
- Vulture: 1x size 5

That one could be a godsent for me as I'm locked out of my Vulture thanks to engineers since well, engineers.
Though only if there is the ability to "remote" outfit it if you're in the same station as it, so is that a thing?

Can't check myself because I'm somewhere out in the deep several thousands away from the bubble : /