Allow multiple star system jumps.

[nanite2000]

This does not solve the problem, as there will be no meaningful long distance bonuses then! and if they are solely based on their "closest" star, then these missions would pay less when you take into the extra time to do the "jump" to the other star.

Not even your you can run more mission during the same time will make up for it. because if that would have been the case, there would not have been any gold rush for stacking missions to far away stations. buyt since the basic mission payouts, was to low to match the bonus earned on the far away destinations, despite hjaving to account for the time spent in super cruise. And this is even before we start to look at the propsed game loop for thjis....so instead of player opting to go on this long super cruise journey, they should now be filled with lots of busy works that involves ALOT of loading screens...
Lets look at the proposed game loop.

At station, stack missions to destination, leave station, jump to other system, loading screen, super cruise, drop to normal space, loading screen, dock, turn in mission, leave station, jump to previous system, loading screen, super cruise, drop to normal space, loading screen, dock REPEAT

And this does not include any mechanics/time for the proposed star-to-star travelling... which sounds like there would be another loading screen in practice..

So your issue is that players will actually have to play the game, rather than vacuum their house to earn in-game credits?

Yea, again I’m having a hard time getting upset over that.

as for the extra time required to do an in-system jump - either scale mission payouts to account for that extra time required, or allow players to choose the destination star before they jump into the system (since you can already tell which additional stars are present in a system from the galaxy map, even for unexplored systems) so that there is no additional time requirement.

 

[Misty_Dark]

So your issue is that players will actually have to play the game, rather than vacuum their house to earn in-game credits?

Yea, again I’m having a hard time getting upset over that.

as for the extra time required to do an in-system jump - either scale mission payouts to account for that extra time required, or allow players to choose the destination star before they jump into the system (since you can already tell which additional stars are present in a system from the galaxy map, even for unexplored systems) so that there is no additional time requirement.

Ok, smartie pants,

show us the DATA for what you says is true....

Show us the data, that the earnings per hour from stacking missions to a system that has a destination over 300 000 LS from the main star, with stacking missions to a destination that is less than 1000 LS from the main star.

[edit]
Also add do a time study on what you do spend your time on.. so we can see where you spend most of the time when you "play" the game, in either of these situations

 

[nanite2000]

Ok, smartie pants,

show us the DATA for what you says is true....

Show us the data, that the earnings per hour from stacking missions to a system that has a destination over 300 000 LS from the main star, with stacking missions to a destination that is less than 1000 LS from the main star.

[edit]
Also add do a time study on what you do spend your time on.. so we can see where you spend most of the time when you "play" the game, in either of these situations

Since I can’t show you data for something that doesn’t exist yet, it will be difficult. I will show you the data after FDev have implemented the modified mission payouts I proposed.

I hope that’s OK?

As for how I currently spend my time - from my data set of 1 (I.e. me), I can tell you that I spend most of my time in SuperCruise just sitting and waiting to reach my destination. I’d rather spend that time doing something more meaningful in-game though.

judging by how often people request improvements to SuperCruise and/or in-system jumps on this forum, I would say that lots of other people feel the same way.

TL;DR: superCruise is time-consuming and boring. It doesn’t have to be.

 

[Greasetrap42]

So your issue is that players will actually have to play the game, rather than vacuum their house to earn in-game credits?

I will explain using simple speak.

Current Game:
There are two types of missions. (i) Short distance - Fast but small rewards. (ii) Long distance - long but big rewards.

OP Proposed Idea:
Remove long distance missions.

Net Improvement to Game:
Nothing. All we got are short missions. We used to have long missions, but now they are gone. Why? Because someone wanted long mission payouts easier. But now those payouts are gone. Because everything is a short mission.


--->> If you want to string together a bunch of short missions you can do that right now. Most players including myself frequently do this. You don't need to change game mechanics to achieve this.

 

[varonica]

I like how you quoted all my posts out of context, well done that man!

 

[JTFireblaze]

Is the tl;dr of the problem "Long supercruise times bad between stars far away" and "microjumps"?

Passing long wait times during supercruise.

I think this is a good opportunity since space legs A.K.A Odyssey is coming out. Let us be able to at least stretch our legs, drink coffee form those coffee machine looking things. I believe this is an easy implementation using already existing features. Simple "minigames" that we can do to...

forums.frontier.co.uk

There was some really good discussion over how a "Supercruise boost" feature could work towards the end of this thread.

Leave regular supercruise exactly how it is now. But:

• Add Supercruise Boost feature
• When enabled you rapidly accelerate up to 2001C much, much quicker than you do now. Possibly faster? I don't know. Numbers can always be tweaked.
• Burns up fuel at a faster rate
• Your ship course can fluctuate because of disruptions in travel (think how Neutron stars or interdictions work)
• You would need to course correct to prevent being ripped out of travel or damaging ship
• You could have to adjust throttle to an ever changing "blue zone" to prevent damage as well

It would promote quite active gameplay in order to reward faster travel times, with risk of faster fuel usage and damaging your ship. Make it so you can only activate the feature when you're maybe 2001Ls away from a parent star or something, I dunno. And it drops you down to "normal" supercruise when you're 2001Ls from the destination. So you can still get interdicted when nearby a star.

You'd still have long distance missions, you can still cruise to them at "normal" speeds. But you can risk fuel and hull by enabling the boosters.

It solves a lot of the concerns people have with microjumps being overpowered without risk.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Since I can’t show you data for something that doesn’t exist yet, it will be difficult. I will show you the data after FDev have implemented the modified mission payouts I proposed.

I hope that’s OK?

As for how I currently spend my time - from my data set of 1 (I.e. me), I can tell you that I spend most of my time in SuperCruise just sitting and waiting to reach my destination. I’d rather spend that time doing something more meaningful in-game though.

judging by how often people request improvements to SuperCruise and/or in-system jumps on this forum, I would say that lots of other people feel the same way.

TL;DR: superCruise is time-consuming and boring. It doesn’t have to be.

So you are basically admitting you are just making stuff up without actually having anything remotely solid to back these up with. Good to know.


And if going by your conclusion in TL/DR, then what would be left of the game if we remove just about anything players complain about!
So lets go with that idea and see how this game would look like

• super cruise, remove travel times, since players are upset about it. So Enter system, select destination and now you are there, no need to worry about super cruise distance etc.
• Next we have FSD jump range, there plenty of players, upset about having to make many FSD jump to get to far away places, so lets remove this limitation, and we can jump from any system to anyt other system in just one jump.
• unwanted PvP, also known as greifing, there are plenty that dislikes that, so remove PvP altogether...
• Combat, we have plenty of players, who thinks combat is terrible, so of course, we remove combat.
• Exploration, what a terrible waste of time, thinks plenty of players, so of course we have to remove it.
• SRV driving on planets, there are is shortage in players complaining about how booring this activity is, once again, we remove it
• Mining, gone
• Engineers, gone
• BGS , gone
• Poowerplay, gone
• Thargoids, gone
• Guardians, gone
• Missions, gone
• Game modes. We have the re-occuring Open Only, which of course means we have to remove Solo and Private Groups. But then we have the co-op players base, that wants to have Open PvE, but not at the expense on the existing open... and we know the Open Only players are totally against Open PvE, as it is very likely going to be more popular, and also all the juicy PvE targets will obviously choose Open PvE... so Open would be the only game mode left, phew, but since so many other suggestions is about removing unwanted PvP, hence Open PvE suggestions, then we would get an open mode without player interaction!

So what would be for us to engage with in the game?

 

[Greasetrap42]

Since I can’t show you data for something that doesn’t exist yet, it will be difficult.

?? Lots and lots of missions are available for you to perform analytics on. Go ahead, knock yourself out.

From experience the best method for optimizing rewards is to take advantage of the missions offered. Sometimes it is best to stack local fast-run missions that loop in a circuit. But sometimes you can stack several ludicrous missions to some far-away outpost, far outpacing the rewards of the local circuit runs. No data spreadsheets required to learn this. (similar concept whether trucking, kill missions, etc.)

You are adamantly arguing that the later style of mission be removed. Because your style of gameplay is best, and you don't like long distance travel.
--> The easier solution already exists: Don't take long distance missions.

 

[nanite2000]

So you are basically admitting you are just making stuff up without actually having anything remotely solid to back these up with. Good to know.

If by “making stuff up”, you mean I’ve proposed a suggestion that FDev could implement to help rebalance mission payouts if micro-jumps were introduced, then yes - I was "making stuff up", just like every other single poster in the Suggestions forum, including your own (quoted below):

And if going by your conclusion in TL/DR, then what would be left of the game if we remove just about anything players complain about!
So lets go with that idea and see how this game would look like

• super cruise, remove travel times, since players are upset about it. So Enter system, select destination and now you are there, no need to worry about super cruise distance etc.

Nobody asked for that. We only asked to be able to jump to other stars.

the rest of your post is hyperbolic nonsense that no one has even asked for, so not worth responding to.

• Next we have FSD jump range, there plenty of players, upset about having to make many FSD jump to get to far away places, so lets remove this limitation, and we can jump from any system to anyt other system in just one jump.
• unwanted PvP, also known as greifing, there are plenty that dislikes that, so remove PvP altogether...
• Combat, we have plenty of players, who thinks combat is terrible, so of course, we remove combat.
• Exploration, what a terrible waste of time, thinks plenty of players, so of course we have to remove it.
• SRV driving on planets, there are is shortage in players complaining about how booring this activity is, once again, we remove it
• Mining, gone
• Engineers, gone
• BGS , gone
• Poowerplay, gone
• Thargoids, gone
• Guardians, gone
• Missions, gone
• Game modes. We have the re-occuring Open Only, which of course means we have to remove Solo and Private Groups. But then we have the co-op players base, that wants to have Open PvE, but not at the expense on the existing open... and we know the Open Only players are totally against Open PvE, as it is very likely going to be more popular, and also all the juicy PvE targets will obviously choose Open PvE... so Open would be the only game mode left, phew, but since so many other suggestions is about removing unwanted PvP, hence Open PvE suggestions, then we would get an open mode without player interaction!

So what would be for us to engage with in the game?

 

[nanite2000]

I like how you quoted all my posts out of context, well done that man!

Explain what I quoted out of context. What parts did I leave out that changes the intent or meaning of your comments?

 

[Misty_Dark]

If by “making stuff up”, you mean I’ve proposed a suggestion that FDev could implement to help rebalance mission payouts if micro-jumps were introduced, then yes - I was "making stuff up", just like every other single poster in the Suggestions forum, including your own (quoted below):

Nobody asked for that. We only asked to be able to jump to other stars.

the rest of your post is hyperbolic nonsense that no one has even asked for, so not worth responding to.

No, you made it up, that you can make as much credits doing multiple SMALLER runs in the same time it would take to make a long run!


Nobody asked for, so do you say that those things I wrote, have NOT been asked for? And you fail to get the point.. if your wish for change should be made to the game, then what about the others? you have already iriculed one player that takes advantage and like the current system.


So are you seriously saying that noone have ever suggested to make this game OPEN ONLY? Or people have requested to remove Engineering etc etc? but with selective reading, of course ytou will fail to understand the implication if you get YOUR WILL and remove long super cruise journeys, that OTHERS might get their WISHES of stuff to remove from the game, and what would we be left with if enough stuff got removed?


What hyperbole? I am not the one making stuff up, taking stuff out of context and then get upset when being called out on it.

 

[nanite2000]

No, you made it up, that you can make as much credits doing multiple SMALLER runs in the same time it would take to make a long run!

Maybe not right now, but you could if FDev implemented changes to mission payouts to account for in-system jumps (which is what I proposed).

Even if you couldn't, it's not as though credits are hard to come by these days, is it?

Nobody asked for, so do you say that those things I wrote, have NOT been asked for?

Not in this thread they haven't, no.

To be honest, I stopped reading after the first couple of items in your list because I don't think anybody has ever seriously asked for PVP or combat to be removed entirely anyway.

So it seemed like you were just ranting and it would have been a waste of everyone's time to address any of the items on it.

And you fail to get the point.. if your wish for change should be made to the game, then what about the others? you have already iriculed one player that takes advantage and like the current system.

I'm not going to derail this thread and waste everyone's time addressing changes no one has asked for in this thread. If you are seriously asking for those changes in your list, create a new thread for them and discuss their merits there.

So are you seriously saying that noone have ever suggested to make this game OPEN ONLY? Or people have requested to remove Engineering etc etc? but with selective reading, of course ytou will fail to understand the implication if you get YOUR WILL and remove long super cruise journeys, that OTHERS might get their WISHES of stuff to remove from the game, and what would we be left with if enough stuff got removed?

Like I said, I didn't get that far down your list before I gave up reading. The Open-only and removal of engineers suggestions have all been addressed in their respective threads, where they belong.

To discuss them here would be off-topic, and I don't care enough about those topics to discuss them anyway.

What hyperbole? I am not the one making stuff up, taking stuff out of context and then get upset when being called out on it.

You could have fooled me...

 

[Greasetrap42]

judging by how often people request improvements to SuperCruise and/or in-system jumps on this forum, I would say that lots of other people feel the same way.

I believe Misty_Dark is responding to this statement. Just because an idea comes up many times doesn't mean its a good idea. If FD bowed to every idea that comes up lots of times there would be no game left.

An idea must stand on its own merits. There are lots of ideas that get re-hashed over-and-over-and-over on these forums. That doesn't qualify them as good ideas.

The OP's idea is logically flawed.

I do agree that flying long distance in supercruise is not engaging. It should be made more engaging. Simply replacing ship flight with fast travel is a cop-out for a flight sim game.

 

[varonica]

Explain what I quoted out of context. What parts did I leave out that changes the intent or meaning of your comments?

Maybe everything I was replying to and that was posted, you can't just pull stuff out of a discussion, even I don't know preceded the quotes because I couldn't be bothered going to look it up, how do you think people just coming into the thread are going to read it. Let me refresh your understanding of out of context, if you use a quote with no surrounding or preceding discussion then that quote is out of context regardless of what meaning you think it has, it has no meaning because there is nothing to relate it to, it is out of context.

You may think it means something, but no-one else has any idea. I don't mind you quoting my posts, you can't just post a section out of a post without context;

I can’t show you data

“making stuff up”

See how that looks? No context.

Just for the record I am firmly against intra-system jumps by regular ships.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Maybe not right now, but you could if FDev implemented changes to mission payouts to account for in-system jumps (which is what I proposed).

Even if you couldn't, it's not as though credits are hard to come by these days, is it?

Not in this thread they haven't, no.

To be honest, I stopped reading after the first couple of items in your list because I don't think anybody has ever seriously asked for PVP or combat to be removed entirely anyway.

So it seemed like you were just ranting and it would have been a waste of everyone's time to address any of the items on it.

I'm not going to derail this thread and waste everyone's time addressing changes no one has asked for in this thread. If you are seriously asking for those changes in your list, create a new thread for them and discuss their merits there.

Like I said, I didn't get that far down your list before I gave up reading. The Open-only and removal of engineers suggestions have all been addressed in their respective threads, where they belong.

To discuss them here would be off-topic, and I don't care enough about those topics to discuss them anyway.

You could have fooled me...

So if credits is not hard to come by, then we can use the same argument that flying long distance is not that hard either... so what is the problem there then? it is not like that anybody is FORCING you to do those long journeys. that is a player choice. Just like players can choose what game mode to play in, if they into exploring or into combat and thus engage in those activities.



And if you are going to suggests stuff that affects players the enjoy doing these things, then you better have more solid arguments for WHY this should be changed.because, and this seems to be particularly hard for you to grasp, if you make suggestions that you expect to be implemented without any concern what other players think about your suggestion, then it this should be equally be applied to all suggestions regardless of WHAT you think about them. that is why I added that lists that you clearly did not bother to read, about how absurd that kind of thinking is. because there so many different kind of players in Elite and we all enjoy different parts of it. and if you are going to remove some parts that some player like, they are going to be rightfully upset. So they might make their own suggestions to improve the game back to what they like, and change something else that you considers to be a bad change. And this is a vicious cycle that we are doomed to repeat as long as long people, like you, are willingly to disregard other players opinions.


Just look at how you ridioculed trhat other player, how he like to play that part of the game. what make you so much superior and makes that kind of bullying OK? that is prettyu coward tactic to avoid having to own up to your suggestions that affect other player.

 

[nanite2000]

Just look at how you ridioculed trhat other player, how he like to play that part of the game. what make you so much superior and makes that kind of bullying OK? that is prettyu coward tactic to avoid having to own up to your suggestions that affect other player.

Oh jeez...

Who did I ridicule? Who did I bully? Have you confirmed with that person that they actually felt ridiculed or bullied by whatever it is I said to them? Did they alert the mods? Have you alerted the mods?

Mods - do you think I'm bullying and ridiculing other players?

Personally, I think you're just ranting again, and so I don't think there is any benefit in me trying to respond to any of your points until you calm down.

 

[StockardRoss]

before jumping in chains. think about what u need for the chain jumping, oh yes the fuel. how do you want to manage the fuel and refill of it. full automatic fuel scooping ???? beware of the heat level u get. so forget the chain jumping. or auto dock at next station and refill autostart and next jump ??? before jumping afterall clear the fuel stuff und refill option.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Nanite, You are avoiding defending your ideas with sound reasoning.

• Mission rewards are generally related to effort, risk, time. A cmdr will not get long-distance rewards if given fast travel. Because its no longer a long-distance mission.
• Replacing long distance missions with additional short distance missions doesn't add anything to the game. It just removes long distance missions.
• Currently a cmdr can choose to ignore long distance missions if don't like them.
• Currently there is no requirement for a cmdr to perform long distance SC travel. (edit: maybe some specific exceptions? can't think quickly.)
• Currently a cmdr can stack multiple missions to single remote location for major payday. One single run far outperforming many local hops.
• The game currently offers short and long missions. You can perform a numerical analysis on payouts if you wish.
• Just because OP's idea has been posted many times does not mean its a good idea.

The only advantages I see to the OP idea (which nobody brought up???):
1) Being able to hyperjump back to a system's primary.
Currently the fast method is jumping to another system and back again.
2) Exploration - mapping planets on secondary stars.
IMO these advantages are outweighed by the loss of long distance missions.

 

[nanite2000]

Nanite, You are avoiding defending your ideas with sound reasoning.

• Mission rewards are generally related to effort, risk, time. A cmdr will not get long-distance rewards if given fast travel. Because its no longer a long-distance mission.

The only difference with long-distance missions is the time required to complete it. They don't require any additional skill, effort, or risk than their equivalent short distance missions.

Are you concerned about not being able to make as much money if long-distance missions were removed? Because I genuinely can't understand why anyone would want to keep them otherwise.

• Replacing long distance missions with additional short distance missions doesn't add anything to the game. It just removes long distance missions.

The removal of long distance missions as a consequence of faster travel is a sacrifice I'm willing to make.

• Currently a cmdr can choose to ignore long distance missions if don't like them.
• Currently there is no requirement for a cmdr to perform long distance SC travel. (edit: maybe some specific exceptions? can't think quickly.)

I agree that players can choose to ignore long distance missions.

But I somewhat disagree that there is no requirement for players to perform long distance travel. Pirate massacre missions can very often take you into a system with a distant star leaving you travelling for hours tracking down pirate lords when they spawn at secondary stars. There's no easy way to discover this before you accept the mission, since they don't spawn until after you have arrived at the system,.

Additionally, explorers (who aren't taking any missions) often find themselves looking at distant secondary stars. I have found planets around distant secondary stars that I would like to approach up close (earth-like worlds, terraformable water worlds, landable planets with biological POI's, raw materials I need, etc...), an I have had to endure long boring SC journeys to get to them. Everything except the SC journey itself was fun.

• Currently a cmdr can stack multiple missions to single remote location for major payday. One single run far outperforming many local hops.
• The game currently offers short and long missions. You can perform a numerical analysis on payouts if you wish.

Like I said in an earlier post, I would imagine FDev could rebalance payouts to account for micro-jumps so that you wouldn't lose out so much. I don't need to compile data for this - you already told me that long-distance missions pay out way more than multiple small missions. I get that.

• Just because OP's idea has been posted many times does not mean its a good idea.

The only advantages I see to the OP idea (which nobody brought up???):
1) Being able to hyperjump back to a system's primary.
Currently the fast method is jumping to another system and back again.
2) Exploration - mapping planets on secondary stars.
IMO these advantages are outweighed by the loss of long distance missions.

IMO, the loss of long-distance missions is a small price to pay for enabling more exploration options.

I mean - I guess we just have different motivations, and so will have to agree to disagree on this.

However, I do agree with your earlier suggestion that if SuperCruise were modified so that the player could employ skill and risk (i.e introduce gameplay) to increase SuperCruise speed and shorten those long distance journeys, then that would be a good alternative that I would support.

I did previously suggested a mini-game similar to the interdiction mini-game where you have to keep your ship manually centred on the target star to increase acceleration/speed beyond the current maximum, with an increasing chance of drive damage, or being kicked out of SuperCruise, the faster you go.

But micro-jumps to secondary stars just seemed simpler to implement, especially now that Fleet Carriers have that capability.

 

[Greasetrap42]

I agree that players can choose to ignore long distance missions.

Agreed. Enough said.