Whut??
I agreed with what he said and gave him rep for that, what else could I do, send him chocolates and roses? sheesh.
I love the game but FD ignoring 95% of folks and caving to 1% makes me want to walk away.
- Thread starter Aaron T
- Start date
Whut??
I agreed with what he said and gave him rep for that, what else could I do, send him chocolates and roses? sheesh.
It's the capitalist mindset that forces people to protect their investment in the asset "Anaconda". A cheaper ship simply isn't allowed to be "better" at something than a more expensive ship.
All well known socialists and marxists fought for the liberation of the working class T-7. Even Ché wanted a 60 ly T-7 for Bolivia. Sadly the local farmers believed that with enough work they will be able to become rich and obviously they had to protect their future investment and assets.
Viva la revolución!
Be careful, Aaron is manly man: if you dont show you have guts he'll take socialists like you on until you mess your britches!
And why shouldn't the T-7 become a "premier-league" exploration ship?
Thread after thread people complain about the lack of exploration ships, but the moment FDev makes a ship somewhat usable for exploration people whine about that it's the wrong ship and that that ship shouldn't be usable for exploration.
Meanwhile FDev buffs and buffs combat ships and all combat oriented players are happy.
I'm starting to think that the reason why there are so few exploration ships in ED is the result of a vocal part of the "exploration community" not wanting competition for their preferred ship.
Kind of missing the point, there.
What I asked was, do people really want the T7, out of all the other possible ships, to be the one that's elevated to being a super-explorer?
If they wanted to do that to, say, the iClipper, I'd be all for it.
I just don't fancy flying around in a shoebox for a month at a time.
The primary difference was that the communist wanted a community owned T7 for the people, who could jointly engineer it. Socialists nerfed the T7 and used the proceedings to empower the people to buy their own T7. Capitalism had two dudes buy all T7s then complain the rest didnt polish the windshields fast enough.
I would be against an exploration iClipper - because it would be rank locked.
I would never fly an exploration iClipper, even if it was the best possible exploration ship in the game, because I think the imperial ships are ugly as hell.
But I wouldn't be against an exploration iClipper without rank lock.
Yes, I would want a T-7 capable of hauling 256t with a jump-range of 40 lys. Not so much as an exploration ship, but as a long range trading ship. It would fit into a niche no other ship really fills. A big long range hauler capable of delivering cargo to distant systems, "trading" cargo space for range.
Making the T-7 smaller would just result in a cheaper alternative to the Python - both competing in the same niche (beside combat).
Since it's a large ship it is just a stepping stone to the T-9 (or Cutter).
Long range would have made it usable for something no other ship really is capable off.
I guess it's that high empty because the mass added by loading cargo decreases it. Same as with every ship.
1. Don’t be bitter when losing a debate about philosophy.
2. You still have a lot in common with your game rules opponents, they are not Ganker/ griefers trying to ruin the game- in fact just the opposite.
3.The games success is based on this unrequited love, you are probably in the minority if game metrics were common knowledge
de gustibus non disputandum est
I felt the same way but now understand that is because my personality recoils from self limiting choices and puppet like entanglements. I can farm assets with the best of them but only for a chance to be an independent explorer, lone Star Sheriff, solitary Spec Ops infiltrator. That is not the choice of a great many many Elite Dangerous players, and people I’ve worked with in technical fields.
They like structure and limits; they thrive when overcoming layers of limitation, the more the merrier.
Think many nested - if then/else then if then/ else then
Tedious for you is challenging for them. The stamina, the dedication to task, time on the task is as important as the task itself.
They do not like you changing the basic Galaxy they’ve worked so hard to ‘get ahead’ in.
So they do not like you. As I’ve found in the usual brazen internet ‘you can’t see me’ comments.
So you are their natural Nemisis with your celebration of easier travel, less sacrifice for the same, no more, adventure.
These two basic personalities are at odds and fighting to control the games development direction.
It’s really frustrating but your opinion does not take precedent over theirs.
I think they will be more faithful to the game in time and money in the long run.
That’s it, the truth is: it’s just your opinion on what a better Elite Dangerous is.
But there are some small Math issues to sort out hence a Beta.
#de gustibus non disputandum est
Now, there are standards in the gaming industry for a 2018 AAA property, or AA or indie.
There’s plenty of info via gaming news sites on the “state of the game” for 2018 and other Vlog sources not TBA.
You can easily see the competition in the to be released in 2018 lists.
Elite D is a great bang for the buck at it’s sale price, even if you’re not into extensive farming assets.
The minute I saw the Engineer slot machine pre-reward RNG animations I knew the freemium market research they came from and the dispute there might have been within the development staff about their introduction.
They are moving away from that and that’s great, and hard to do from a business perspective.
The farming process remains, with much limitation as part of the games appeal.
I can play around it, have done so, suggest you do, in VR no less.
