Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 78

Thread: Exiting Hyperspace appears to have changed

  1. #46
    Originally Posted by Mengy View Post (Source)
    Nah, it's most likely just Frontier changing a two and a half year old mechanic which rarely posed some semblance of a challenge into something foolproof and completely tranquil and safe. I can't fathom the reason why they are bothering, I don't ever recall this being an issue that required addressing and certainly there are many dozen other issues which are vastly more critical to spend dev time on. Explorers certainly won't need heatsinks anymore if this goes live. Elite Harmless anyone?
    I agree. They might not need hull repair limpets either. The only minor hickup I had was ops forgot to power down once in a great while and hit the star. I started exploring when I got the SRV and still out in the deep.

  2. #47
    Originally Posted by Kaltern View Post (Source)
    Sigh

    Dangerous = Rank, not Game Description.

    (I should make a macro for this...)
    space it dangerous and danger makes for an exciting game.

  3. #48
    Originally Posted by Lucius-Darcia View Post (Source)
    Okay today i was at PSR J0751+1807 (Burnelle's Pulsar) which is a binary starsystem with a Neutronstar that has a large jet cone. As expected i was dropping out further away than usual, but not in the jet cone. So if it wasn't just luck, i would say the new mechanic is working well together with the former improvements to avoid accidents. Jumping to Neutronstars should not get someone into the cone.
    There should be a distinct possibility that it will through. Which should make using the neutron highway risky and requiring a bit of luck.

  4. #49
    Originally Posted by Red Anders View Post (Source)
    It's the mindset that nothing should be a challenge, that any gameplay that presents even the vaguest semblance of danger or risk is something to be quickly beaten with the nerf bat until it limps away and that 'challenge' equates to 'unpleasant task that I don't want to spend my spare time doing' that annoys me.

    Seriously, on the one hand I really don't like these clowns who talk about 'the forum dads' and so on because it's just a lazy categorisation of people but on the other I am heartily sick of people who want this to be the video game equivalent of snuggling up on the couch in their slippers with a nice half a Guinesss and watching their Heartbeat box set. It's popped up in quite a few threads recently, this concept that if you want the game to occasionally present you with some kind of challenge on which you face (gasp!) a risk and have to actually do something to avoid it, you must be some kind of bulging-eyed adrenalin-crazed ultra-alpha personality type who is only playing this because all their friends have managed to kill themselves BASE jumping and wrestling alligators.

    I'm proper tired of it.

    Games are fundamentally based around the concept of risk and reward. Games have required players to overcome challenges and deal with risk since I started playing them in 1981. If you remove the risk, the reward is diminished because you do not feel that you did anything to earn it.

    If people want what is essentially a way of occupying their time that doesn't shake them out of their Horlicks-induced coma that's fine, occasionally I also want that. My suggestions would be read a book, invest in a nice box set, watch the cricket highlights, listen to Radio 3, or in fact do pretty much anything other than play a computer game based in a 'cut-throat galaxy' where you spend your time flying a space ship through what is supposedly the single most dangerous and inhospitable environment for human life that the universe provides.

    TL;DR - Farmville is thataway --->
    best comment on this thread. Frontier should be working on making flying more dangerous and risky and skilled fall, not less, they already dumb the navigation part of the game down. One of the best moments in the game for me was figuring out how to get to Sol in a sidewinder and automatic routing would only calculate like a hundred light years and being successful, eventually. It took me all day!

  5. #50
    Originally Posted by CMDR Dreamstate View Post (Source)
    Oh wow!

    I... I think I would actually prefer that distance from the star in any system I jumped to...

    Frontier
    - can you please put in an option in the right-hand panel for this???? For people using human bubble space or not having to scoop at the star itself (missions etc, massive fuel tank), this would be brilliant for gaining speed in supercruise instantly in the system! It is actually quite a big time saver.
    I would love a system that lets us pick how far from a star we jump.
    They would call it ''FSD drop out sensitivity''

  6. #51
    I hope this does not make it in live. I like the surprise danger of a sun real close every now and then.

  7. #52
    Additional confirmation while approaching the Ao system from Bunus. Approaching Ao from LHS 378 also triggered the behavior, unexpectedly, when it hadn't in my original approach. I tried coming in from an even more angled approach, and I still end up very far out. Just for funsies I logged out and back in, then retried the angled approach and still ended up very far out.

  8. #53
    I'm not sure which issue this is supposed to resolve; stars are hot, a number of stars in close proximity are thus very hot; if you don't move, you cook; ergo you move, it's really not that complicated, is it?

    Jumping in between stars is an omnipresent risk and is part of the journey. Of all the things to improve, they've been asked to improve the universe not always being convenient, meanwhile HSL uses tech mats. I sort of don't know what we're trying to achieve here.

  9. #54
    Originally Posted by Crash1099 View Post (Source)
    I hope this does not make it in live. I like the surprise danger of a sun real close every now and then.
    If they want to make exploration dangerous they should enable damage of black holes.

  10. #55
    As I understand it, this change was made to prevent the edge cases of unavoidable damage from being suddenly too close to a binary or worse.
    The mechanics should definitely be set up in such a way as sloppy piloting leads to incremental wear to your ship, but it should not be causing cases where even the most careful pilot takes damage due to bad luck.

  11. #56
    Originally Posted by Novo Mundus View Post (Source)
    Huh... I gotta say, I don't like this.

    It might be good if this happened when you had already mapped the system out, but, before your ship actually HAS the system data, it shouldn't know HOW to drop you between stars, should it?

    Even if it shuold, I think it adds more to the game to make it so, until the data is known, you get the "old" holy crap on a cracker! moment, but once the data is gathered, your ship adjusts it's future drops into that system to protect itself.
    The star data is known without the system data. You can see the star classes of any stars and other stellar objects present even on a "red" system.

  12. #57
    Originally Posted by Cosmo View Post (Source)
    This is really good, cause I hate to be blinded by a bright star when exiting hyperspace. Imagine doing the dark hyperspace transition to super-bright star thousands of times. It's very annoying and such rapid change in darkness/brightness can cause eye damage.

    A long time ago I suggested an in-game option so that players can always exit hyperspace above or below a star to minimize the annoying star brightness which strains the eyes.

    In real-life looking directly at the sun causes serious damage. Why looking directly at the sun during a solar eclipse could cause your eyes to POISON themselves
    Just a thought ... Perhaps we should be able to purchase a ship sun visor (for a utility slot?). When activated it alters the ship canopy so that it reduces the amount of light allowed to pass through it. Space would appear ultra black but landing on a star would be a more pleasant experience :-) Alternatively we could all just take to wearing sun glasses whilst playing ED. ;-)

    CMDR Turson

  13. #58
    Originally Posted by GraXXoR View Post (Source)
    The star data is known without the system data. You can see the star classes of any stars and other stellar objects present even on a "red" system.
    Yeah, I realised that after I posted it.

    I guess you could still say the computer knows what star types there are, but not their exact relative locations until it's been up close.

  14. #59
    I do get that this way is not "dangerous".
    But honestly, I would butcher the engineer that one day decided that every time you come out of hyperspace you do so NEXT TO A G BALL OF PLASMA.

    In any case, while I do like this more than the current approach we have, I agree it is far less impressive.

  15. #60
    Originally Posted by Cosmo View Post (Source)
    If they want to make exploration dangerous they should enable damage of black holes.
    Exiting next to one or next to a white dwarf or "unusual" stars in general should blow the ship into cosmic dust. Let's make exploration thrilling again.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast