Increase risk of becoming trapped in stars

If people want an casual space sim, there are light and easy ones out there. If people want realism, the play Elite. I think stars need to be more little more 'Dangerous'. It will give more of a risk/reward dynamic especially for explorer types like me. I was surprised when I could get super close to a star without getting stuck in its gravity (but can get mass-locked by nearby ships and stations?). I was SUPER surprised too when I learned that Black holes posed almost no threat, except for a little heat damage.

As I said earlier I am all for more danger out there, but the OP wants to make every jump a risk of being burnt to a crisp in a star, and that's simply not reasonable. Yes if I make a mistake and get to close when fuel scooping it should be dangerous, if you hit the exclusion zone and drop out of SC in the corona I would be all for a gradual heating up, that would be acceptable because the danger is caused by your own carelessness, same with black holes, however getting caught in stars gravity isn't going to happen for a couple of reasons, a) we are already using a drive that manipulates space/time to push us faster than light, a little gravity isn't going to affect that, and b) gravity at the suns surface is around 28g so that's not really extraordinary or anything near the effect you would feel at a neutron star or black hole.

Properly and reasonably designed dangers out there are one thing, making every jump a serious risk isn't reasonable at all.
 
If people want realism, then play Elite.
I was surprised when I could get super close to a star without getting stuck in its gravity (but can get mass-locked by nearby ships and stations?).

I think most of the players were thinking the "sh*t" word when they first came close to a star, you are so right about getting mass locked by little minuscule things like ships, but not by mega big suns...there goes reality tru the window again lol.
 
I was surprised when I could get super close to a star without getting stuck in its gravity (but can get mass-locked by nearby ships and stations?).

Mass lock has nothing to do with gravity.. Think of it more as a safety feature preventing you from going to warp close to the surface of a planet (or near an orbital) Mass lock from a planet is at a fixed altitude, not dependent on the gravitational field of the body.

Mass inhibition factors (Ships) also seem to have little to do with actual mass (Check each ships MLF)

@OP - 100% in agreement, we should be able to get closer to stars, and have a bit more risk in game.
 
Last edited:
@OP - 100% in agreement, we should be able to get closer to stars, and have a bit more risk in game.
.
Actually I dare to ask: why?
.
I mean, the ship automatically drops out of SC when you get too close to a star. It does so when you reach a certain minimum safety distance. The ship decides to rather take some damage from emergency drop out of SC than to fly closer to the star. Considering the technology of this game, it's a very logical thing to do.
.
- Of course, in pure theory things could break. But implementing something like this only for ships which are badly worn down also seems like a waste of effort to me.
- Somebody could tinker with the system, override it, etc. But why would he? What would he gain from that? I just don't see why anybody would want to do it.
.
For me, the whole thing is like "hey, we could replace the seat belts material with some wool strings" and "we could add a 10 seconds delay when triggering the airbag". The whole goal would be "increasing the risk", without any actual benefits gained. Indeed these things could be done. But it requires excessive levels of stupidity to actually do that.
.
I think what we have currently is fine. It makes perfect sense for the world of ED to have these safety features. You can override them sometimes, e.g. when entering cones to get bigger jump range. You take a risk, but you can also get a benefit from it. That actually makes sense.
.
You also can still drop into a system and be wedged between two very close stars. Here we see a limitation of the navigation system: it doesn't know enough about a destination system to completely avoid these situations. This again makes perfect sense when jumping into unexplored systems. If this happens, you better be quick to get out of there and best have some heat sinks at hand. Traveling is not completely risk free. While the chance to end up in such a place is low per jump, the high number of jumps for a longer trip adds up to some risk.
.
The game has other things which can use a lot of improvement. Just making traveling more dangerous for the mere sake of making it more dangerous doesn't seem the right way for me.
.
I have already read threads here about people limping back 20k LY on a broken FSD, which they only kept operational via repair and reboot. You don't feel the danger when just jumping through the bubble and fixing things up when arriving. You don't get hurt much when you have experience and know what to do. But there are other people out there, who apparently are not that proficient yet. The game already has a steep learning curve. Its player retention rate seems to be not all that great already now. Making it even worse isn't the way to go.
.
 
Last edited:
.
Actually I dare to ask: why?

.

I don't need hand holding, have never been a fan of the exclusion zone. Would rather have the option of pushing my ship to limit, as opposed to not having anyway to override the computer.


For those that need hand holding, keep the computers switched on. Besides, it would be visually stunning to be able to dive deeper into a stars Corona.
 
Last edited:
I don't need hand holding, have never been a fan of the exclusion zone. Would rather have the option of pushing my ship to limit, as opposed to not having anyway to override the computer.


For those that need hand holding, keep the computers switched on. Besides, it would be visually stunning to be able to dive deeper into a stars Corona.

what limits? what would the benefits be?
 
what limits? what would the benefits be?

Limits - Maximum performance of the ship before destruction

Benefits - Knowing the actual limit of the ships, as opposed to what the Computers recommend. I guess you have never turned off Flight assist and rode the gravity well down a high g planet at 8000m/s

There doesn't have to be some grand purpose to everything, I enjoy flying these ships (and pushing them to the limit) Happy with safety protocols built in, would like the option to switch more of those computers off.

Key word is option ladies and gentleman.,.
 
Last edited:
Limits - Maximum performance of the ship before destruction

Benefits - Knowing the actual limit of the ships, as opposed to what the Computers recommend. I guess you have never turned off Flight assist and rode the gravity well down a high g planet at 8000m/s

There doesn't have to be some grand purpose to everything, I enjoy flying these ships (and pushing them to the limit) Happy with safety protocols built in, would like the option to switch more of those computers off.

Key word is option ladies and gentleman.,.

so basically, nothing then.... it would not really add anything....

and no, you assume to much, I have bumped several ships against different planets surfaces in break necking speeds.
 
so basically, nothing then.... it would not really add anything....

.

What the heck are you on about? I am talking about the SC inclusion zone safety net, and I don't give a damn what you think, this is a suggestion forum. I agree with the OP, get over it..
 
Last edited:
I think op’s suggestion is just adding danger for the sake of danger. There’s no risk / reward, just risk. It’s just seems like a useless complication.

The current mechanic is not intentional. It is the byproduct of having the FSD cooldown. It would be really dumb to just be getting baked alive while you’re waiting for the damn timer. There is a fine line between making risky gameplay and making frustrating gameplay. This suggestion seems closer to frustrating in my opinion
 
I don't need hand holding, have never been a fan of the exclusion zone. Would rather have the option of pushing my ship to limit, as opposed to not having anyway to override the computer.


For those that need hand holding, keep the computers switched on. Besides, it would be visually stunning to be able to dive deeper into a stars Corona.
.
Which would be very different from this suggestion. You would like to have the option to override safety features. For most people the "gain" would not be worth the price, but you can see it differently. But the suggestion here is not to get the option to override anything, but to eliminate reasonable and thus logical safety features.
.
 
What the heck are you on about? I am talking about the SC inclusion zone safety net, and I don't give a damn what you think, this is a suggestion forum. I agree with the OP, get over it..

I should get over it? it appears you to be the one who needs to get over that other people do not agree with your opinion, you know, we have all the same right to express our own opinions on your opinions, and if you cannot handle that, then perhaps you should consider if really hand manage the response your posts can create.


And I still stand by my statement, your suggestion on why OP's suggestion should be implemented is not going to add anything to the gameplay. OP and you have both made a terrible proposition as to why it would be beneficial for FDev to spend development hour to change this mechanics in the game, instead on spending this time on other things.
 
^ wall of text.. calm down and have a cup of tea.. your precious safety net isn’t going anywhere. Seriously dial that geek level down a notch or too..
 
I'd like it if being within the exclusion zone of any M star or higher caused runaway heat gain with no upper limit with the heat of the star dictating how fast the runaway is.
Even a brown dwarf should put a ship over 100 when following the escape vector.
Even a highly engineered ship should feel a little danger.
As it stands all stars are the same except for color and how slow they make you feel.
I do think that jumping out of hyperspace can be managed safely, so I don't agree with jumping into stars.
It's the Icarus Effect that should be punished when getting greedy with a fuel scoop or just not paying attention.
I also think larger stars should have further scooping ranges to compensate for the heat somewhat.
 
.
Which would be very different from this suggestion. You would like to have the option to override safety features. For most people the "gain" would not be worth the price, but you can see it differently. But the suggestion here is not to get the option to override anything, but to eliminate reasonable and thus logical safety features.
.

Sorry mate was browsing my phone, missed your reply, back home now. Agreed, OP suggestion is on the extreme end of things.

To clarify what I would like to see -

Get rid of the exclusion zone around stars:The actual safety zone is very reserved (calculated on star radius as opposed to actual heat output)

Pro's - Modifier applied to scoop rates the deeper you delve into the Corona. Modifier for fuel efficiency (max fuel per jump) the deeper you scoop

Con's - Increased risk from heat damage the deeper you go, potential for a complete hull loss if a cmdr pushes things too far.

Keep a safety net implemented (However the auto drop is an option that can be toggled)

A bit of extra risk and reward to scooping, anyone who wants to play it safe can let the computer do the work.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom