No problem with you disagreeing.
Definitely the fault of the devs, I would recommend immediately submitting a ticket, there are enough apologists here to back your claim up
Oh come the heck on. This is just being daft. The usual "dumb person is dumb, lol let's pile on and prove how self righteous we are" twaddle. Stick to the topic, m8.
As you stated above, it is now a requirement for the player to have the capability to jump out of a system to clear a bounty, so shouldn't the onus of responsibility be on the player!
But do you remember, how we even got into this situation? The new C&P system led to players who didn't pay attention having to pay huge sums to clear hot modules they unknowingly removed from a hot ship, even if the bounty was negligibly low. But, instead of tying the cleaning cost for the modules to the bounty of the ship they were removed from, FDev locked outfitting on all stations for hot ships to prevent players from doing silly things like this... the lockout was never part of the punishment. It was a quick and dirty workaround for a different issue.
After the outcry of players playing criminals not being able to access outfitting even in anarchies, the whole thing was partially reverted... outfitting is now locked only in jurisdictions where the ship is actually wanted.
This step obviously didn't go far enough. The whole C&P system is currently adjusted with every minor update...
3.0 -> full access to outfitting for hot ships
3.0.2 -> no access to any outfitting for hot ships whatsoever
3.0.3 -> no access to outfitting for hot ships only in jurisdictions they are wanted in.
3.0.4. -> no change afaik.
sorry, but I don't think we can expect every casual player to read all of the patch notes and think about every silly consequences the C&P flavor of the week might have. That's entirely FDev's job.
Last edited:
It was built. specifically by the OP, to NOT have jump range...as a trade off.
Trade offs have consequences. Unfortunately, the OP did not think of this one, in light of the new changes to the game.
They should file a ticket, get moved to somewhere they can outfit to handle the new C & P...and not forget the lesson learned.
![[VR] DDM_Reaper20](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/44/44021.jpg?1588332101){kind=avatar}
How about a work-around: When somebody is stuck in a system, due to having installed an FSD that is more decoration than anything else, why not loan that player a ship which has enough legs to get him to the next Interstellar factor?
Of course, that ship would be loaned (resell value: 0 credits, same for all the modules), no weapons installed, and rebuy might be a tad higher than what it usually would be.
That way, players wouldn't be forced to do unsavoury things to their save games, but would feel the consequences.
I apologize if that has been already thought off, please don't tazer me -- :x
Of course, that ship would be loaned (resell value: 0 credits, same for all the modules), no weapons installed, and rebuy might be a tad higher than what it usually would be.
That way, players wouldn't be forced to do unsavoury things to their save games, but would feel the consequences.
I apologize if that has been already thought off, please don't tazer me -- :x
A workaround put us into the current situation in the first place... I don't think fixing the unforeseen cosequences of said workaround with another workaround is potentially a good idea.
Instead I suggest to fix the original issue, re-open outfitting for hot ships and tie the cleaning cost for hot modules removed from a hot ship to the ship's bounty instead. Under no circumstances should cleaning a hot module cost more than cleaning the entire ship. No workarounds for workarounds would be needed, if this simple plausibility check was implemented.
Last edited:
See what comes from posting in Dangerous Discussion?
5 pages of ranting....
Ok, that situation is entirely your fault: power management would have permitted you to switch off the FSD while hunting, and the weight isn't an issue on the Vulture.
So, first of all, which system are you in? If it is where I think it is, you also got a planetary outpost with outfitting, which is under a different jurisdiction. So you can land there, have your old FSD transferred and go off in search of an IF (unless you just want to forget about that place, there are a few thousand other systems out there).
Second possibility would be to let yourself be killed by the system authority or a bounty hunter - your bounty needs to be claimed. That should respawn you in the corresponding penal facility, minus a rebuy and the applicable fines/bounties.
Finally, you could forfeit your ship and suicide back to the freewinder in lhs 3447. That won't reset your game or affect the rest of your fleet, but it'll cost you your ship.
So, don't let anyone tell you that you're "blocked" from the game, or that you need to reset. You made a mistake, and hopefully learned something from that.
Allow me to disagree with you. It would be simply a consequence of one's actions, as in, "You seriously misbehaved, you are no longer welcome here, now push off. What, you can't make it out of here under your own steam? Well, in that case, take that unarmed ship. Should at least make sure you cannot gun down anybody else while in this system." Otherwise, what's to keep somebody from spreading some more mayhem in the same system?
(This would add some level of roleplaying...)
That's not true. Interstellar contacts are NOT lovked out if you are wanted in the system. If the system has one, you can dock with anonymous protocolls, clear your bounty and get access to all services.
So ... what about Distant Stars? An entire expedition, very deliberately, taking a one-way neutron jump into a region impossible to escape from afterwards except by rebuy. Should Frontier have ensured an escape route? (How?)
It depends where the next system is and what the ship is. There are some ships which with E-rated max-size FSDs and an otherwise normal weight might well not be able to leave some systems.
I think the problem is: insufficient sizes of FSD. A ship which is struggling to move with a size X FSD will suddenly become a top explorer - possibly the longest range ship in the game - at just size X+1 (as the T-7 briefly did in Beta). All the other modules are more incremental - often with overlap between a XA and an (X+1)D - and upsizing and downsizing is less of an issue.
I assure you, if I ever get into a truly inescapable situation, whether through fitting the wrong size of FSD, some weird power priority mishap [1], not watching my fuel gauge on a trip through the brown dwarf layer, running out of jumponium on the galactic margins, or flying a shieldless T-9 while at 1% hull to a CG ... then I will blame myself, not the game, take the rebuy, and try harder not to do it again. You can basically never get stuck from a single mistake - you have to make a few in sequence - and ultimately Frontier cannot account for all the creative ways players can trap themselves without taking away a lot of the flexibility on offer.
Ultimately all situations are escapable with sufficient forward planning, and all of them can be inescapable (bar rebuys) if you consistently do the wrong things. So what's really being asked is "what's the acceptable distance between making the mistake and paying for it?"
[1] Take a stock E-rated Eagle and give it 3A enhanced performance drives with G5 Clean Drive tuning, and then stick a low-emission mod on the stock E-rated powerplant. You'll only discover the mistake when you request launch clearance, your ship powers down, and literally will not leave the pad because your drives take >100% of your power. It's an edge case and I have no idea how you'd accidentally do it - perhaps while messing around with module shuttles? - but again, not completely impossible. Explorers with no power priorities and undersized plants have managed to do the same sort of thing with the SRV hangar before.
How did this thread carry on after this post? Anyway, this. Ignore the people who say it's your fault, op, it isn't.
The best thing to do would be to add a mass limit, just like thrusters and shields, so that you cannot fit an FSD with less than 10ly range.
Many (most?) ships come with less than 10ly range stock, though... i.e. the Corvette with ~6 LY
Back on track trying to help OP:
Go to the star port and get blown up by the station - dock without permission usually works.
This will get you to a detention centre. With the fine paid off you should be able to buy a better FSD drive at the outfitters in the detention centre.
Go to the star port and get blown up by the station - dock without permission usually works.
This will get you to a detention centre. With the fine paid off you should be able to buy a better FSD drive at the outfitters in the detention centre.
Please God, stop this nonsense. Many ships default below ten, and my Viper and iCourier greatly benefit from reduced fsds. You are proposing the removal of options, advantages and consequences because OP fit an undersize fsd to a ship that doesnt benefit it, without planning for the consequences.
Btw, when fitting a 2d fsd the vulture has 1.2LY range. The outfitting screen clearly tells you. Anyone in a vulture should know that isnt enough to jump, so kofyeh's remark about missing warnings is nonsense as well.
Back on track trying to help OP:
Go to the star port and get blown up by the station - dock without permission usually works.
This will get you to a detention centre. With the fine paid off you should be able to buy a better FSD drive at the outfitters in the detention centre.
Or just store the 2d if they dont sell any, you get the stock fsd in return.
Thanks this did the trick. I shot at the system defence force, got wasted, then got put into a detention facility where I could buy back the ship.
The 5 pages of discussion of lockout vs punishment was amusing. Nevertheless, I've been playing this game for 2 weeks and really it's not intuitive to have to allow a NPC or player to kill me to get out of the lockout.
Notice that it's not necessarily the career criminals being caught out here; it's joe blogs commander pulling a ship in via ship transfer doing a bit of bounty hunting, being wedged, and then discovering they have to read eleventy different sets of release notes to understand what's happening.
The OP realised they were pulling in a ship that wasn't able to jump out; and like a large number of "finger pointing" commanders here, probably assumed the wedging would "never happen to them" and they'd be fine.
--
If I have to potentially operate an entire wiki to document what is going to happen in any given scenario, so I can't get wedged; you know what, it's probably gone a bit far. Given a decent chunk of the community never steps foot here, maybe the ipso facto logic isn't quite so clear-cut.
Just a thought.
No, it's not intuitive. Very little in elite is actually intuitive. Glad you are unstuck. Hope you continue playing; there's a lot of fun to be had, there's just a lot of awkward still.
Last edited:
Many (most?) ships come with less than 10ly range stock, though... i.e. the Corvette with ~6 LY
True. If you also factor in the fact that I support jump ranges being doubled across the board, as someone else said, we'll be good.
I realise that (double jump range) is a contentious topic, however, I never have understood why. If you want to go somewhere, pressing J more times than you might have to, is boring. If you are exploring, your maximum jump range is irrelevant, a true explorer will take an 'economical' route to visit as many unvisited things as possible. Also in favour of the explorers, a lot more stars would be reachable now. I can't really think of a downside. This game has had its 'niche game for masochistic nutbags' time. It's time it was made more enjoyable and more playable.Beyond is making some headway there already I feel.
Nah. This game needs to be made more accessible and sensible. Sowwy.
On the contrary, YOU are looking for problems to create because you don't like this game being made easier. The solutions are easy, make FSds weightless, for example, like fuel scoops. Look for solutions rather than problems to create.
Last edited:
True. If you also factor in the fact that I support jump ranges being doubled across the board, as someone else said, we'll be good.
I realise that (double jump range) is a contentious topic, however, I never have understood why. If you want to go somewhere, pressing J more times than you might have to, is boring. If you are exploring, your maximum jump range is irrelevant, a true explorer will take an 'economical' route to visit as many unvisited things as possible. Also in favour of the explorers, a lot more stars would be reachable now. I can't really think of a downside. This game has had its 'niche game for masochistic nutbags' time. It's time it was made more enjoyable and more playable.Beyond is making some headway there already I feel.
Nah. This game needs to be made more accessible and sensible. Sowwy.
On the contrary, YOU are looking for problems to create because you don't like this game being made easier. The solutions are easy, make FSds weightless, for example, like fuel scoops. Look for solutions rather than problems to create.
Man, buying credits for real money, simplifying outfitting, removing the chance of making mistakes: your idea of fun doesnt seem to have anything to do with the Elite series...
Last edited: