The slow orbital cruise approach causes a host of problems.

We don't. Instant stop damages the FSD and hull.
Outside the game, there is no unity about what happens when an Alcubierre drive stops and if a gamma burst would kill everyone on the planet ahead or the next system over.
We had that, instant land on tourists' ground beckons. That was fixed in latest path. Which makes whole thread obsolete. FDevs clearly stated what they want in game by doing that fix.
 
Realistically, those are rookie numbers even in real space. It takes 11km/s just to get out of Earth's gravity well.
We don't have hard facts on how gravity wells affect a theoretical frame shift drive. For the game, it's just points on a curve that someone defined once and that could be changed.
Well typically when OC starts velocities are over 100 km/s. Thats way over what real spaceships NOT intended for crashing their target spectucularly go. From there to 2.5 km/s just before glide starts. Which btw. is over three times faster than typical rifle bullets muzzle velocity.
 
Why not just have the game played from the station menu?

Choose next mission.
Press X to complete mission. Receive payment.
Choose next mission.
Press X to complete mission.
Why not just be able to have an adult conversation about anything? Already the very first reply was a condescending "I want it NOW".

I'm sure the state of this forum is just the "doom-sayer's" fault.
 
Don't get me wrong. I think that the final approach on planetoids is mostly fine as it is. It's the long SC travel that should be ramped up. It's no more unrealistic to go 20c near a planet than 2c, as far as we know.

Which btw. is over three times faster than typical rifle bullets muzzle velocity.
And there's where I worry about the realism of dense atmospheric entry and flight ;)
Maybe we do get new space planes for that (only those will fit the ultra-advanced planetary suite).
 
We had that, instant land on tourists' ground beckons. That was fixed in latest path
Many a tourist beacon will go unvisited from now on. Man, that feature was so good. And sort-of explainable by the way a tourist beacon could guide your FSD controller thingamajig (so maybe planetary outpost should buy the same tech).

Edit: the removal of that feature is made worse by the continued bug to unlock the target when dropping out of SC
 
Last edited:
Is it a problem necessarily? I don't know... it's slow, and there's nothing you can do but wait. For some things that's fine.... for this? I can grin and bear it with hard surface landings since I'm usually doing multiple things on that planet, but when at a space port, going to another port? It'd be nice if there was an option to depart via a mechanism that "fires" you into space, pushing you out at 200km/s or thereabouts.
I hate banging on about Traveller, the game that Elite was based on (even down to the example starting character being Commander Jameson...) but there's a reason given in that universe of why orbital starports exist. It is to save time for those who need to visit the system to courier data, passengers, speculative goods, cargo freight, and a thousand other missions - by avoiding the need to spend time travelling down to the surface. So the same goes for Elite, or should do. Why should they be identical? It would remove the point of orbital stations. Have everything on the surface.
 
Don't get me wrong. I think that the final approach on planetoids is mostly fine as it is. It's the long SC travel that should be ramped up. It's no more unrealistic to go 20c near a planet than 2c, as far as we know.
It's probably built in for the safety of the planetary inhabitants. Who wants someone slamming their ship into your world at relativistic speeds and wiping it out?
 
First the 'Grind' Now the 'Rush'. It's meant to take time. Would you be happy with a pop up screen that says 'land?' when you get into orbit?
It does at least reassure me that other people would not be happy with ship interiors. Having to walk for minutes all through your ship, only to get to the hangar and have to walk again to get to the lifts to the concourse. Much easier to have a "disembark" teleport. Why can't we teleport to our ship from anywhere in a ground settlement? We can to the drop ship, after a CZ is won.
 
Who wants someone slamming their ship into your world at relativistic speeds and wiping it out?
Nah, that's no danger at all. I just did that recently. Tried to evade a pirate and aimed at a planet, went too fast, got dropped out of SC and saw "body exclusion zone hit", found myself some km above the surface on the other side of the planet.
 
Nah, that's no danger at all. I just did that recently. Tried to evade a pirate and aimed at a planet, went too fast, got dropped out of SC and saw "body exclusion zone hit", found myself some km above the surface on the other side of the planet.
Yebbut that's because of the built-in supercruise limits the OP is complaining about. If it didn't drop you but carried the space-warp into the planet surface it would make the dinosaurs' extinction event look like a stubbed toe.
 
I hate banging on about Traveller, the game that Elite was based on (even down to the example starting character being Commander Jameson...) but there's a reason given in that universe of why orbital starports exist. It is to save time for those who need to visit the system to courier data, passengers, speculative goods, cargo freight, and a thousand other missions - by avoiding the need to spend time travelling down to the surface. So the same goes for Elite, or should do. Why should they be identical? It would remove the point of orbital stations. Have everything on the surface.
I counter with: Why shouldn't it be?

There's plenty of reasons why it shouldn't be (or more correctly, couldn't be), and none of them are extant or implemented in the game.

In other words, what meaningful game experience does having the escape from a planet's gravity well when you leave a surface port take so long, provide?

For example; when in supercruise, it's helpful to enter a planet's gravity well and close to it's surface, slamming a hard-90 near it to lose a pursuer; AI is kinda dumb... but now I'm stuck in a gravity well losing time... fair cop because I'm now one pursuer down.

If your point is that orbital stations save time, then deliveries/activities on the surface should pay more to compensate. But they don't. So that line of thinking is quite fraught.
 
If it didn't drop you but carried the space-warp into the planet surface it would make the dinosaurs' extinction event look like a stubbed toe.
Well, I guess that would be a massive fine. Or even a bounty? That would teach Cmdrs not to crash into important planets!
Jurassic: Dangerous
 
If your point is that orbital stations save time, then deliveries/activities on the surface should pay more to compensate. But they don't.
And here it again comes down to balancing. The game is so unbalanced everywhere that this is practically overlooked again. It would only make sense for a game to pay out more for space-to-ground operations than for space-only ones. Time == Money. Would also work for mats instead of credits.
 
Why not just be able to have an adult conversation about anything? Already the very first reply was a condescending "I want it NOW".

I'm sure the state of this forum is just the "doom-sayer's" fault.
This response is even weirder since OP wants to improve the game without replacing any existing systems.
 
Many a tourist beacon will go unvisited from now on. Man, that feature was so good. And sort-of explainable by the way a tourist beacon could guide your FSD controller thingamajig (so maybe planetary outpost should buy the same tech).

Edit: the removal of that feature is made worse by the continued bug to unlock the target when dropping out of SC
I have a feeling they only "fixed" this because in Odyssey skipping the glide sequence would result in the planet's surface not rendering properly for a short amount of time, making your ship seem as if it was below the surface looking out at the seams of the planetary textures.
 
This is not my claim. My claim is the departure times are a much more significant issue.

I disagree with that timeframe, even for clean/ no alarm missions. That said, individual times aren't a good measure, you have to average it... otherwise do we mark off the person who takes an hour to do this. You claim 20, i claim 10. 15 is the baseline I'm using in that case.

... and moving between space based objectives is very stick. But number of activities is not the measure here. Time actively playing the game is.

You also need to compare like with like... megaship missions, hijacks, massacres, they're much more involved as well. (And then there's the wrinkles)

If, in another world, space individual space missions to the same length of time as an Odyssey mission, the time idle still wouldn't change; moving between activities in space is dramatically faster than moving between Odyssey activities... as such drastically more time is spent idle in odyssey as a proportion of play time, because of how long it takes to leave a planet's gravity well and reach a decent supercruise speed.

Well, like i said, we have different views, and i guess it depends on how each of us plays.
 
I don't understand why some players are against any change in the game. If the game is perfect I would understand it. But it's not perfect, and I hope everybody might agree with this claim.
We all remember Fleet Carrier Update. It changed our gameplay for better. But still many players were against it. For me, FC update is better than Odyssey, not because it was free, but because it's really connected with space game, unlike Odyssey.
 
I'm not overly bothered about surface-missions taking longer than station-based missions, logically they should, though the slow escape from surface back to space is slightly frustrating. Higher pay for surface-based missions would be one way to balance, and if escaping from the gravity well could be sped up a little, this too would be welcome.
 
This response is even weirder since OP wants to improve the game without replacing any existing systems.

Like the improvement we got when our SLF crew got immortality?
Edit: i mean, when it was introduced people said but you can opt to not rebuy the slf crew and while the option exist indeed, the Elite SLF Crew lost all its preciousness)
 
I'm not overly bothered about surface-missions taking longer than station-based missions, logically they should, though the slow escape from surface back to space is slightly frustrating. Higher pay for surface-based missions would be one way to balance, and if escaping from the gravity well could be sped up a little, this too would be welcome.
Higher pay would be sufficient. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom