Sorry for the late edit on the post. I clarified a little what I meant.
News Chapter Four - Exploration Reveal
Sorry for the late edit on the post. I clarified a little what I meant.
I love all these ideas for wear and tear on long range journeys, but fear it will never happen.
Personally, I'd like to add a way to repair your ship without needing a repair module or limpet system - namely doing it on a planet's surface using your SRV and an alternate setting on the turret (until we get space legs)
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Can someone tell Marc I agree with him, please?
An easy example would be high g planets having a greater concentration of mats, with higher percentages of the high grades.
That wouldn't require any new mechanics, but it would give players the option to perform a high risk landing for better rewards.
Last edited:
I mean, you can, though I suppose I know what you mean, but it probably wouldn't be worth the effort to allow it. Even at max Supercruise speed, you're talking people leaving their computers on for X amounts of days, weeks, months, years(?) or whatever just to fly (more like idle) toward the star system of their choice. Then what happens when you get there? You honk and find relatively little of interest or nothing? I don't really think the game is missing that. I'm sure there are some particular folk that would be all for it, but probably not worth whatever developer tricks would be needed to make it so. Crazier things have been requested and subsequently added to games though.
I love all these ideas for wear and tear on long range journeys, but fear it will never happen.
Personally, I'd like to add a way to repair your ship without needing a repair module or limpet system - namely doing it on a planet's surface using your SRV and an alternate setting on the turret (until we get space legs)
I think a wear-and-tear mechanic or something very much like it might come up as more & more people get into exploration. NMS has survivalism mechanics that a lot of players have gotten used to, so a less annoying version of that kind of requirement might be welcome in ED as well. Especially if the consequences are avoidable by careful flying or flying to safer (less CR rewarding) systems. This is something that very much fits into what a lot of players seem to be asking for, namely:
Risk vs Reward
I am hoping that deep space mining will offer something very much along these lines of extra reward and extra danger. The danger being that you'll be far from home so you'll be in danger of attrition damage. Speaking of which...
Yes I agree, landing or stalling in space to do space walks for manual repairs sounds like a fun way to experience the scale and beauty of your ship. Also, the AFMU seems like a placeholder mechanic to make things simple for solo pilots. Once we get spacelegs and hand held toolkits, then we'll something more like what you describe, since manual repair is such an obviously useful activity for spacelegs. It makes me think that the A in AFMU was an intentional naming choice that was ultimately meant to be either replaced or accompanied by a handheld MFMU. M obviously meaning "manual". They could keep both options in the game and balance this by making manual repairs faster than automatic repairs. Auto repairs being quite slow atm.
Ask the Rifters about it ! Weeks, even months trying to identify star patterns and skybox chimeras on the GalMap ! But it was fun, though ![haha]
Yea, I know people have messed around with the limitations and I know people were genuinely disappointed when they first ran into the outer limits of a system. If there were to be no costs associated with opening star systems I'd be all for people having that option, but I have a feeling there's probably some sort of performance cost that just wouldn't make it worth it. The galaxy is just too big. Who knows, maybe one day we'll have the tech where an open world can be that massive without cost.
Oh. Hmm.
I don't deny there are a LOT of people who want more risk in exploration. I'm just saying I fear that there is a very vocal portion of the community that would be hell bent against it. In fact, I'm certain there is, because I'm certain this debate came up way back when an exploration overhaul was first being debated in these forums (with all the same accusations of grognards vs modern gamers, carebears vs griefers, grinders vs casuals, PvP vs PvE and all the rest of the polarizing talk of the time).
I want a survival element thrown into the game. 100%. Of course, my own idea of what constitutes that might differ from others. I feel a lot of survival games, for example, skip the logical because of the need for game loops--hence survival games with people making metal knives that break in an hour of regular play, or guns whose parts wear out after a few clips. Many of these games put this in just because they feel it's a necessary part of the game loop.
To me, I'd like to see wear and tear mechanics simply be logical. I actually like the idea of 0% hull integrity actually meaning the ship as a whole is like only 70% strength (though I do think how that's presented in game needs work). It doesn't make sense that your ship would fall apart after a month of travel, but it does make sense that it would be under stress and perhaps not be up to snuff or showroom condition.
As far as wear and tear goes, I wonder if it's more logical for it to experience degrading effects in a curve? Like, going from 100 to 95 happens fairly quickly, but going from 55 to 50 actually takes much much longer. The idea being that fine tuning is harder to maintain that just reliable functionality.
I think an explorer, who is careful and cautious should, in theory, be able to stay out in the black for like a year without getting an overhaul and tuneup (Heh, I just know that would become the new ironman test amongst some--who can stay out away from a starport the longest). My fear would be that if they added the mechanics in, they'd work in such a way that you'd have to come back every month--just because.
Edit: OOOH! I know people will HATE this but it would be great if the more Engineering you did, the more quickly those parts wore out. Yes, that includes our precious long range FSDs
Different levels of engineering would create different curves as described above, wearing out faster at the high end (100-95 range) and having a lower point where the wear starts to bottom out and really slow down (the 55-50 range described, which might shift down to 40-35 by the time you hit Grade 5). There would actually be value associated with having a reliable stock version over a hotrod. Oh yeah, bring on the tomatoes, guys. I'm makin salsa!
Last edited:
So if you flip back a few pages, you'd read that I posted the exact same assumption about that "vocal minority" of the exploration community wanting a to be wrapped in packing popcorn when venturing into the black, and was swiftly proven wrong by the very people that I recall calling for risk-free exploration back in those same threads of yesteryear were in this very thread asking for MORE danger. It's good to be wrong sometimes. In fact it makes me hopeful for the future.
well, my standard equipment for exploring-ships is heatsink, 2 afmu, rep-drone-controller, but what I really miss is a kind of independent powersupply / emergency backup-generator, so that at beagle point one can repair the reactor....
edit: and make no mistake
I just ask for a 1E Module which only allows running one AFMU and life support systems And as we are on that one - FD could you please remove that rediculous logic of life-support systems ? if a 1E life-support system sustains one pilot in a Sidewinder for 10 Minutes, it should do the same in a Cutter ! Vice versa, if You are flying the latter with two crewmembers, support-time should be a third as well....
Last edited:
Same here.
I can forget names of close relatives. But I'm better at recognizing faces and places, and reading maps, and such. Now, some might suggest that's Alzheimer or something, but I don't think so because it's a problem since childhood. My mom is the same, and she's 90 years old and still have her wits.
Having seen what's coming up, I can tell you that it's (IMO) a lot more engaging, and will also offer more scope than just for pure exploration. The coming changes in Q4 seem to be working to give us more content, but also make everything work well with everything else. I am probably an explorer primarily, and cannot wait to get hands on when the update lands
The DECE (Dead Ends Circumnavigation Expedition) is coming to and end. We started it 350 days ago. Only 2 weeks left before we're back home again.
https://www.edsm.net/en/expeditions/summary/id/32/name/The+Dead+End's+Circumnavigation+Expedition
Once a month return wouldn't have been possible. The very distant stars on the fringe can take days to reach by carefully planning a few stars at a time and charging the FSD boost.
Where I'm at right now, I have to do 2,000 LY/day to get back home if I want to get back in 2 weeks.
It's an interesting idea, but it wouldn't be fair to players who now would go exploring in those parts, if some stars suddenly would be impossible to reach. And how would that be explained in the lore? A sudden decrease in quality of all things that wasn't there before?
(Have some of my tomatoes.
)Yeah. I haven't used a single heatsink on the trip I've been on for 350 days now. I've used the AFMU a lot though, but that's because I do quite a bit of neutron jumps.
Just please tell me we can finally use exploration tools to learn what metals/minerals etc rings & belts contain before we ever get into them. That would be so cool!
The DECE (Dead Ends Circumnavigation Expedition) is coming to and end. We started it 350 days ago. Only 2 weeks left before we're back home again.
https://www.edsm.net/en/expeditions/summary/id/32/name/The+Dead+End's+Circumnavigation+Expedition
Once a month return wouldn't have been possible. The very distant stars on the fringe can take days to reach by carefully planning a few stars at a time and charging the FSD boost.
Where I'm at right now, I have to do 2,000 LY/day to get back home if I want to get back in 2 weeks.
It's an interesting idea, but it wouldn't be fair to players who now would go exploring in those parts, if some stars suddenly would be impossible to reach. And how would that be explained in the lore? A sudden decrease in quality of all things that wasn't there before?
(Have some of my tomatoes.
I would have ways that players can extend the time they can stay beyond the bubble by doing lots of regular diagnostics & preventative maintenance. The ability to convert materials from one type to another (like converting raw materials into manufactured materials-or vice versa) & to be able to use these materials for maintenance & jury rigging would be awesome too.
I really hope so, because I have been looking forward to being able to do exactly this for nearly 4 years.
I don't know if the new mechanics will give info about specific elements/minerals, but considering that we already know if a ring is metallic, metal rich, rocky, or icy, then any probe launched would have to give deeper info. At the very least about good places to hunt for stuff:
I really hope so, because I have been looking forward to being able to do exactly this for nearly 4 years.
I don't know if the new mechanics will give info about specific elements/minerals, but considering that we already know if a ring is metallic, metal rich, rocky, or icy, then any probe launched would have to give deeper info. At the very least about good places to hunt for stuff:
I was more thinking along the lines of Gold 10%, Osmium 25% etc etc. With the mid range scanner mentioned in the Mining update being used to narrow down specific rocks within a ring.
As I have said previously, I would like to see a mechanic similar to the Mid-range scanner for mining be applied to finding PoI & USS specific objects. In this case using a kind of active "Ping" mechanic to get an idea of both direction & distance to an object that isn't in plain sight.