I love the game but FD ignoring 95% of folks and caving to 1% makes me want to walk away.

[Lee Archer]

Maybe the new multi crew Keelback

Maybe the new multi crew Keelback Can be bent to exploration.
With total light weight module mods,
Hahahaha
And instantly I’m ready to Engineer again

Heh, That is why I’m of two minds in these threads, I do like a challenge.
What website-
Is it roguey or eddb, something .io, they could add a stat outfitting tester.

Hmm, later.

 

[govny]

There are hundreds of threads from folks wanting to max out their jump range, and they usually end up with a Coriolis link showing zero cabins, cargo holds, scanners, etc, just an empty hull to get the jump range they want, but now they cannot use the ship for anything productive.

Then I find FS was giving the Type 7 a 61 Ly jump range, what a great thing, almost eveyone would have bought one (I made my first real cr in a Type 7) this excited me more than attaining Admiral.

Meeting my rank goal had me on Cloud 9 and laid back, finally able to just enjoy the wonderful game, nothing can ever discourage me now I thought, then this.

I was elated at the thought of a Type 7 with a 61Ly JR.

But two comments later there was a link for FD, and because those with exploror ships were crying they nerfed the long JR plans because "It would not be fair for it to have a higher JR then the X ships."

I went from cloud 9 and having joy and pride in the game to almost having a deep hatred for it instantly, I love the game, but hate, HATE, the fact that a few babies can cry, and the rest of the community suffers for these cry babies.

Thanks for nothing.

I was not moaning but I concur that they are right and I think that this is the opinion of the majority of players.
It would be stupid to have a trader ship with more jump capability than the exploration ones.

 

[Achilles7]

Hmmm, 'complex but interesting argument you have put forward there, Aaron. Let me see, as I've understood it, the general synopsis of your thread would appear to be...

[video=youtube;aUfU1arc0Es]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUfU1arc0Es[/video]


& hahaha - nice use of the insult 'cry baby' & indeed the subtle, post-ironic paroxysmal tone of your post that would lead less intelligent forum users to conclude that the dual concepts of self-awareness & irony are merely lost on you. We, of course, know different.

 

[Mengy]

Regarding the Anaconda... it's quite amusing that even after FD's admittance that it wasn't meant to be as capable in terms of jump range people still bring out the torches and pitchforks when proposals are meant to correct it. Problem is, they haven't (so far) shown much willingness to buff the other ships so that multiroles don't overshadow them. We'll see what the future brings, but so far I'm not convinced that it's even a direction they're going to take.

I too, would love to see more Exploration love- they've hinted at hit for this year, but we'll see what the manifestation is in time. I'm not expecting a miracle, though.

The problem Frontier has is that they’ve worked themselves into a corner with exploration. If they add any new modules to exploration then they will force everyone to explore in Anaconda’s because it’s the only high jump range ship with enough internals to add anything new. The DBX has zero open space and the Asp X only has one slot open, and the ships after them don’t have much space open either.

Whatever they have in mind for Q4 will either need exploration ships to be buffed / require new exploration ships, or they will be forced to work within the frame of only utilizing the modules we already have in the game. Maybe we’ll finally see exploration specialized internals on a few ships, like military slots for combat ships. That could give Frontier some leeway to expand upon the exploration toolset with new modules.

Either way we are going to need some serious expansive development regarding exploration to make anything worthwhile from it, it’s just been far too neglected for far too long and now it’s caught up to it. 3.0 is off to a decent start though with the planets finally fixed and FSD synthesis being improved. Hopefully that trend both continues and increases.

 

[lysan]

There are hundreds of threads from folks wanting to max out their jump range, and they usually end up with a Coriolis link showing zero cabins, cargo holds, scanners, etc, just an empty hull to get the jump range they want, but now they cannot use the ship for anything productive.

Then I find FS was giving the Type 7 a 61 Ly jump range, what a great thing, almost eveyone would have bought one (I made my first real cr in a Type 7) this excited me more than attaining Admiral.

Meeting my rank goal had me on Cloud 9 and laid back, finally able to just enjoy the wonderful game, nothing can ever discourage me now I thought, then this.

I was elated at the thought of a Type 7 with a 61Ly JR.

But two comments later there was a link for FD, and because those with exploror ships were crying they nerfed the long JR plans because "It would not be fair for it to have a higher JR then the X ships."

I went from cloud 9 and having joy and pride in the game to almost having a deep hatred for it instantly, I love the game, but hate, HATE, the fact that a few babies can cry, and the rest of the community suffers for these cry babies.

Thanks for nothing.

What can I say........ AUTOPILOT for star Jumps would solved some of the issues.

 

[John Xenir]

This thread is getting really diluted so lemme try and put it back on track, using words of my wise fore-spokesperson:

(...)
The things that Irks is that current exploration vessels do not really excel at the job, and you are better off in a Conda, which is one of the least enjoyable ships to fly.

So, how about this then?

 

[Iskariot]

The things that Irks is that current exploration vessels do not really excel at the job, and you are better off in a Conda, which is one of the least enjoyable ships to fly.

Speak for yourself.
I enjoy flying big ships including the Conda.

 

[El_Hefe]

Fully laden T7 with an A rated FSD,D rated everything else,256t cargo,C3 fuel scoop,C4 shield and an ADS has a laden range of 16.39ly range. *Unemgineered*

That for me puts it firmly on the short to very short haulauge list for me. No way im doing say 500ly and back in that.

Just look at the stations out in thargoid sapce,how much closer to being repaired would they be with a T7 of say 24ly range fully laden? Suddenly looks mich more doable then

The numbers FD introduced were definitely a bit OTT but trade ships in general,givin their laden ranges,could do with a little bit of love imo. Not everybody wants/needs an Anaconda/Cutter for trading

 

[Captain Jack Sparrow]

Some people like watching lots of loading screen instead of actually playing a game, OP. Let's them fidget with their HOTAS while catching up on Netflix. And they very much don't want a more engaging or quicker method of travel. They'd actually have to play the game then...and they're too busy watching shows to do that.

They're also waiting on that ever elusive "instant" button. They press it and get instant credits, materials, upgrades, etc.

 

[Vasious]

If one wants to explore, pick a Ship an explore, even the Type 7, which is a great explorer.

It gets you where you are going with what you need.

But at the end of the day fly what you enjoy.

 

[Stealthie]

I gotta say, I find the sort of shi... stuff in this thread REALLY depressing.

Over the last few months, this forum seems to have filled up with people constantly whining that they want instant credits, instant access to engineers, instant access to ships, instant access to everything.

After the initial whine, they follow up with:-

1) But I paid for the game so I should have access to everything.
2) How does it affect you if I have access to [thing]?
3) But other people have other things.

I'm sick of hearing it, TBH. [sad]

 

[Karunamon]

I gotta say, I find the sort of shi... stuff in this thread REALLY depressing.

Over the last few months, this forum seems to have filled up with people constantly whining that they want instant credits, instant access to engineers, instant access to ships, instant access to everything.

I find constant utterly dishonest characterizations of other people's stated desires equally depressing, especially considering the straw person that asked for all of those things doesn't exist outside of your own imagination, and I double-dog-dare you to find a single one, let alone substantiating that the forum is filled up with such imaginary people.

Why do y'all feel the need to lie about what other people are saying? I mean, the quote button is right there...

 

[Crank Larson]

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.

Made me laugh. And you're right, of course... All the explorer would do is start flying the T7 instead of complaining about it.

 

[Jack Schitt]

No, my argument is that the galaxy is a big place - that should be reflected in how long it takes to get somewhere.

This is key, and for me it always has been. This was my response the last time a jump range thread came up. It's probably the most succinct version I've posted:

Spoiler

But the core of this disagreement can't be solved with code because it isn't a technical problem, it's a perceptual problem.

When I perform a hyperspace jump in ED it's enough to convince me, in that moment, that I've just ripped a hole in spacetime and sent thousands of tonnes of hardware multiple light-years across the galaxy. Even though I know what the code is doing underneath, loading assets and setting up instances. Even though I know the distances are just numbers on a screen. Even though I know it's going to take me ten minutes of real time to get the ship to where I want it in the game. The illusion that I choose to buy into is enough to overcome those things. The simulation that isn't a simulation works, and the choices imposed by the range limitations make sense in the fantasy world FD have created for me to play in. Even though I know.

Other players see nothing but loading screens and wasted time, and would happily sacrifice any of the things that make the simulation work for players like me in order to minimise or even eliminate them. They just want their ship to be where they need it ASAP, with a minimum of barriers.

I would imagine a great number, possibly the majority, of players are somewhere in between: generally OK with the status quo but maybe wishing things could be tweaked just a little in one direction or the other.

A single set of rules that would keep all of those players happy at the same time is impossible, even if the code could support it.

(FWIW here are links to some earlier postings, going back to early 2016 and saying basically the same thing. I'm sure there were earlier examples too but they're in the archives and not so easy to dig up.):

Spoiler

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...this-weekend?p=5494427&viewfull=1#post5494427
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...eates-Tedium?p=5130418&viewfull=1#post5130418
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/314320-Dear-Frontier?p=4884007&viewfull=1#post4884007
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...s-phenomenal?p=4319699&viewfull=1#post4319699
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...rain-to-mush?p=3682399&viewfull=1#post3682399

The point I've always tried to make is that it's a balancing act. For those who buy the illusion of scale, the jump ranges have to be small enough to maintain the size of the fictional galaxy. For those who only see loading screens, the ranges have to be large enough to minimise the number of jumps. But neither can dominate without crippling the other. If the ranges are too small, only the hardest of the hardcore will explore long range and everyone else won't move outside the bubble. If they're too large, the galaxy becomes a tiny space packed with humankind, the wanderlust is diluted and eventually everybody sees loading screens.

Personally I think jump ranges are just about right at the moment, perhaps teetering towards the leading edge of over-generous. Between Engineers, FSD synthesis and neutron star boosting it's made for some interesting fringe exploration but also shrunk the galaxy a little. That Colonia can be reached in a couple of hours along the Neutron Highway is an impressive feat of short-term endurance for those who've done it, but it's turned a flight to humanity's farthest outpost into something akin to a drive to the big city. Shave any more off those times and it could be a problem IMO.

A 61ly Type-7 would definitely have broken that balance.

The argument for longer ranges often boils down to, "Long distance travel is really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really boring, but if you could shave off a couple of 'really's I might be more inclined to embrace it."

The problem, as ever, lies in reaching a consensus as to how many 'really's can be removed for those who suffer from them, without changing the soul of the game for those who don't.

 

[babelfisch]

There are hundreds of threads from folks wanting to max out their jump range, and they usually end up with a Coriolis link showing zero cabins, cargo holds, scanners, etc, just an empty hull to get the jump range they want, but now they cannot use the ship for anything productive.

Then I find FS was giving the Type 7 a 61 Ly jump range, what a great thing, almost eveyone would have bought one (I made my first real cr in a Type 7) this excited me more than attaining Admiral.

Meeting my rank goal had me on Cloud 9 and laid back, finally able to just enjoy the wonderful game, nothing can ever discourage me now I thought, then this.

I was elated at the thought of a Type 7 with a 61Ly JR.

But two comments later there was a link for FD, and because those with exploror ships were crying they nerfed the long JR plans because "It would not be fair for it to have a higher JR then the X ships."

I went from cloud 9 and having joy and pride in the game to almost having a deep hatred for it instantly, I love the game, but hate, HATE, the fact that a few babies can cry, and the rest of the community suffers for these cry babies.

Thanks for nothing.

How do you know that 95% agree with you?

 

[babelfisch]

One thing IO have seen on every ED forum, is many folks trying to tell others the right way to play, I will make a deal with those folks, you give me the $60 I paid for ED with, the thousands of dollars in my gaming rig, pay for my VR, and then maybe, I will care one little bit about how you play or want me to.

After reading your other posts in this thread I have a better suggestion: Get lost.

 

[Karunamon]

The argument for longer ranges often boils down to, "Long distance travel is really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really boring, but if you could shave off a couple of 'really's I might be more inclined to embrace it."

The problem, as ever, lies in reaching a consensus as to how many 'really's can be removed for those who suffer from them, without changing the soul of the game for those who don't.

That's pretty much a fair characterization of my views, but I'd expand it out a bit on some consideration.

#1: People are saying that 2 hours off of 8 hours of travel is a negative impact on their enjoyment. With all due respect to people who parroted that view or something looking like it, I call <bovine biowaste>. It's a meaningful reduction for people making such a trip who want to get it over with already, but if you're in it for the travel, it's almost no impact to you. And on top of that, if you want a longer route, that is an option available to you. Plot a different course, FSD to economical, anything. The people that want it to happen slower have an option to make that happen. The people who want it to happen faster have nothing.

That being said...

#2: The real core problem is the boringness, more than the time commitment. 80% and up of your time will be spent staring at a screen where you have no agency, nothing to do whatsoever other than sit and wait. Supercruise carries the risk of interdiction, lets me fly loop-de-loops if I want. High waking might get me Thargoid hyperdicted once in the whole trip if I go by a certain area of space.

I think this is why we keep seeing calls for autopilot.. firstly because its absence is a glaring hole in the narrative, second because if you are just travelling A to B and not exploring, that 6 hours of doing nothing is extremely unappealing. It's watching space-colored paint dry.

If I could fill that 6 hours of downtime with neutron stars, alignment minigames, improving my ship, dodging Thargoids, chatting with other CMDRs without having to tab out, literally anything that could be associated with the words "playing a game", I'd have a lot less of a problem with it. Travel times as a whole, as a complaint, are a proxy for this issue.

I have to bring up the much-maligned comparison here, but EVE. There's a lot of drudgery, sure, but there's enough going on that you can amuse yourself while you wait for whatever the main "thing" you're doing is to finish.. whether that be mining, or a gate camp, or a siege. You can be playing the market, doing side mindgames to solve problems and get ingame rewards, chatting with everyone else in your corp. It greatly blunts the mindlessness of the stuff you have to do sometimes, while still having travel and scale be meaningful. They even have an autopilot, but it comes with some big risks to your continued not-being-a-cloud-of-disassociated-atoms.

 

[NMS]

What can I say........ AUTOPILOT for star Jumps would solved some of the issues.

I'd even go back to the game with that. But that would be fun and it is not allowed by the game design.

 

[Tarman]

That's pretty much a fair characterization of my views, but I'd expand it out a bit on some consideration.

#1: People are saying that 2 hours off of 8 hours of travel is a negative impact on their enjoyment. With all due respect to people who parroted that view or something looking like it, I call <bovine biowaste>. It's a meaningful reduction for people making such a trip who want to get it over with already, but if you're in it for the travel, it's almost no impact to you. And on top of that, if you want a longer route, that is an option available to you. Plot a different course, FSD to economical, anything. The people that want it to happen slower have an option to make that happen. The people who want it to happen faster have nothing.

That being said...

#2: The real core problem is the boringness, more than the time commitment. 80% and up of your time will be spent staring at a screen where you have no agency, nothing to do whatsoever other than sit and wait. Supercruise carries the risk of interdiction, lets me fly loop-de-loops if I want. High waking might get me Thargoid hyperdicted once in the whole trip if I go by a certain area of space.

I think this is why we keep seeing calls for autopilot.. firstly because its absence is a glaring hole in the narrative, second because if you are just travelling A to B and not exploring, that 6 hours of doing nothing is extremely unappealing. It's watching space-colored paint dry.

If I could fill that 6 hours of downtime with neutron stars, alignment minigames, improving my ship, dodging Thargoids, chatting with other CMDRs without having to tab out, literally anything that could be associated with the words "playing a game", I'd have a lot less of a problem with it. Travel times as a whole, as a complaint, are a proxy for this issue.

I have to bring up the much-maligned comparison here, but EVE. There's a lot of drudgery, sure, but there's enough going on that you can amuse yourself while you wait for whatever the main "thing" you're doing is to finish.. whether that be mining, or a gate camp, or a siege. You can be playing the market, doing side mindgames to solve problems and get ingame rewards, chatting with everyone else in your corp. It greatly blunts the mindlessness of the stuff you have to do sometimes, while still having travel and scale be meaningful. They even have an autopilot, but it comes with some big risks to your continued not-being-a-cloud-of-disassociated-atoms.

This is my main breakpoint on these types of threads, at the point of "hrm, don't see much gameplay here" on any given topic.

There is a distinct vibe seen from a selection of posters which usually boils down to "welp since there's not much gameplay here anyway, lets just simply increase the rate at which we consume this lack of gameplay, or else just shortcut this loop entirely". This concept does nothing to improve the game, but it does increase the speed of consumption of what does exist. Rather, we should be looking at ideas like this post, that actually has some gameplay ideas to fill in the game with more game.

 

[Stealthie]

That's pretty much a fair characterization of my views, but I'd expand it out a bit on some consideration.

#1: People are saying that 2 hours off of 8 hours of travel is a negative impact on their enjoyment. With all due respect to people who parroted that view or something looking like it, I call <bovine biowaste>. It's a meaningful reduction for people making such a trip who want to get it over with already, but if you're in it for the travel, it's almost no impact to you. And on top of that, if you want a longer route, that is an option available to you. Plot a different course, FSD to economical, anything. The people that want it to happen slower have an option to make that happen. The people who want it to happen faster have nothing.

That being said...

#2: The real core problem is the boringness, more than the time commitment. 80% and up of your time will be spent staring at a screen where you have no agency, nothing to do whatsoever other than sit and wait. Supercruise carries the risk of interdiction, lets me fly loop-de-loops if I want. High waking might get me Thargoid hyperdicted once in the whole trip if I go by a certain area of space.

I think this is why we keep seeing calls for autopilot.. firstly because its absence is a glaring hole in the narrative, second because if you are just travelling A to B and not exploring, that 6 hours of doing nothing is extremely unappealing. It's watching space-colored paint dry.

If I could fill that 6 hours of downtime with neutron stars, alignment minigames, improving my ship, dodging Thargoids, chatting with other CMDRs without having to tab out, literally anything that could be associated with the words "playing a game", I'd have a lot less of a problem with it. Travel times as a whole, as a complaint, are a proxy for this issue.

I have to bring up the much-maligned comparison here, but EVE. There's a lot of drudgery, sure, but there's enough going on that you can amuse yourself while you wait for whatever the main "thing" you're doing is to finish.. whether that be mining, or a gate camp, or a siege. You can be playing the market, doing side mindgames to solve problems and get ingame rewards, chatting with everyone else in your corp. It greatly blunts the mindlessness of the stuff you have to do sometimes, while still having travel and scale be meaningful. They even have an autopilot, but it comes with some big risks to your continued not-being-a-cloud-of-disassociated-atoms.

Are you annoyed at the travel requirement to unlock Palin, or something?

Cos, you sound like somebody who doesn't want to go exploring and you're being forced to go exploring for some reason and you want the game changing to make it easier for you do that.

Here's a thought; if you don't enjoy exploring, don't do it.

Problem solved.