Jump Range as a Balancing Factor

I'm all down for the FDL getting a bigger FSD... If the power plant goes back down a class to compensate.

In general, though, I don't think balancing combat abilities via jump range is a good idea. The two categories are unrelated to each other, so all it REALLY does is inconvenience / enjoy the player. Balancing different trade ships by jump range makes because it directly effects the trade efficiency of the ship.
 
Last edited:
Jump range should be as is, however we need a NPC helmsman or autopilot to plot the route and get rid of the grinding mechanics of jumping from star to star, in a huge galaxy it serve no purpose to manually press (J) each time you jump to the next star.
 
What the game needs is a standardized mechanic for producing jump range.

Ex:
Ship's Volume x Max Range = X Tons of FSD

Then, you either commit or not to having that much FSD on board. If you cannot get it in the FSD slot, you should have the option to add additional modules where ever you have space, be that IC, Utility or Hard Points.

The game needs to either be scientific or not. If we are going to use magic and handwavium, then I want a Spelljammer ship.

Iu1ecQQw_14.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ship Transfers inadvertently nerfed a very big part of ship fitting which I call "Penetrator" fits. That is, a fitting with a large total jump range (i.e maximum distance able to be travelled having expended your whole fuel tank), but no organic refuelling capability.

This was great for force projection. Moving combat ships with their short jump range around was "hard", because the big time-waster is refuelling, whether it's with a fuel scoop or docking at a station. Installing some extended fuel tanks, you didn't have to worry, and it didn't screw your fitting around too much (plus fuel tanks are fairly ubiquitous).

There's one other practical use for the "penetrator" fit which is when shipping large volumes of corrosive cargo, where waiting for the ship to scoop fuel is very dangerous. Their only other use is for fuel rat functions, or if you simply can't afford the transfer or the cost of a reasonable fuel scoop (in which case, why are you even flying that ship :p you probably can't afford the rebuy! )

Frankly, FFE and FE2 had the right idea with their implementation of Military/Hyperspace drives. So rather than bind you to jump range or fuel limitations, you are bound by fuel availability. This is critical for maintaining the distinction between exploration ships and fighter ships, giving fighter ships the ability to have a superior jump range, but still be poor exploration vessels, while affording the ability to fit for long-range exploration, with a vastly inferior per-jump range. This can easily be designed in ED (implementation is a whole other bag).


Skipping out the background, here's how I'd do it in ED.

1. Put in two sorts of FSD, civilian and military. Civilian FSDs have ranges as-per current game. Military FSDs have 3x the range, or whatever makes balance sense. Any ship can fit any FSD. The extended range rebalances the fact that military drives in FE2/FFE took up less room in your ship, allowing you to fit more weapons and, importantly, more fuel for longer trips, while ED does not have the concept of fittings taking up "space" like FE2/FFE did.

2. Refuelling of a civilian FSD is as-per current game, either by fuel scoop or by station refuelling services. Military FSDs can *only* be refuelled at a station.

3 (optional). Put in two sorts of Extended Fuel Tank, Military and Civilian.

And that's pretty much done. What you now have is a massive amount of flexibility in fitting, at the trade-off of maximum range (as ability to refuel is mandatory for any exploration type of activity) versus force projection (range and speed at which you can deploy a military force). This is exactly how FFE/FE2 did it. Take the Viper versus the Asp Explorer, for example. With a class-3 hyperdrive, the Viper had a superior jump range at 41 LY, compared to the Asp Explorer which can only get out 32LY per jump with it's largest drive. However, to get that 41LY jump range in the viper, a C3 military drive was mandatory. This meant you needed military fuel, which could only be bought at stations, binding you to a maximum range from a station. If you wanted to be able to fit a fuel scoop to the viper, you needed to trade down to a C2 hyperdrive which only gives 18LY (a C3 hyperdrive doesn't practically fit in a viper) . Meanwhile, the Asp's 32LY range used a C4 hyper drive, and you could also fit a fuel scoop with it. So, your options were:

- 41LY jump range in a viper, but bound to the bubble for refuelling at a station; or
- 32LY jump range in an Asp, but theoretically infinite projection range (for exploration, obviously)

Now, fitting ships works entirely differently in ED, and to cut out explanation, offering military drives (or whatever they want to be called) for all ships makes a measure of sense. To try out the 3x jump range idea, in ED we get

- 60-oddLY jump range in a viper, but bound to the bubble for refuelling at a station; or
- 41LY jump range in an Asp, but theoretically infinite projection range (for exploration, obviously)

But what if we throw a military drive on an Asp in ED? That gets 120LY range, but is bound to the bubble. Because fitting works differently in ED, the Asp is still a poor combat vessel choice compared to a viper, but we now have an excellent reconnaisance ship, or even a decent long-range fighter. Now comes the cool bit. If you throw 64t fuel extension tank on a 40LY Asp, you get around 600-700 LY without having to refuel. So throw that on an Asp with this "military" drive, and you can (based on how the fuel consumption works in-game) get 1800-2100LY without having to refuel. So the Asp can fill a lightweight combat and reconnaisance element with a military fit out to a long range, while the more heavyweight fighters have some reduced projection range, but can still have influence over a bubble-sized region. With the way the game is going, and how many outposts we're getting in places like Witch Head/California Nebula, there's some real application for that.

This even works for traders. The jump range of a fully laden hauler is low, so a military drive on, say, a T9 would still only give it =~ 30LY per jump, and it would only have a max range of 150LY or so, which isn't enough to cross the bubble. But if you don't plan on kicking out further than 30LY for trade, and always pay for fuel, it's a great option. Meanwhile a civilian + scoop fit gives you the option of getting all over the bubble... useful for rare trading or exploiting powerplay trade effects.

Throw in the idea of distinct civilian/military fuel tanks, and the Fuel Rats out there could even set up a ship with an organic refuelling capability for self-sustinence, but load out with military fuel tanks to "support" a fleet moving much further than they normally could.

So the short version, this would:
- Give fighters much bigger jump range to improve force projection to about 600LY, without turning them into explorer ships.
- Maintain the role of exploration ships with theoretical infinite range
- Introduce new "Long-range fighter/Force Recon" roles for ships out to 2,000LY.
- Introduce the idea of refuel support ships to military fleets that can't just be resolved by fitting a scoop.
 
Jesus, flies a 80M ship[ and cries about not having the jumprange of an AspX. Buy a g AspX and ship the FDL to wherever you want. What's a few M credits anyway, 15 mintues work?>
 
I don't feel like the Python has great jump range, maybe I got bad RNG. Highest I saw was just shy of 30LY, and add a hull and some thrusters, even engineered, and it drops to a pedestrian 24LY. Still gets me around but I keep the AspX and the DBx around for errands, both with 50+ LY capability.

As for CGs, when there's a bounty hunt or combat zone portion of the CG, it gets about 3x the participants as the delivery CG gets. Creating a scenario where even more combat ships could descend upon that system in short order would imbalance it even more.

I remember my first T9, I thought I was going to make a fortune hauling palladium until I realized the jump range fully loaded was horrible, so it took forever to get anywhere. I did a few runs to pay off the depreciation and dumped the ship for the faster travel, because it's not just about Cr/hr. It's about wide awake game playing, not staring at the same cut scene over and over. If the Python had 50Yr jump range, and 40 or so with a full load, no one would fly any other ship except in combat.

I never fly my big ships to a CZ anyhow. I have them transported. It takes longer than to fly them, but I can be making money in the meantime at the CG without the optimal setup and I really really don't like the jump scene repeated over and over, and other than limping back to the station with the canopy shattered, I don't like that last 2 Ls from the station that takes as long as the prior 100Ls and the 30LY prior to that.
 
Yep. If combat ships should get a buff in jump range, then why not let cargo ships have the same capacity for shields, dps, armor as combat ships and keep their ability to haul loads?

It's really frustrating for a trader/explorer that to actually trade/explore they have to fill their ships with "pointless" modules like scanners, racks, srvs, scoops, fsds, limpet controllers completely making them uncompetitive for combat. How's that fun for a trader/explorer? Should any of that be used as a balancing factor?


Because Jump Range = Loading Time


And Loading Time isn't what you balance anything around. If WoW said "We're going to design an uber class that'll win every engagement but it takes 30 seconds longer to load" the DEA would be searching Blizzard HQ for crack in under an hour.
 
Because Jump Range = Loading Time


And Loading Time isn't what you balance anything around. If WoW said "We're going to design an uber class that'll win every engagement but it takes 30 seconds longer to load" the DEA would be searching Blizzard HQ for crack in under an hour.

Pretty much this. Until mechanics are added that makes jump range actually relevant to the combat profession outside of load times, it really shouldn't be a balance factor for them.
 
Because Jump Range = Loading Time


And Loading Time isn't what you balance anything around. If WoW said "We're going to design an uber class that'll win every engagement but it takes 30 seconds longer to load" the DEA would be searching Blizzard HQ for crack in under an hour.

Not a great analogy. I get where you are coming from but it doesn't take into account other styles of play.

IRL you are not allowed to drive either a tank or a moped on the motorway. Is that unreasonable? I don't think so, if you want to go a long way quickly choose a different vehicle. It is still possible to reach your destination in your vehicle of choice, but for most people (and those around you) inconvenient.
 
Well if we start playing with balance in one area then other areas would need to be visited too like the pitch rate of the cutter. Do we do a total overhaul when things seem reasonably balanced as is and the game really needs love in other areas?
 
It's only a theoretical argument.

I'm not actually asking for any changes.

I do like the military FSD idea, increased range but no scooping is an excellent trade off.

The main point of my argument is, why do some ships require extra loading screens than others?

Surely supercruise speed, agility and 'mass resistance*' is a better for balancing?
Instead we all crawl along in supercruise at the same speed.

*Mass resistance, is an odd idea I had, where the heavier your ship, the harder it is to Interdict, and the less effected by gravity wells it is.
So in theory, a small faster interceptor, like the iCourier, will be faster and more agile in supercruise, but gravity wells will slow you down more, and interdicting a fully laden Cutter will be difficult.
The cutter would have a slower acceleration and deceleration, but much less effected by gravity wells.

Back to my question, there seems to be no "up" side to balancing ships using jump range.
Even in co-op play, a low jump ranged ship is a hindrance to the rest of the wing.
 
Pretty much this. Until mechanics are added that makes jump range actually relevant to the combat profession outside of load times, it really shouldn't be a balance factor for them.

+rep for summarizing my thoughts very succinctly.
 
Yes, it's a good way of balancing. It leads to many interesting trade-offs in outfitting and engineering. And if it wasn't so, explorers would all be going around in heavily-armoured death machines.
 
I know my post was long, but in my opinion jump range isn't being used as a balancing element, nor should it be.

The only logical factor that determines jump range, that I can think of, is available module space, where availavle module space is determined by higher priority design considerations related to the ship's role.
 
Should Jump Range Be Used As A Balancing Factor?.d

I have no problem with it at all. I like the fact that ships are different and different jump ranges are part of that.


Going off topic slightly, but in my general opinion, if ship class was going to effect anything, it should effect supercruise more. Combat ships being the fast, agile interceptor types, and the larger ships being the slow, but an almost unstoppable force.

That sounds really interesting.
I would like to see supercruise to become a more interesting game space.
I would also like to have more piloty things to do in sc, more player agency, more influence on ship behaviour.
Perhaps that might be done via the manipulation of pips and via a markedly different sc HUD comparable to the different HUD we get when approaching a planet.
 
Last edited:
I have no problem with it at all. I like the fact that ships are different and different jump ranges are part of that.
I don't have a problem either really, especially since the Engineers basically fixed that.
But pre-engineers was daft, when your ship could spend more time going sideways than forwards. Lol
And of course, the issues of the stock E rated Corvette, lacking the ability to leave the system it was purchased in, is a bit of a design flaw, but easily sorted.

But in general, I'm fairly happy, I just tend to lean towards ships with a better range.

That sounds really interesting.
I would like to see supercruise to become a more interesting game space.
I would also like to have more piloty things to do in sc, more player agency, more influence on ship behaviour.
Perhaps that might be done via the manipulation of pips and via a markedly different sc HUD comparable to the different HUD we get when approaching a planet.

I've suggested different handling characteristics in supercruise many times, as well as pip effects in SC.
:)
It's something I really hope happens some day, as SC is quite stale.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead
 
Should Jump Range Be Used As A Balancing Factor?

Yes, jump range needs to be used as a balancing factor in Elite Dangerous. Or rather, mass is the balancing factor, and jump range is simply dependent on ship mass. To that point, some ships are designed more towards top end jump range trading hardpoints and combat prowess to be lightweight, while other ships are designed with weapons and armor prioritized thereby skimping on FSD size. Without the balancing factor you'd get a super ship, capable of everything, that would be better than any other choices. Like the Anaconda is now.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom