Suggestion: Hyper-Factor (MetaDrive?)

[Chaparral]

So who is forcing you do those 30+ minutes super cruise travels?

If you accepted a mission, to deliver cargo/data/passengers to a remote location, it is stated in the mission information where you accept the mission. So if you do not pay attention, then of course you are in for a surprise... But it was YOU who accepted the mission in the first place. These missions are very EASY avoid.
So why do people tend to take these mission? because they pay BETTER, and why do they pay better? because that long journey in super cruise.

But no one is forcing you to go there. you can at any time choose, F this and abandon the mission. That is still an option.


Then we have those missions that will have you go to a system and then you scan and they will tell you where to go... Once again, the game give you the option to check out the system BEFORE accepting, so once again, you have the tools to avoid taking these kind of mission to systems that could end up with a long super cruise journey. And if you want to gamble, you can still abandon the mission!


There are a few cases where you will be re-routed to another system and meet a contact, that will tell you what system the target is, and these can bring you to systems that will give you long super cruise journeys. And these we cannot detect before hand, as the mission accepted is go to system X, and then randomly your target is not in that system.... So in that case, you always have the option to abandon the mission. This is not a common chain of events for this kind of missions.



So with a FEW exceptions, you as a player have all the tools needed to avoid accepting missions that will take you on long super cruise journeys. And if you as a player repeatedly refuses to use these mechanics available to avoid this, you are obviously not paying attention to this kind of things.

So who is forcing you todo these things? why do you accept these kind of missions? why do you not own up to your own choices?

I've addressed this in other posts but I will try again.

Boss gives worker a screwdriver to hammer nails.

Worker says, "This is the wrong tool for the job."

Boss says, "You don't have to do the job."

Are you going to objectively stand back and say, "You don't know how to play the game, you don't have to go to those places."

The problem has nothing to do with whether or not I want to go to those places.

The problem is the travel mechanic is terrible. It is the wrong tool for the job.

 

[Azmuth Divarchchron]

Hey folks, so, I've been thinking (hold tight)....

The community vastly agrees that Supercruising is muchly needed in order to make space feel "big".

However, there are those that hate cruising about because of the time it takes to fly 100,000ls just to reach a destination.

How about this for a compromise? A new "third" mode called "Hyper-cruising".

To those that follow Star Trek, this may sound familiar. So, this is how it would go in game...

You can have a destination set, such as a station, or just go free-mode, either or, the direction will only ever be a straight line.

Hyper-cruising's main strength, and get this, is that the speed, once set, isn't affected by gravity Wells, and the like, like regularly Super-cruising.

When initiating Hyper-cruising, you set a "factor" between 1 to 10, and these are linked to the Speed of Light (C). These are interchangeable, either through a simple panel instruction on you left-hand panel, or one you can customise by clocking in the exact numbers.

Hyper-cruising, Factor 1, could be the default "SoL" (speed of light or 1c) - however, to get somewhere faster, you would input Factor 10 - Factor 10 is the maximum speed-of-light speed, which is 2000c in the game.

So, for fun, you could go Factor 10 and go 2000 times the speed of light and zip right past a small system you started in, or use it to make your way to a binary 200,000ls away in a few minutes, as opposed to 30, for a rough example.

But, I hear you cry, how to balance?

Hyper-cruising can only be initiated in Super-cruise after 20 seconds (a similar soft cool down after a jump is completed, but this is to allow time for inderdiction from NPCs or PvP).

Once this condition has been passed, you line up where you want to go, then initiate Hyper-cruise.

This will cause the ship to generate loads more heat, and suck up a lot more fuel (part of the balance).

So, therefore, if your ship runs hot, and/or doesn't have a large fuel tank, using Hyper-cruising could be dangerous.

Heat build-up by Factors:

Factor 1: 0% heat (1c)
Factor 2: +5% heat (20c)
Factor 3: +10% heat (100c)
Factor 4: +15% heat (200c)
Factor 5: +20% heat (350c)
Factor 6: +30% heat (500c)
Factor 7: +35% heat (750c)
Factor 8: +40% heat (1,100c)
Factor 9: +45% heat (1,400c)
Factor 10: +50% heat (2,000c)

The same percentages for the heat also apply to fuel consumption used during the duration of the trip.

So yeah, basically, just a way to warp around without any restraints but with some kickbacks - what does the community and Frontier think?

Of course, fine tuning needed if and where it applies, I'm just asking if this is something people could get behind, since this is more for passenger missions, hauling, exploring, and general flying.

Thoughts?

First off its not gravity that dictates the functionality of supercruise, but a combination of the Ship AI and ambient quantum friction.
The FSD itself doesnt care about gravity, but because of the way astronomical mass displaces space like water it can impose quantum friction on the FSD because it has to worker harder to displace space that is already displaced by something else (hence why masslock is a thing) The ship AI does impose some sort of relative speed assist on the FSD but for the most part this assist is minimal.
the "slow down" messages you get are a warning that the FSD is going to loose efficency near an astronomical body affecting it's ability to accelerate or decelerate properly due to quantum friction. which is why you can speed up or slow down on a dime in deep space but it takes time to slow down or speed up fully near an astronomical body.

That being said, I can see how heat would be generated making supercruise operate outside its normal limits by forcing it to operate harder with the presence of quantum friction.
I would say instead of "factors" that there should be a mode that function like "silent running" where you toggle it on and off but it gradually causes heat build up the longer it is in use. Gameplay wise this would make it so its more of a situational utility rather than something to always be used to "go faster".

As for why the Hyperspace functionality wouldnt do this, well thats because the hyperspace functionality is the result of a separate part of the FSD that has a significantly higher energy threshold than supercruise does, which is why supercruise tops out at 2,000c and hyperspace (Depending on mass and fuel limits) is upwards of 20,000c

However, it is likely frontier wont implement a faster supercruise as they wanted a game where you feel the vastness of space. this game, inside and out, is meant to be a hyper-realistic space sim and all the emptiness of space that comes with it. There are no true shortcuts, and even if this "faster supercruise" was implimented in a way similar to silent running, I don't see frontier implementing it either.

 

[Chaparral]

First off its not gravity that dictates the functionality of supercruise, but a combination of the Ship AI and ambient quantum friction.
The FSD itself doesnt care about gravity, but because of the way astronomical mass displaces space like water it can impose quantum friction on the FSD because it has to worker harder to displace space that is already displaced by something else (hence why masslock is a thing) The ship AI does impose some sort of relative speed assist on the FSD but for the most part this assist is minimal.
the "slow down" messages you get are a warning that the FSD is going to loose efficency near an astronomical body affecting it's ability to accelerate or decelerate properly due to quantum friction. which is why you can speed up or slow down on a dime in deep space but it takes time to slow down or speed up fully near an astronomical body.

That being said, I can see how heat would be generated making supercruise operate outside its normal limits by forcing it to operate harder with the presence of quantum friction.
I would say instead of "factors" that there should be a mode that function like "silent running" where you toggle it on and off but it gradually causes heat build up the longer it is in use. Gameplay wise this would make it so its more of a situational utility rather than something to always be used to "go faster".

As for why the Hyperspace functionality wouldnt do this, well thats because the hyperspace functionality is the result of a separate part of the FSD that has a significantly higher energy threshold than supercruise does, which is why supercruise tops out at 2,000c and hyperspace (Depending on mass and fuel limits) is upwards of 20,000c

However, it is likely frontier wont implement a faster supercruise as they wanted a game where you feel the vastness of space. this game, inside and out, is meant to be a hyper-realistic space sim and all the emptiness of space that comes with it. There are no true shortcuts, and even if this "faster supercruise" was implimented in a way similar to silent running, I don't see frontier implementing it either.

Awesome descriptions of "science" rationale for supercruise.

This is a game. With purple biweaves, green prismatics, magic floaty shocky guardian fighters, persisting magnetic bottles for plasma, kinetic weapons that do not affect ship velocity, FSD average jumps that change when an engineer game mechanic is introduced, no blackouts on 9 g planets, sit on an iron fumarole etc. etc. etc. The "vastness of space" crap does not hold water.

Stop acting like this broken mechanic is sciencey. It isn't. It's lazy design. There have been mechanic updates on everything from ship masses, to optional slots, to weapon profiles, to heat generation, to mission frequency, to mission payouts, to board flipping, to C&P, to mining, to FSS etc. This is simply another mechanic, like any other aspect of the game.

It is well established that mechanics evolve in this game. The extreme intra-system distance consequences can be reflected in fuel cost, module damage, hull erosion, random system failures, etc. etc. FAR more interesting mechanics than sit and do nothing for 30 minutes.

 

[MK Regular]

Let me guess. you are the type that want everything handed to your on a silver spoon.

You seem to be implying (yet again) that long distance supercruise is hard, and that asking for an alternative is asking for an 'easy mode'. Somehow, you equate time sinks with difficulty. By this logic going to Hutton Orbital for my free(tm) Anaconda would be one of the most difficult tasks in the game (and rightly so as you get a 100M+ CR ship out of it). However, I can tell you from personal experience that flying to Hutton Orbital is one of the easiest, if not the easiest task in the game with respect to the time:effort ratio.

I do not understand the logic involved here. In the interest of making progress in this discussion, would you please go over your though process so others can better understand your viewpoint and come up with alternative solutions?

You are complaining about 10kls? That only a few minutes unless you are not using max throttle Oh note they are engineers. You know you have that option to Pin your Blueprint so you can update them at most stations.

This works well for Marco (especially if you have Hera Tani unlocked), but isn't exactly the best solution for Selene Jean.

Personally, I pinned the G5 armoured PP mod for Hera, and the G4 overcharged PP for Marco. I rarely use G5 overcharged (or low emissions for that matter), so I don't mind flying halfway across the bubble to get those mods done when I need them.

Selene Jean is a bit more difficult to do. She is (currently) the ONLY engineer that can do G5 bulkheads and G5 HRPs, and there are several useful modifications for both of these modules (many ship builds make use of 2-3 different mods that are ONLY available through her). As such it is VERY difficult to pin the "correct" blueprint that will minimize the amount of traveling one needs to do to get to her base of operations. Personally, I would recommend pinning a blueprint for bulkhead modifications as these are ship specific (where as HRPs can be mounted to any ship), meaning that you will only need to visit Selene when you want one of the unpinned bulkhead modifications or need to modify an HRP (although these can be done in bulk when you visit to get your bulkheads done). Thankfully, Liz Ryder can do secondary effects on bulkheads and HRPs, so you don't need to go too far out of your way to get them done.

 

[Monoceros]

This may be a broken mechanic in your view but it is broken for everyone, adding any 'optional' shortcut would immediately unbalance the game in favor of those that use it.

Taking the BGS as an example the ability to run 10 missions in 1/2 the time for your chosen faction would be a huge advantage and this optional method would soon become mandatory.

What you are actually asking for is that Fdev changes the mechanic for everyone as this would be the only way to maintain the current balance.

 

[Misty_Dark]

I've addressed this in other posts but I will try again.

Boss gives worker a screwdriver to hammer nails.

Worker says, "This is the wrong tool for the job."

Boss says, "You don't have to do the job."

Are you going to objectively stand back and say, "You don't know how to play the game, you don't have to go to those places."

The problem has nothing to do with whether or not I want to go to those places.

The problem is the travel mechanic is terrible. It is the wrong tool for the job.

There is no boss here telling you to hammer a nail with a screwdriver.

You are the boss, so it is you who chooses to accept to do something, or go somewhere, it is your choice.
If you are to lazy, to use the existing tools in the game, that ALLOWS you to avoid these kind of situations. then what good would a new travel mechanic do?

You have already told us that these existing tools to help you make an informed descision is obvioulsy somethign that you do not use.

• Mission description - Does in most tell you the travel distance to the destination in super cruise.
• Button, "open in galaxy map", good for most of those missions that do not have the information in the description

Two very handy tools available WHEN you are in the process of accepting those missions.That will in almost all cases let you avoid risking any long super cruise journeys.


So we have not EVEN got to the travel mechanics, and you have already decided to ignore two of the available tools given to you. You have skipped to use the option to actually decline missions that can put you on these 30+ minutes super cruise journeys. Then you act all upset when your own lack of respoinsiblity blowe sup oinm your face and the destionation is far, far away... And there are really no one else to blame except yourself, becuase you are the boss over your descisions, and lazyness can have these kind of results, and you appears to be totally ok with using the mission board tool to find high paying missions, since these missions pays more, because of the long super cruise distance they have.


Now to the boring truth, if there where some changes made, that eliminated the super cruise distance time cost, then all those previously far away super cruise locations, would no longer have any reason to pay better than those other similar missions without the long super cruise distance. So no particular reason to pick those mission anyway....




So yes, I am telling you, going to these places are entirely up to you. There isn't anyone forcing you to go there, there are no ingame requirements that forces you to go anywhere. These are all in the end, your choices, you are the boss over yourself. The game can give you incentive to go there, by giving you higher mission rewards, but it is still you who accepts the mission, again, you are the boss over yourself. You can choose what todo or what not todo, where to go, and where not to go. Your choices, you are the boss, and depending on your choices, it can come with some consequencies, but it is still your choice to choose to engage in this activity or not, does the potential reward out-weight any potential negative stuff? You are the boss, so it is your decision over this.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Let me guess. you are the type that want everything handed to your on a silver spoon.

Are you implying that there's no other way to make a game mechanic challenging other than boring players to death for 90 minutes?

So are you telling us you are the type of player that accepts all the mission and only focus on the credit you could earn and you don't bother doing any research before accepting the mission? Yes, You are foolish to do that. Now complaining about it because you did not do that research.

You keep going on and on as though checking the distance to the destination is some obscure or mythical practice that few people do, and then curse themselves for not doing afterwards. You also continue to entirely miss the point. Repeatedly. The complaint is not "I hate when I have to travel in supercruise for a long time because I didn't check the destination distance first". We're taking issue with the supercruise mechanic in general. It's OK for short distances, but for long distance travel it's unengaging, requires no skill, carries no real risk, and provides no actual gameplay.

If your position is that "It's a good thing to be forced to stare at a screen and do nothing for 90 minutes in a game when you want to travel long distances", then you've effectively shot your credibility in the head, at close range, with a rocket launcher.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

There is no boss here telling you to hammer a nail with a screwdriver.

You are the boss, so it is you who chooses to accept to do something, or go somewhere, it is your choice.
If you are to lazy, to use the existing tools in the game, that ALLOWS you to avoid these kind of situations. then what good would a new travel mechanic do?

You have already told us that these existing tools to help you make an informed descision is obvioulsy somethign that you do not use.

• Mission description - Does in most tell you the travel distance to the destination in super cruise.
• Button, "open in galaxy map", good for most of those missions that do not have the information in the description

Two very handy tools available WHEN you are in the process of accepting those missions.That will in almost all cases let you avoid risking any long super cruise journeys.


So we have not EVEN got to the travel mechanics, and you have already decided to ignore two of the available tools given to you. You have skipped to use the option to actually decline missions that can put you on these 30+ minutes super cruise journeys. Then you act all upset when your own lack of respoinsiblity blowe sup oinm your face and the destionation is far, far away... And there are really no one else to blame except yourself, becuase you are the boss over your descisions, and lazyness can have these kind of results, and you appears to be totally ok with using the mission board tool to find high paying missions, since these missions pays more, because of the long super cruise distance they have.


Now to the boring truth, if there where some changes made, that eliminated the super cruise distance time cost, then all those previously far away super cruise locations, would no longer have any reason to pay better than those other similar missions without the long super cruise distance. So no particular reason to pick those mission anyway....




So yes, I am telling you, going to these places are entirely up to you. There isn't anyone forcing you to go there, there are no ingame requirements that forces you to go anywhere. These are all in the end, your choices, you are the boss over yourself. The game can give you incentive to go there, by giving you higher mission rewards, but it is still you who accepts the mission, again, you are the boss over yourself. You can choose what todo or what not todo, where to go, and where not to go. Your choices, you are the boss, and depending on your choices, it can come with some consequencies, but it is still your choice to choose to engage in this activity or not, does the potential reward out-weight any potential negative stuff? You are the boss, so it is your decision over this.

You've completely missed the point. Commander Danicus is not complaining about having to spend a lot of time travelling long distances in supercruise because of forgetting to check the distance to the destination first. In fact, no one is making that complaint.

We're taking issue with the supercruise travel mechanic in general. We're saying that staring at a screen for 90 minutes with nothing to do in-game is not gameplay. We're saying it's unacceptable, and can't be justified with the "vastness of space" excuse. The fact that we're not forced to travel long distances is irrelevant in assessing the merits of this game mechanic. It's also a poor argument, because although we're not forced to, many of us actually want to travel long distances in supercruise. We just want to have an engaging experience while doing it.

That could mean adding a lot of things a player can do on their ship whilst locked onto a destination, and this could go hand-in-hand with EVA if it's implemented. It could also mean rebalancing factors, such as skill requirement, risk, and cost. Currently the time cost is huge, while there is virtually no skill or risk involved. If they add an optional travel mechanic that has a high skill requirement and high risk factor, they could balance out a reduction in time costs, and they could increase other costs, such as fuel, or add new costs such as materials.

 

[Chaparral]

There is no boss here telling you to hammer a nail with a screwdriver.

You are the boss, so it is you who chooses to accept to do something, or go somewhere, it is your choice.
If you are to lazy, to use the existing tools in the game, that ALLOWS you to avoid these kind of situations. then what good would a new travel mechanic do?

You have already told us that these existing tools to help you make an informed descision is obvioulsy somethign that you do not use.

• Mission description - Does in most tell you the travel distance to the destination in super cruise.
• Button, "open in galaxy map", good for most of those missions that do not have the information in the description

Two very handy tools available WHEN you are in the process of accepting those missions.That will in almost all cases let you avoid risking any long super cruise journeys.


So we have not EVEN got to the travel mechanics, and you have already decided to ignore two of the available tools given to you. You have skipped to use the option to actually decline missions that can put you on these 30+ minutes super cruise journeys. Then you act all upset when your own lack of respoinsiblity blowe sup oinm your face and the destionation is far, far away... And there are really no one else to blame except yourself, becuase you are the boss over your descisions, and lazyness can have these kind of results, and you appears to be totally ok with using the mission board tool to find high paying missions, since these missions pays more, because of the long super cruise distance they have.


Now to the boring truth, if there where some changes made, that eliminated the super cruise distance time cost, then all those previously far away super cruise locations, would no longer have any reason to pay better than those other similar missions without the long super cruise distance. So no particular reason to pick those mission anyway....




So yes, I am telling you, going to these places are entirely up to you. There isn't anyone forcing you to go there, there are no ingame requirements that forces you to go anywhere. These are all in the end, your choices, you are the boss over yourself. The game can give you incentive to go there, by giving you higher mission rewards, but it is still you who accepts the mission, again, you are the boss over yourself. You can choose what todo or what not todo, where to go, and where not to go. Your choices, you are the boss, and depending on your choices, it can come with some consequencies, but it is still your choice to choose to engage in this activity or not, does the potential reward out-weight any potential negative stuff? You are the boss, so it is your decision over this.

I am so very glad you don't design games.

Clearly you find perfection in the current mechanic.

I recommend that you never do core mining, never use the fss, never use engineering, never use an srv, never use an slf, never fly in a wing, never use multicrew, never use a guardian module, since they were not part of the initial perfection of the game.

 

[Azmuth Divarchchron]

Awesome descriptions of "science" rationale for supercruise.

This is a game. With purple biweaves, green prismatics, magic floaty shocky guardian fighters, persisting magnetic bottles for plasma, kinetic weapons that do not affect ship velocity, FSD average jumps that change when an engineer game mechanic is introduced, no blackouts on 9 g planets, sit on an iron fumarole etc. etc. etc. The "vastness of space" crap does not hold water.

Stop acting like this broken mechanic is sciencey. It isn't. It's lazy design. There have been mechanic updates on everything from ship masses, to optional slots, to weapon profiles, to heat generation, to mission frequency, to mission payouts, to board flipping, to C&P, to mining, to FSS etc. This is simply another mechanic, like any other aspect of the game.

It is well established that mechanics evolve in this game. The extreme intra-system distance consequences can be reflected in fuel cost, module damage, hull erosion, random system failures, etc. etc. FAR more interesting mechanics than sit and do nothing for 30 minutes.

Maybe if you bothered to do some research you would know that frontier actually does their own research and what I said can be supported by examples from actual science.

Also the "magic floating guardians" are using the Hutchison effect to levitate which is something that has been used to levitate both magnetic and non magnetic materials using electromagnetic waves.
And is reproducible in real life

Not only that but there is an alternative method to the Hutchison effect utilizing quantum levitation and electromagnetic pulses instead of waves. Although quantum levitation is harder to utilize for mobility than the Hutchison effect is.

Open a book sometime,
Use google
Do some research on physics and quantum physics
Maybe you will learn something.

Also if the vastness of space is "lazy"
you are playing the wrong game

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Maybe if you bothered to do some research you would know that frontier actually does their own research and what I said can be supported by examples from actual science.

Except that we're talking about FTL ship travel here, the basis of which is science fiction, and not actual science. As long as they're inventing something that has no practical scientific explanation, they have no limit in their scope to alter the mechanics to create the type of gameplay they want, and so they won't be restricted by realism.

Also if the vastness of space is "lazy"
you are playing the wrong game

I often have to remind people that this is the suggestions forum, where people come to make suggestions to improve the things they feel could be improved, or fix the the things they believe are not working well. If someone feels that the "vastness of space" trope is a lazy excuse for having a travel mechanic that is not engaging over long distances, and if they suggest it be improved or fixed, that is not an indication that the game is not suited to their desires in every other aspect, or that they should cease playing it if they're suggesting this mechanic or feature be changed.

 

[Azmuth Divarchchron]

Except that we're talking about FTL ship travel here, the basis of which is science fiction, and not actual science. As long as they're inventing something that has no practical scientific explanation, they have no limit in their scope to alter the mechanics to create the type of gameplay they want, and so they won't be restricted by realisim.

Except that it is restricted by realisim.

Astronomical bodies can displace the 4th spatial dimension of space, the FSD does the same thing to propel the ship.

The FSD shifts the quantum density of the ship because normal matter cannot travel faster than light otherwise hence the "shift" in "Frame shift drive"
The FSD uses the warping of the 4th spatial dimension of space to propell the ship without imposing kenetic energy on the ship internally.
Which is why during a dropout or a fsd failure the ship returns to a speed of a few hundred m/s instead of dropping out at near light speeds.

If an FSD failure occurs the ship takes hull damage because the FSD does not get a chance to shut down properly which means the quantum density of the ship will return at an uneven rate as the mass of the hull expands against and contracts away from itself which can cause fractures and damage as the quantum density of the ship's mass basically "rubberbands" back to normal.

Ive already given explanations of how quantum friction affects the FSD in this thread.

Nasa has already done expiriments with attempting to warp space with very minimal results, but results none the less.

You can choose to belive there is no pratical explanation for the FSD's functionality but that wont make the supporting science go away

But I guess we still live in a generation where people are willing to buy into hogwarts as science instead of accepting any kind of logical or scientific explanation.

 

[Misty_Dark]

You've completely missed the point. Commander Danicus is not complaining about having to spend a lot of time travelling long distances in supercruise because of forgetting to check the distance to the destination first. In fact, no one is making that complaint.

We're taking issue with the supercruise travel mechanic in general. We're saying that staring at a screen for 90 minutes with nothing to do in-game is not gameplay. We're saying it's unacceptable, and can't be justified with the "vastness of space" excuse. The fact that we're not forced to travel long distances is irrelevant in assessing the merits of this game mechanic. It's also a poor argument, because although we're not forced to, many of us actually want to travel long distances in supercruise. We just want to have an engaging experience while doing it.

That could mean adding a lot of things a player can do on their ship whilst locked onto a destination, and this could go hand-in-hand with EVA if it's implemented. It could also mean rebalancing factors, such as skill requirement, risk, and cost. Currently the time cost is huge, while there is virtually no skill or risk involved. If they add an optional travel mechanic that has a high skill requirement and high risk factor, they could balance out a reduction in time costs, and they could increase other costs, such as fuel, or add new costs such as materials.

what point? he came with ridiculous example of using a screwdriver as a hammer.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Except that it is restricted by realisim.

Astronomical bodies can displace the 4th spatial dimension of space, the FSD does the same thing to propel the ship.

The FSD shifts the quantum density of the ship because normal matter cannot travel faster than light otherwise hence the "shift" in "Frame shift drive"
The FSD uses the warping of the 4th spatial dimension of space to propell the ship without imposing kenetic energy on the ship internally.
Which is why during a dropout or a fsd failure the ship returns to a speed of a few hundred m/s instead of dropping out at near light speeds.

If an FSD failure occurs the ship takes hull damage because the FSD does not get a chance to shut down properly which means the quantum density of the ship will return at an uneven rate as the mass of the hull expands against and contracts away from itself which can cause fractures and damage as the quantum density of the ship's mass basically "rubberbands" back to normal.

Ive already given explanations of how quantum friction affects the FSD in this thread.

Nasa has already done expiriments with attempting to warp space with very minimal results, but results none the less.

You can choose to belive there is no pratical explanation for the FSD's functionality but that wont make the supporting science go away

But I guess we still live in a generation where people are willing to buy into hogwarts as science instead of accepting any kind of logical or scientific explanation.

I think you've missed the general point, or at least the spirit of it.

What the FSD does is something that is not proved by any of the accepted science in that field. Even NASA states that, regarding FTL travel, "The bulk of scientific knowledge concludes that it’s impossible", which makes sense since the news about the Electromagnetic Drive or what they've purported to have done or attempted to do is neither confirmed nor peer-reviewed.

Yet Elite: Dangerous makes the currently impossible possible in its futuristic science-fiction setting. What that means is that if they can explain away this one impossibility with some science-fiction theories, then they can do the same with any obstacle that real science may put in the way of any mechanic they propose.

The long and short of it is, they can do whatever they want in their game, and continue to draw from science-fiction to justify it whenever they feel they need to, which they may not.

 

[Misty_Dark]

I am so very glad you don't design games.

Clearly you find perfection in the current mechanic.

I recommend that you never do core mining, never use the fss, never use engineering, never use an srv, never use an slf, never fly in a wing, never use multicrew, never use a guardian module, since they were not part of the initial perfection of the game.

impressive, once again, you have actually nothing to say. why do you even bother?

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

what point? he came with ridiculous example of using a screwdriver as a hammer.

The point that both Danicus and I made, which is, specifically, that the supercruise travel mechanic has a very poor design for long distance travel in a game, and that taking simple steps to avoid it does not solve the problem, because:

a) They're not supposed to design game mechanics that players would usually try to avoid using (they should try to aim for the opposite).​

b) People who play this type of game will naturally want to travel long distances in space, but will want to have an engaging experience while doing it.​

It's really not a difficult point to grasp, and has nothing to do with "you're just upset because you foolishly fail to check the distance first". Seriously.... *shakes head

 

[Schmack]

The systems have every type of distance you could want. Shortening time is shortening distance. There's a reason we cannot do 2000c right out of the gate. Bypassing that to get to the hard to reach areas makes hard to reach areas pointless.

There's nothing 100,000Ls from the star that you cannot find in another system much closer. The deals for hauling goodies is because of the time required.

So I do not support anything that reduces the amount of travel time. I do support, however, being able to drop out of SC at 1 Ls instead of waiting until 1mm in some instances to be at your destination.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

The systems have every type of distance you could want. Shortening time is shortening distance. There's a reason we cannot do 2000c right out of the gate. Bypassing that to get to the hard to reach areas makes hard to reach areas pointless.

There's nothing 100,000Ls from the star that you cannot find in another system much closer. The deals for hauling goodies is because of the time required.

So I do not support anything that reduces the amount of travel time. I do support, however, being able to drop out of SC at 1 Ls instead of waiting until 1mm in some instances to be at your destination.

I have to agree that a simple cutting of time would not be an acceptable option.

As specified in some previous posts, an alternate local travel mode would have to have high skill requirements and risk levels, and maybe increase fuel costs or introduce material costs, to balance out a reduction in travel time, which would be contingent on successful use of the new mechanic.

 

[Azmuth Divarchchron]

I think you've missed the general point, or at least the spirit of it.

What the FSD does is something that is not proved by any of the accepted science in that field. Even NASA states that, regarding FTL travel, "The bulk of scientific knowledge concludes that it’s impossible", which makes sense since the news about the Electromagnetic Drive or what they've purported to have done or attempted to do is neither confirmed nor peer-reviewed.

Yet Elite: Dangerous makes the currently impossible possible in its futuristic science-fiction setting. What that means is that if they can explain away this one impossibility with some science-fiction theories, then they can do the same with any obstacle that real science may put in the way of any mechanic they propose.

The long and short of it is, they can do whatever they want in their game, and continue to draw from science-fiction to justify it whenever they feel they need to, which they may not.

I dont know where you are getting that it was concluded that FTL is impossible but Nasa's expiriments with frame dragging (which is basicaly the warping of space) proves its possible
Edit: your link wasnt working on mobile I see now that it was a page on nasa's website
Not sure who would have written that article when Nasa has already done experiments with the warping of space.

this has nothing to do with the EM drive.
this has to do with actual warping of space.
all astronomical bodies in the universe affect the 4th spatial dimension of the universe, and the FSD functions on the same principle.
such warping of the 4th spatial dimension is part of the reason why astronomical bodies only orbit in the direction of the spin of the body they orbit.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

I dont know where you are getting that it was concluded that FTL is impossible but Nasa's expiriments with frame dragging (which is basicaly the warping of space) proves its possible
Edit: your link wasnt working on mobile I see now that it was a page on nasa's website
Not sure who would have written that article when Nasa has already done experiments with the warping of space.

this has nothing to do with the EM drive.
this has to do with actual warping of space.
all astronomical bodies in the universe affect the 4th spatial dimension of the universe, and the FSD functions on the same principle.
such warping of the 4th spatial dimension is part of the reason why astronomical bodies only orbit in the direction of the spin of the body they orbit.

I assume you're referring to frame dragging that apparently causes the accretion disk around a rotating black hole to move faster than light? If so, I don't know how you can make the leap from that to the possibility of FTL ship travel, which is what we're talking about here, as there is no credible study I'm aware of that ties this discovery to a plausible, or even possible outcome, which again would explain why NASA on its website does not link its research into the warping of space with the possibility of FTL space travel, calling it impossible still, according to our current scientific knowledge.

In any case, whether it's non-existent and unproved FSD technology, or the magic of telepresence, Frontier can and will ignore real science and draw from science fiction whenever they need to justify a game mechanic, which means they can bypass any currently accepted scientific principles when designing new features or changing existing ones.

So, if someone suggests an FTL travel mechanic that for example is not subject to ambient quantum friction, Elite: Dangerous has set precedents which preclude that fact from being a valid basis for objection to the suggestion. Of course, there can be valid gameplay related reasons as to why it may not be an overall good proposal, but that's another story.