Prove it.
Show me a video of you travelling to a destination more than 20,000ls away demonstrating how “challenging and not boring” it is.
And what about when you’re not in populated space? Is it still “challenging and not boring” then too?
Increase Supercruise Acceleration and Top Speed to No More than 20 Seconds AFK
- Thread starter DrGrib
- Start date
Show me a video of you travelling to a destination more than 20,000ls away demonstrating how “challenging and not boring” it is.
And what about when you’re not in populated space? Is it still “challenging and not boring” then too?
You're underestimating how much your mission choices get gutted unless doing excessive due diligence. IE many of the non-trade or data missions (assassination, massacre, recovery, piracy etc) designate system not precise destination. So if they're in a system with a 5min plus commute potential I'd need to cull those ones.
The due diligence to find a 'base' system that doesn't fall foul of that, while moving fluidly around the game world (as it invites) is tediously lengthy. It's not as rewarding as establishing an undiscovered trade route or whatever. You're not seeking out a positive game experience, you're constantly culling out a negative one (& a load of potential positive mission experiences just to be sure...)
These cases are normal in my experience. Maybe your playstyle is the edge case, who knows
If you want, run an experiment. Move a random number of jumps away (or towards a CG or whatever). Do the due diligence. Having fun yet?
Not really between stars though right? If you've made it out of the orbital plane first they can't catch you. Short of someone pulling off a u-turn coming from the other (10 minute) direction.
I don't think so. I run missions most of the time. Actually my mission choice is usually most restricted when out mission board goes silly and starts offering mission only to Colonia.
If you want, run an experiment. Move a random number of jumps away (or towards a CG or whatever). Do the due diligence. Having fun yet?
I've operated out of a number of regions, alliance, indep, empire, fed... yes, i had fun in all those regions.
I've explained why the analogy is a poor one L. On prior threads, at length. Just because you feel an arbitrary destination extension is an enjoyable 'gamble', or gameplay, doesn't make it so for others. Or comparable to the gameplay prep, choices & gambles inherent in surviving an asymmetric combat encounter.
We've established that you don't have a problem with 5min+ dead times. So you haven't been doing the same level of due diligence that you're advocating I do. (Regarding culling all sites with such trips in the home system or surrounding ones). That would be the test.
Last edited:
Some time ago I posted a variant to this idea, that was based on pressing boost to increase acceleration and speed in supercruise at the cost of extra fuel and added turbulence to controls (with possible malfunction and module damage if the pilot wasn't able to keep the ship in line)
This idea could allow more gameplay options, since an interceptor could waste some more fuel to reach the target sooner if he was further away, it could increase the accel when leaving the gravity well of a planet, or even increase speed in deep space for a while, without being such an overpowered system. (fuel consumption and risk of damaging the ship were always present, and the more time boosting, the greater the risk of damage).
This idea could allow more gameplay options, since an interceptor could waste some more fuel to reach the target sooner if he was further away, it could increase the accel when leaving the gravity well of a planet, or even increase speed in deep space for a while, without being such an overpowered system. (fuel consumption and risk of damaging the ship were always present, and the more time boosting, the greater the risk of damage).
It isn't arbitrary, it's a dilemma, an opportunity to fail. Space is big, the game's single biggest strength is giving a sense of perspective to the galaxy. I would not want this to be discarded lightly.
I agree with Lestat's position on this, it is what it is.
I'd agree on not discarding lightly, as you guys enjoy this aspect.
If you can accept the principle that not enjoying 5min+ zero-gameplay stints is a valid player reaction too, then you'd see that it's no longer a rewarding choice for us. It's a 'choice' between 'fail' & 'fail'. (IE fail the mission or fail to have fun). With no skilled deployment of game mechanics that could at least make either fail engaging, or flip it to a win, its poor game design from our perspective.
Hence why I offer up the 'win win' attempt of my tether idea etc. Fun choices for me, fun choices for you
Last edited:
I'd say no to increasing supercruise speeds without some major associated drawback (sufficient to make you think twice about using it, wherein the risk or economic damage is proportional to the time saved).
Long supercruise times aren't just about perspective and making the universe feel big, they produce an important balance lever for gameplay decisions. Do you take the short hop for a mere pittance, or do you accept that mission to Hutton orbital for a good payout? The long travel times ensure that remote locations are actually remote, making them rare places to visit for the majority of players.
However, I do agree that supercruise is a bit sparse in terms of actual gameplay. But rather than strip it out and make the game head even more down the route of instant gratification, they should instead add additional gameplay. Make it so that you need to avoid dust clouds, make stellar phenomena a thing, make the gravity wells far less localised etc. While they are at it, they should probably rework/revamp interdiction mechanics so that they are actually relevant. The real problem is a lack of things to do and consider in supercruise, not the time it takes.
Long supercruise times aren't just about perspective and making the universe feel big, they produce an important balance lever for gameplay decisions. Do you take the short hop for a mere pittance, or do you accept that mission to Hutton orbital for a good payout? The long travel times ensure that remote locations are actually remote, making them rare places to visit for the majority of players.
However, I do agree that supercruise is a bit sparse in terms of actual gameplay. But rather than strip it out and make the game head even more down the route of instant gratification, they should instead add additional gameplay. Make it so that you need to avoid dust clouds, make stellar phenomena a thing, make the gravity wells far less localised etc. While they are at it, they should probably rework/revamp interdiction mechanics so that they are actually relevant. The real problem is a lack of things to do and consider in supercruise, not the time it takes.
Then all we are doing is saying you don't like 5 minute travel times and i'm fine with them. There is no argument to be had here, only expression of preference.
I mean, maybe i'm misunderstanding what you mean by "same level of due dilligence". You mean i should look for a place to work out of where there are only missions to places with travel times of less than 5 mins? Ummm... no, i don't need to, because i'm fine with 5 min of travel time, although its not that common anyway. 5 mins is already travel times of over 10k ls, which is pretty rare.
My home system station is 7k ls out, it takes me less than 5 mins to reach. And that's a pretty bad system.
I've got nothing against your preference being different to mine. You just seem to be intent on proving long travel times are everywhere.
Yes exactly. That's what you're advocating I do to resolve the issue. I'm suggesting it is in itself not hugely fun, and so not a satisfying solution.
It's cool that we appreciate different preferences exist at least, and have some validity. Not always a platform that's achieved in discussions over transit times
I'd agree on not discarding lightly, as you guys enjoy this aspect.
If you can accept the principle that not enjoying 5min+ zero-gameplay stints is a valid player reaction too, then you'd see that it's no longer a rewarding choice for us. It's a 'choice' between 'fail' & 'fail'. (IE fail the mission or fail to have fun). With no skilled deployment of game mechanics that could at least make either fail engaging, or flip it to a win, its poor game design from our perspective.
Hence why I offer up the 'win win' attempt of my tether idea etc. Fun choices for me, fun choices for you
I am writing this post while on my way to Prospectors Rest in Kuk. By all means stay in the shallow end of the pool. You have a choice, I have a choice. There is enough choice to go around, there is no need for the stuff others are happy worth to be removed or made worthless to suit your skillset when the status quo suits more variety.
Arrived now, ganker free engineering here we come
I am writing this post while on my way to Prospectors Rest in Kuk. By all means stay in the shallow end of the pool. You have a choice, I have a choice. There is enough choice to go around, there is no need for the stuff others are happy worth to be removed or made worthless to suit your skillset when the status quo suits more variety.
Arrived now, ganker free engineering here we come
This is a bizarrely snide and errant response given I'm advocating solutions that preserve your 'deep' game preference of writing on the internet while playing a game
It seems I respect and understand your preference, but you do not return the favour. Ho hum.
Last edited:
Yes exactly. That's what you're advocating I do to resolve the issue. I'm suggesting it is in itself not hugely fun, and so not a satisfying solution.
It's cool that we appreciate different preferences exist at least, and have some validity. Not always a platform that's achieved in discussions over transit times
Ah, well, i'm going to pass on that. I mean, where i operate out of, most flights are under 5 mins anyway, except for a couple of systems that i know about.
Last edited:
You dont know me from Adam or what my life consist of or what time I have available to me. In fact, you know nearly nothing about me at all. I suggest you quit telling others in here what is or isnt in their lives. Fact is, you dont have a clue about me or what I do have or not have time for. If I have family, friends, or even a pet. So, tell me again how I dont have family, friends, a job or a social life and how I have endless time to "stare at screens". Because I really want to hear all these interesting "facts" again. Oh, and tell me one more time how wrong I am too. Sure dont want to leave the icing off the cake.
Errr...what? So you are literally writing a message on the forums while waiting for your ship to arrive at it's destination because the game is too slow, boring, and unchallenging to keep you engaged?I am writing this post while on my way to Prospectors Rest in Kuk. By all means stay in the shallow end of the pool. You have a choice, I have a choice. There is enough choice to go around, there is no need for the stuff others are happy worth to be removed or made worthless to suit your skillset when the status quo suits more variety.
Arrived now, ganker free engineering here we come
And you think this means that players who want a faster, more engaging skill-based game just want it easy?
Have I got that right?
If so I've got news for you - you're the one who's afraid to move out of the "shallow end of the pool".
Jeez dude - calm down. Read your post I was originally replying to. Actually, I'll just quote your original post here for clarity:
For someone who gets so defensive when people make wrong assumptions you, you sure make a lot of wrong assumptions about other people.
What I find funny is A lot of players are making Valid reason against people who want a Short cut.
Please enlighten us what did you say on the Prior Tread? We like to know.