My only disappointment is I can’t get my really longstanding, dedicated full on gamer friends to play ELite or WarThunder or any of these casino milk the whale micro transactiony games even when I give them accounts to “try”. They also like the farming limitations but see the puppet strings and pull back. I am obsessed with space travel / Sci Fi so I push on!
The limits and instability in multi crew thwarted it’s initial attraction, that was my last carrot. I’ve given up other than a bit of “talking points” debate in the forum, just during this Beta process. Why couldn’t there have been SRV use or Keelback multi or greater rewards- yes now Keelback but they’re gone. They put in 20 hours of inefficient gameplay and quit. It was too tedious even for me to give them cargo to turn in, couldn’t find the right commodity, my bad.
So it’s just me making movies and writing soundtracks.
And doesn’t ED have millions of satisfied players and a few long winded posters who knew a dream that was Rome, you had but to touch it....
Hahahaha, it is what it is, hence those laughing hyena-like Dogs.
Again,
de gustibus non disputandum est
But I hear you, I hear you very well.
#don’t downgrade me Bro
Last edited:
Space Cowboy says no
Thought the thread title was something I could really get behind, because I believe it to be true (in spirit if not numerically)
Then the example given was just ludicrous.
Explorers were not up in arms, they were still ROTFLMAO when FD came in and clarified the mistake. It was like all their christmases had come at once, in the shape of a brick wearing a clown nose.
Then the example given was just ludicrous.
Explorers were not up in arms, they were still ROTFLMAO when FD came in and clarified the mistake. It was like all their christmases had come at once, in the shape of a brick wearing a clown nose.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
i have an anaconda, it currently has over half my entire assets sunk into it and i can only just cover the insurance.... but, i think it is horrendously OP (PvE part of game i know nothing of PvP)
IF FD reduced its armour rating to 10% of its current with light armour, OR made it gain 200 tons of mass (after next docking) and it lost the military slots, you would get no complaints from me.
(even after all the above i STILL think it would be an incredible powerful PvE ship
Last edited:
Is this salt? N can I haz your stuff
You know, there's a solution that would satisfy all parties here:
Boost all the jump ranges by the same proportion. Let me pull a nice round number from my aft exhaust here and say 50%.
All the ships still have the proportional weaknesses (an Anaconda can still wildly outjump a Sidewinder), but we have less loading screens. It still takes a respectable time to get to Sag*A from the bubble.
Doing some numbers here.. Max unengineered 'conda jump is 41.4 - now it would be 62.1
That takes a 20Kly trip from 6.7 hours to 4.5 hours using the same route - it would be less after accounting for more efficient pathing, neutron stars, etc.
Explorers would still set their FSDs for economical rather than fastest path to maximize the number of systems they encounter. People who want to be at their travel destination as quick as possible would have that option too.
I'm seriously thinking that the people who enjoy staring at nearly six hours of loading screens over a nearly seven hour trip is small. At least scooping and honking is gameplay
Boost all the jump ranges by the same proportion. Let me pull a nice round number from my aft exhaust here and say 50%.
All the ships still have the proportional weaknesses (an Anaconda can still wildly outjump a Sidewinder), but we have less loading screens. It still takes a respectable time to get to Sag*A from the bubble.
Doing some numbers here.. Max unengineered 'conda jump is 41.4 - now it would be 62.1
That takes a 20Kly trip from 6.7 hours to 4.5 hours using the same route - it would be less after accounting for more efficient pathing, neutron stars, etc.
Explorers would still set their FSDs for economical rather than fastest path to maximize the number of systems they encounter. People who want to be at their travel destination as quick as possible would have that option too.
I'm seriously thinking that the people who enjoy staring at nearly six hours of loading screens over a nearly seven hour trip is small. At least scooping and honking is gameplay
Last edited:
Yep, real shame IMHO.
Everyone's utterly sick of the Asp by now, why not mix things up fer Christ's sake. Try to keep things fresh like other game companies do.
And yes I also agree, the idea was infinitely more exciting that getting Admiral rank, which now, over 3 years in still provides absolutely no reward or meaning whatsoever.
Everyone's utterly sick of the Asp by now, why not mix things up fer Christ's sake. Try to keep things fresh like other game companies do.
And yes I also agree, the idea was infinitely more exciting that getting Admiral rank, which now, over 3 years in still provides absolutely no reward or meaning whatsoever.
Last edited:
Seriously, what is wrong with you people, isn't the galaxy small enough already.
FSD already got all the boost it needs - it's called Engineering and it'll let you go a little bit further than before in Beyond.
Are you really saying that having a trip to the core take 4.5 rather than 6.7 hours of real time (of which 5.8 of them is staring at a loading screen, hands off controls, no input from the player, literally nothing for you to do other than twiddle your thumbs or watch Spaceflix) would negatively impact your enjoyment?
Last edited: