Quality of Life Improvement: Input LAT/LON Co-ords and have a Surface Waypoint appear, similar to the surface scan mission Waypoint.
- Thread starter Genar-Hofoen
- Start date
- Status
At first I found navigating to coordinates a little confusing, but quickly learned how to visualise my current position on the globe and my destination position, then just head on a suitable bearing to close in on it. Refining the heading as I get closer. While it provides me with a bit of skill-based gameplay, I can understand that many others can't get their head around it and find it frustrating.
Some sort of create-your-own planetary waypoint system would appear to be a popular addition, if this thread is any indication, so I wouldn't object to it's addition to the game in order to make navigation simple. That said, I'd still feel it was removing a skill players can learn and replacing it with typing a number in a box. Hopefully they'll be able to add other skill-based navigation/exploration mechanics to make up for the loss though.
Some sort of create-your-own planetary waypoint system would appear to be a popular addition, if this thread is any indication, so I wouldn't object to it's addition to the game in order to make navigation simple. That said, I'd still feel it was removing a skill players can learn and replacing it with typing a number in a box. Hopefully they'll be able to add other skill-based navigation/exploration mechanics to make up for the loss though.
You'll be lucky mate, there's a massive thread going on about the beige plague that's actively being ignored by FD right now. That's a major issue so they are hardly likely to reply to QOL suggestion like planetary way points.
I almost started explaining what's wrong with this kind of attitude, but I won't. If this "feature" satisfies your need for intellectual stimulation, by all means, enjoy it. Nobody is going to force you to use waypoints. You are free to fly the way you fly.
To me, lack of this feature breaks immersion. Because it doesn't feel like flying a spaceship in 3300's. It feels like the game was designed in 1800' (though they had options such as using compass and markings on their maps back then). I have no problem with someone making purposefully anachronistic SF game, with anachronistic universe, steam punk visuals etc. providing they do it in an interesting way. But ED is not that game. It's supposed to be advanced technology, civilisation somewhere between Type I and Type II, efficient space travel being commonplace. The way it is now, it feels disrespectful and lazy on the dev's side. It feels like duct tape and blue tack fix. Especially that galaxy map and system map have this feature, so it's also about keeping it consistent.
If we can't place waypoints on the planetary maps, then we should not have this possibility in the system map or galaxy map. At least keep it consistent, Frontier, will you? We can fly in the general direction of our destination and once in a while pop our heads out of our trusty space barrels and see where we are. All that map searching, route plotting and waypoint placing functionality is for pansies. Down with that sort of thing! We, tough and brave spacemen (and women) will fly towards our destination with courage in our hearts and light of hope shining in our eyes!
And a short example of apparent inspiration for FD game design:
[video=youtube_share;iV2ViNJFZC8]https://youtu.be/iV2ViNJFZC8[/video]
Last edited:
'Flying' a spaceship in the 3300's probably wouldn't require any input from a human pilot at all, beyond asking the computer to take you somewhere. No fiddling with maps, pushing a joystick around or 99% of the other activities that make up the game. Obviously the developers have chosen a middle ground that still allows you to manually control things from moment to moment and feel involved. Different players will each chose a point on the scale from 0-100% automation that satisfies them personally.
It's kind of you to offer, but there's really no need for you to "start explaining what's wrong with this kind of attitude" from your own personal position on that scale. It's perfectly ok for you to have a different viewpoint and to express it, without needing to claim that your viewpoint trumps all others.
I does require skill to get to a specific set of points. I got a tip from ObsidianAnt. Go through the points of the compass (0,90,180,270) and watch your lat/lon increase/decrease until you are basically pointing the correct way.
An option to this should be a new grade of docking computer that allows the input of lat and long and let it do the rest.
It should be noted that this is only an issue for those with Horizons so that may be why it won't come anytime soon.
An option to this should be a new grade of docking computer that allows the input of lat and long and let it do the rest.
It should be noted that this is only an issue for those with Horizons so that may be why it won't come anytime soon.
'Flying' a spaceship in the 3300's probably wouldn't require any input from a human pilot at all, beyond asking the computer to take you somewhere. No fiddling with maps, pushing a joystick around or 99% of the other activities that make up the game. Obviously the developers have chosen a middle ground that still allows you to manually control things from moment to moment and feel involved. Different players will each chose a point on the scale from 0-100% automation that satisfies them personally.
It's kind of you to offer, but there's really no need for you to "start explaining what's wrong with this kind of attitude" from your own personal position on that scale. It's perfectly ok for you to have a different viewpoint and to express it, without needing to claim that your viewpoint trumps all others.
Perhaps in 3300's we will think things and they will happen. ED offers some sort of vision of what 3300's might look like. To me, it's a strange vision, where you can plot your course in the galaxy map as well as search for particular system, you can place waypoints in the system map (though not search for a particular feature or filter it out - things like CZ, RES, planetary outpost) and yet you have no way of interacting with a surface map. It doesn't feel like a purposeful gameplay design, or a "feature", it feels like "we couldn't be bothered to get it right and we don't give a damn about getting it right" sort of attitude. The only thing I'm asking for is for Frontier to be consistent.
As for the automation, I am happy to have options. Most of the time I like being involved and making decisions. I don't want my ship to fly itself, but I would like to have the tools allowing me to navigate in the environment Frontier created.
This thread still going? We still haven't got waypoints, then? Shucks... I've got several tip-offs that I can't be bothered with until my navigation computer gets into the 33rd century (or whichever one we're in).
Shucks... I've got several tip-offs that I can't be bothered with until my navigation computer gets into the 33rd century (or whichever one we're in).
Please no.
The only piece of basic airmanship and navigation is flying to co-ords.
The whingers have no gratitude for the Zero Meridian.
We should do a season with arbitrary zero meridians. You get one, but it doesn't match anyone else's.
Then when we get the Common Zero Meridian back, it will fill the gap.
Instead of easy mode waypoints I propose "Player Beacons"
A Beacon that gets deployed by players.
Maybe it costs a lot. 500MCr - maybe it needs a wing to deploy.
Anyways that.
The only piece of basic airmanship and navigation is flying to co-ords.
The whingers have no gratitude for the Zero Meridian.
We should do a season with arbitrary zero meridians. You get one, but it doesn't match anyone else's.
Then when we get the Common Zero Meridian back, it will fill the gap.
Instead of easy mode waypoints I propose "Player Beacons"
A Beacon that gets deployed by players.
Maybe it costs a lot. 500MCr - maybe it needs a wing to deploy.
Anyways that.
Do we know what % of the player base is playing on vanilla rather than Horizons by the way ?
TBH, I'm fine with surface navigation as it is.
It's a skill which has to be learned, developed and optimised and I'd rather it wasn't "dumbed down" for the sake of those who don't have the same level of ability I have.
Yes, maybe that's a bit selfish but, y'know, that's why pilots who can fly FA-off have an advantage over those who can't and that's why those who can accurately use fixed weapons have an advantage over those who rely on gimballed weapons.
A game should reward people for developing skills, not negate the need for those skills.
It's a skill which has to be learned, developed and optimised and I'd rather it wasn't "dumbed down" for the sake of those who don't have the same level of ability I have.
Yes, maybe that's a bit selfish but, y'know, that's why pilots who can fly FA-off have an advantage over those who can't and that's why those who can accurately use fixed weapons have an advantage over those who rely on gimballed weapons.
A game should reward people for developing skills, not negate the need for those skills.
This kind of argument is sometimes called headcanon... It's where a player of a beloved game or viewer of a beloved movie goes to any conceivable length to reconcile the illogical choices made in the said medium against something approaching a logical reason.
The fact that ships can only fly at <1000m/s is because of "in lore rules and regulations."
The fact that crew have no escape pod but commanders do is "due to are having no unions to back them up."
The fact that the Anaconda weighs 2.5 times less than any other big ship is "because it's made of megalightanium... which stopped production about 800 years ago, hence newer ships are actually heavier and weaker..."
The fact that a 1t power plant can produce 9mw of power but an 80t power plant can only create 36mw is "due to all the extra shielding required etc."
The fact that a T7 can only hold a tiny, tiny fraction of its volume in goods is that "most of the interior is taken up with internals..."
The fact that ships' yaw is so poor is due to... oh wait, nobody's ever been able to come up with one for this...
when the actual reasons are simpler:
1) Gameplay. This was a decision made to make the game more fun (according to the devs)
2) Time/Budget. There are simply not enough people not working on Roller Coaster Simulator Park Ride Planet or "The new franchise that shall not be named" to create said content.
3) Dev Skill. The staff just do not have the capability to create it.
I suspect the reasons are in the above order, too.
Last edited:
See, that one does kind of make sense.
Most ships have dorsal and ventral thrusters on either side (which control pitch and roll).
The only way they can induce any amount of yaw is because the hulls are usually angled which means that the thrusters exert a small amount of side-thrust in addition to vertical thrust.
Course, why nobody's ever bothered to fit dedicated lateral thrusters, or angle the existing thrusters at 45° so they produce equal amounts of vertical and lateral thrust is anybody's guess. [where is it]
If we were playing a simulator of WWI plane, I would be a happy bunny with what we have. Though they had a compass and ability to write or make marks on their maps back then. And if I wanted to experience that sort of "airmanship", there are plenty of very good flight simulators out there, I would have picked one of them instead. E: D is supposed to be a space sim, is it not? So perhaps it's time for Frontier to realise that certain things do belong in a space sim? They are not just QOL functions, they are basic functions one would expect from a space ship. If you need to make up your own minigames to enjoy the game, you are totally free to do so. Nobody is asking Frontier to take that option away from you.
Beacons? Following your way of thinking, why would you need beacons? Can't you just use some random rocks and boulders laying about?
And seriously, I don't mind the beacons. Don't see the reason why introduce that feature ingame and then make in unavailable to players who mostly don't have 500MCr in spare change (not a problem for me, though even I wouldn't spend 500MCr on a beacon) or don't fly in wings (I don't and see no reason to start), but don't mind them. At the moment I have no use for them, but I can understand other players may prefer to do other things in game and would love one or another feature.
Here's where we differ: I would like things being added to the game to allow for more diverse gaming styles and enjoyment of various aspects of the game, whilst you would like everyone play exactly the way you do.
G forces. Lefty/righty G forces are significantly more dangerous than fronty/backy ones. True fact. Maybe not true wordys.
That argument makes no sense.
ED already is "one of them".
You want it changing so that it stops being "one of them" and becomes what you want it to be instead.
That's kind of like buying a Land Rover and saying it should be as fast as a Ferrari because if you wanted a 4x4 you would have bought a Jeep or a HiLux.
sorry i dont agree. thats like saying "Im fine with a world without GPS. no GPS means people squandering for hours pouring over paper maps and stopping and asking for directions in any place they are unfamiliar with" is a worthy skill and state to be in.
Surface navigation changes the OP suggested is absolutely needed. Its a dull painful monotonous process that is NOT fun currently.
It has nothing whatsoever to do with ability, as I'm sure will have been pointed out numerous times already. I hate to break it to you but the ability to read coordinates is primary school level learning. As others have pointed out, the fact I can read a map perfectly well isn't an argument against using GPS.
Sure.
Just like flying a ship without FA is not fun for those who can't do it, aiming fixed weapons is not fun for those who can't do it, arranging the best possible trade is not fun for those who can't do it, mining for rare commodities is not fun for those who can't do it, engineering modifications is not fun for those who can't do it.
Let's get rid of everything that rewards practice in order to make those who don't possess those skills feel better.
Then I hate to break it to you but nobody should need something of primary-school level dumbing down further, right?
Last edited:
- Status