Increase Supercruise Acceleration and Top Speed to No More than 20 Seconds AFK

[Rat Catcher]

Yep, loads thanks. Including playing the original. Decades of research

• The kinetic end of the mission scale are particularly prone to the surprise destination reveal issue. IE assassinations, wetwork, salvage under fire, piracy etc. Does that seem like a sensible arrangement to you?

Yes, I played the original when it was released also

In answer to the above question one can only say 'yes', the mission will be wherever designated, be it in only 100Ls or 100KLs+, unlike a 'standard' mission where every piece of information is available on take-up.

I'm not unsympathetic entirely to the suggestion, only pointing out that the game has its own unique foibles

Brilliant pre-release trailer! I was a bit busy at the time ED was kickstarted or would have joined you in the very early game too.

 

[Darkfyre99]

As I stated in another thread (in DD) I'd be okay with subtle tweaks to the supercruise acceleration rates around gravity wells that rewards skill, I think the OP asks too much in this case.

Agreed. The “problem” (I use the term loosely) is that the way Supercruise currently works, any tweaks that can decrease skillful travel times will increase “set it and forget it” travel times. Likewise, with the current strength of the mass lock effect, any further attempts to decrease “set it and forget it” travel times will further increase skillful travel times, probably to the point there’s little benefit anymore.

 

[Darkfyre99]

You wrongly conflate ‘faster’ with ‘easier’.

If you think staring at a screen doing nothing for 10 mins is ‘hard’, then I’ve got news for you - it’s not. It’s just time consuming and boring.

For those of us with families, friends, jobs, and social lives (I.e. those of us without as much free time as you), we think that those of you who rely on the uneventful long journeys in SuperCruise to get ahead are just playing the easy game.

Sorry, but “think of those with family” won’t wash, because I average about five hours a week due to family, friends, and work, and if anything I want Supercruise to return to its Alpha state, when travel times for skillful piloting were shorter than they are today. Four minutes, from launch to docking, is not a long a long time IMO, nor is five minutes, which is how long it takes to get to about 90% of the stations in the Bubble. It isn’t even enough time for players or NPCs to interdict me most of the time.

If I find myself myself faced by an unexpected long Supercruise journey, then somewhere along the line I’ve failed: failed at doing my research about my destination, failed at scouting my area of operation, or failed in my cost/benefit analysis.

 

[Darkfyre99]

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?

Personally, I consider finding... or more accurately shaping, a new theater of operations to be a lot of fun. Scouting local systems, determining which factions to support and which to oppose, is half the challenge of moving into a new area. That’s one of the reasons I’d move every three months or so.

 

[VR Golgot]

Personally, I consider finding... or more accurately shaping, a new theater of operations to be a lot of fun. Scouting local systems, determining which factions to support and which to oppose, is half the challenge of moving into a new area. That’s one of the reasons I’d move every three months or so.

Yep I agree, it can be fun. However, the game does invite you to roam. And it's in these free-form modes of play, when I'm roving, that these issues particularly bite. IE checking out community events, sniffing out opportunities on route to somewhere else etc. Having to do full due diligence on every system and its neighbours becomes more of a chore in those circumstances, when what you fancy is just doing some merc work for a bit then following the next scent.

(Again, if there was a system like my tether suggestion, which gamified these roadblocks - IE made me make risk/reward calls on whether to pursue an opportunity at the second star etc, the whole thing would work again. The roaming, the danger, and the scents to be sniffed would all be dots linked up with gameplay. Just ones that might snowball into my death if I get carried away, checking out one too many opportunities with a tether-trashed hull )

 

[Riverside]

Personally, I consider finding... or more accurately shaping, a new theater of operations to be a lot of fun. Scouting local systems, determining which factions to support and which to oppose, is half the challenge of moving into a new area. That’s one of the reasons I’d move every three months or so.

I have become more sedentary over the past year or so but yes, finding a home region (temporary or otherwise) is, well maybe not 'fun' but satisfying.

One of my criteria for my current home base was no RES sites and a >1,000ls journey to the main station. That keeps it nice & quiet, like choosing to live on a cul-de-sac in the suburbs rather than a flat in town.

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

Agreed. The “problem” (I use the term loosely) is that the way Supercruise currently works, any tweaks that can decrease skillful travel times will increase “set it and forget it” travel times. Likewise, with the current strength of the mass lock effect, any further attempts to decrease “set it and forget it” travel times will further increase skillful travel times, probably to the point there’s little benefit anymore.

I think FDev failed at explaining supercruise core concepts and completely gave up with supercruise assist. Nowhere is it explained how to properly build speed spiraling out of the sun, nor is it explained how to use gravity wells to brake and approach below 6s ETA from several ls afar.

I'm totally agreeing with you that any tweaks could potentially make SC even more dull and allow everyone to set a straight line and forget. But I think it's worse than that. I suspect FDev already tweaked the model without even knowing nor testing enough to properly know how it would play out, and couldnt even gather metrics about supercruise gameplay that could allow some direction to change its design.

 

[Darkfyre99]

I don't know, i think there might be a case to be made for smaller ships having faster SC speeds. Make it a trade off between speed vs profit.

Smaller ships may not have superior “speed”, but they do have superior maneuverability, which can reduce travel times if you take advantage of gravity braking. Since they can turn faster, you can stay closer to a planet or moon during your braking maneuver, which in turns mean a greater braking effect, which means less time arriving at your destination.

 

[nanite2000]

If I find myself myself faced by an unexpected long Supercruise journey, then somewhere along the line I’ve failed: failed at doing my research about my destination, failed at scouting my area of operation, or failed in my cost/benefit analysis.

So you’re effectively saying you would never take on a long SuperCruise journey if given the choice?

If so, that just reinforces my opinion that those who rely on the uneventful long journeys in SuperCruise to get ahead of others are just playing the easy game.

 

[Riverside]

So you’re effectively saying you would never take on a long SuperCruise journey if given the choice?

If so, that just reinforces my opinion that those who rely on the uneventful long journeys in SuperCruise to get ahead of others are just playing the easy game.

Kind of, yeah. I'll do mission that suit my strengths, so effectively I'm taking the easy option of a long trip over what may be less easy (for me) like a base assault.

I'm treating the terms 'easy' and 'being good at' as interchangeable here.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Smaller ships may not have superior “speed”, but they do have superior maneuverability, which can reduce travel times if you take advantage of gravity braking. Since they can turn faster, you can stay closer to a planet or moon during your braking maneuver, which in turns mean a greater braking effect, which means less time arriving at your destination.

Its a fair point. I sometimes use planetary braking in small ships. I tried it once in a type 9.... i think you can guess how well that went.

 

[Darkfyre99]

So you’re effectively saying you would never take on a long SuperCruise journey if given the choice?

If so, that just reinforces my opinion that those who rely on the uneventful long journeys in SuperCruise to get ahead of others are just playing the easy game.

Nope. I've taken quite a frew long Supercruise journeys. It's just that when do take a long Supercruise journey, I know ahead of time I'll be taking it, so I can plan ahead and use that time wisely. There are a lot of things I do during longer Supercruise journeys that, if I restricted myself to short trips only, can only be done safely or efficiently while docked.

Currently, I'm far away from the Bubble, so I can use the longer Supercruise trips to further refine my route back to the Bubble. Back before 3.3, when I what I primarily did was disrupting Federation systems via the BGS and Powerplay, I'd use the longer Supercruise trips to examine my immediate surroundings, especially when I'm in an unfamiliar area; examine areas I may be working in the future in order to create book marks; and other similar tasks.

 

[VR SenseiMatty]

This is my counter-proposal to

• Hyperspace Jump within system?

Advantages of this over In-System Jumps

• Can still enjoy smooth in-system transition between astronomical bodies
• Preserves interdiction mechanic
• Can still reward missions for longer distance from star
• Is much easier for Frontier to implement

Reducing Boredom

This reduces the problem of boredom which is explained articulately and fairly by Obsidian Ant here

• Should In-System Space Travel Be Fun?
• My Problem With Long Travel Times In Star Citizen And Elite Dangerous

Sense of Scale

Within those videos, Obsidian Ant provides an excellent rebuttal to people who think long travel times are necessary to demonstrate a sense of scale in space.

To summarize: travel time isn't the only way (or the best way, imo) to convey scale and Space Engine retains a sense of scale while allowing travel speeds of 320 million light years per second.

My opinion is that the Milky Way galaxy has such a massive number of star systems that even traveling at the extreme speeds of Space Engine can't possibly diminish its sense of scale. There are just too many stars to travel to. Inserting long in-system travel between these traversals of star systems actually detracts from our ability to appreciate that particular sense of scale because we spend less time visiting more star systems and more time staring blankly at a screen traveling in-system.

Acceptance Criteria - No more than 20 seconds of AFK

If there is ever a point at which a player can take their hands off the controller or keyboard and watch a full 20 seconds of video while still safely reaching their destination, the in-system travel is too long. So that could be the criteria that Frontier could use for testing: can you take your hands off the controller or keyboard to watch a full 20 seconds of video without looking at your screen and still safely reach any destination within a system? If so, the acceleration and top speed still need to be increased.

Why 20 seconds? That is a short enough time that it (hopefully, pending testing) isn't boring but is still smooth enough to appreciate the transition between astronomical bodies.

It also allows time for the interdiction mechanism to still work. Interdiction can scale to the distance between astronomical bodies. The longer the distance between bodies, the faster the travel time between them. Interdictors would scale with travelers and travel the same speeds.

20 seconds to go EVERYWHERE is a bit too short. This means remove sense of scale because it doesn't matter where you go, it will always take max 20 seconds.
So no to 20 seconds propsal but YES to improve acceleration. 2001c is a value that we should be able to see more frequently. Also leaving planets, once out of orbital flight the acceleration should be much much faster.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Its a fair point. I sometimes use planetary braking in small ships. I tried it once in a type 9.... i think you can guess how well that went.

I've deliberately crashed my Type-9 into planets, or used an emergency drop, because that ship makes snails look agile in comparison, and it's still faster than the "set it and forget it" method. As we say at Stevenson Whirlwind Adventures, "If you're not willing to damage your ship, you're not really in a hurry."

 

[Ser Xav]

Already exists, the multiple light blue circles you see around bodies are a visual representation of gravity wells.

I'm not sure I've seen / noticed this before! Can you point this out to me please? Many thanks.

 

[Hank]

I was confused by the OP topic with the "AFK" part. I agree there can be improvements to SC and long in-system travel. I go AFK all the time for well over 20 seconds; sometime as much as 20 minutes - woohoo. Living dangerously? or I know when and in what direction I can go w/o my hands on the KB/M.
GL HF

 

[Lestat]

We still have 65,000 stations 90% that Cater to short distance stations while people here are complaining about the 10% that caters to Players like me who love the distance.

It still comes down to. If the mission too far then discards the mission. Just like the combat mission if it too hard then discard the mission. Or 7,000 tons of cargo trade mission and you find out It could take 20+ trips or more. Plus distance. If it too far then discard the mission. It comes down to you doing your research.

Start helping your self if you start using Common sense Like using Galaxy map on mission board before accepting missions. If there no detail for that system mission and you Accept the mission you accepted the risk it will be a long mission. I hope your account for Credit earn before accepting missions. We also have Third party sites that could help also.

Some people want you to think Laziness is a type of skill and they are asking for short cuts. They cry Netflix or youtube. Because they don't take their time to research a mission.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

We still have 65,000 stations 90% that Cater to short distance stations while people here are complaining about the 10% that caters to Players like me who love the distance.

It still comes down to. If the mission too far then discards the mission. Just like the combat mission if it too hard then discard the mission. Or 7,000 tons of cargo trade mission and you find out It could take 20+ trips or more. Plus distance. If it too far then discard the mission. It comes down to you doing your research.

Start helping your self if you start using Common sense Like using Galaxy map on mission board before accepting missions. If there no detail for that system mission and you Accept the mission you accepted the risk it will be a long mission. I hope your account for Credit earn before accepting missions. We also have Third party sites that could help also.

Some people want you to think Laziness is a type of skill and they are asking for short cuts. They cry Netflix or youtube. Because they don't take their time to research a mission.

So... you're not keen on the idea then?

 

[nanite2000]

We still have 65,000 stations 90% that Cater to short distance stations while people here are complaining about the 10% that caters to Players like me who love the distance.

What is your evidence for this claim?

It still comes down to. If the mission too far then discards the mission. Just like the combat mission if it too hard then discard the mission. Or 7,000 tons of cargo trade mission and you find out It could take 20+ trips or more. Plus distance. If it too far then discard the mission. It comes down to you doing your research.

Yes, we already know that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's request in any way.

Also, what if you're not doing a mission?

Some people want you to think Laziness is a type of skill and they are asking for short cuts. They cry Netflix or youtube. Because they don't take their time to research a mission.

If laziness was a skill, you'd be the most skilled player in the game Lestat! After all, I can't think of anything more lazy than someone who thinks sitting there staring at their screen doing absolutely nothing for upwards of half an hour constitutes 'skill'.

 

[Riverside]

If laziness was a skill, you'd be the most skilled player in the game Lestat! After all, I can't think of anything more lazy than someone who thinks sitting there staring at their screen doing absolutely nothing for upwards of half an hour constitutes 'skill'.

How often are you doing runs where you do nothing for that long? I realise it is possible for supercruise journeys to be long enough for that but it's hardly routine unless the player is looking to stubbornly prove a point about how boringly it is possible to play.