2.3 dev update feedback mega thread

[Robert Maynard]

From a mathematical point of view you're right. But it also depends on how you determine your data. For example, the opinion of 300 people from one village can not count for a whole country, this depends on geopolitics.

In the comparatively recent polls on Instant vs. Delayed Ship Transfer, the forum poll that ran before the official poll, the official poll and the exit poll that ran on the forums at the same time as the official poll all gave (virtually) the same result: 70%/30% in favour of delayed.

 

[Bobbydylan]

Right so. But drones are also much slower and lightly armed than actual warplanes. And succeptible to catastrophic failures from electronic warfare. But now
you are arguing against telepresence, which is a "today" tech. Since ED is in the future, they should at least have the same tech as us. or better.

Now you are arguing that telepresence does not work in ED because reasons (read : don't like it). From an immersion / scifi pov, this makes no sense.
Especially since FD has put in FTL coms already.

I really doubt that drones are going to become less useful over time. In fact, I expect the opposite.


As for the rest... *Sigh*. Re-read my post on it, I'm not going to repeat myself.

Are you familiar with the concept of willing suspension of disbelief? Yes, we know that the game isn't realistic but that in itself isn't a problem. So long as the game operates by a set of rules and those rules don't contradict each other we can accept it. The problem with telepresence for crew is that it's got no range, where as telepresence for fighters has a range of 10km. Also, if you can just control a ship via remote control why would anyone ever go our in person?

The telepresance excuse not only contradicts its own rules in other game-play factors, but actually cheapens the whole gameplay universe by making the idea of flying a spaceship trivial and risk-free. And to be honest with you, this is actually the SMALLEST issue that muti-crew has. The lack of depth and gameplay added in this feature is staggering.

 

[Muetdhiver]

Something like that

Nope. I dont care about elite : feets. I see no point in it as there would be nothing to do with it. Beyond Elite : the walking simulator.

OTOH instant MC I'm very much for because :

1) I got friends, and coop is something I like
2) If we can drive a pair of SRV's this means sharing nice planets during exploration and race giggles.
3) pew-pew together with cutter, turrets and SLF's. Sure, it does not help with the blandness of CZ's/Res sites, but at least it's not 30min wasted to get all the ships together in the same place.

And since the feature has been developped, we might as well have it in an useable state. (i.e. not a complete loss).

 

[lokvette]

Nope. I dont care about elite : feets. I see no point in it as there would be nothing to do with it. Beyond Elite : the walking simulator.

OTOH instant MC I'm very much for because :

1) I got friends, and coop is something I like
2) If we can drive a pair of SRV's this means sharing nice planets during exploration and race giggles.
3) pew-pew together with cutter, turrets and SLF's. Sure, it does not help with the blandness of CZ's/Res sites, but at least it's not 30min wasted to get all the ships together in the same place.

And since the feature has been developped, we might as well have it in an useable state. (i.e. not a complete loss).

Aye sorry about that I was doing something I loath, taring with the same brush...

As for MC not my thing..

God dammit Karma just bit me in the . typing this and auto docking...almost died

 

[Winterwalker]

The lack of depth and gameplay added in this feature is staggering.

When Horizons first released, 2.3 was slated to be the Commander Creator, only. As it happens we have news that you'll be able to put that created commander somewhere else (on the bridge of a different vessel pusing buttons and/or moving around 3D space, in a fighter). That's a bonus. It means that, though limited when first created, your created commander can actually do something outside your own bridge, which is a first, and means the commander genuinely has been 'created' (not just an avatar, it's active). The chances of that being the only thing your created commander will ever be able to do (eg. in future updates) are, I would say, around about nil?

 

[DMaster]

In the comparatively recent polls on Instant vs. Delayed Ship Transfer, the forum poll that ran before the official poll, the official poll and the exit poll that ran on the forums at the same time as the official poll all gave (virtually) the same result: 70%/30% in favour of delayed.

Then everybody can stop discussing, because in recent polls, most people votet for the mechanics that FDev sneakpeaked last week (instant transfer).

But in generell i think its not logic and objectiv to argue about 2.3 without more information and a Beta.

 

[Xender]

We arguing about telepresence but it is not the biggest issue. It can be somehow explained in lore (with Guardians tech for example). Just look at this poll: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...hanics-or-you-are-satisfied-with-this-concept

Most of the players are fine with the telepresence (however I prefer physical boarding, even with Star Trek beam tech ). The true problem is simplified nature of Multicrew, again we received extremely simple mechanics. Vary barren. Is it caused due to feedback from community that states Elite is to demanding and complex? Or maybe Frontier is low on resources? Because it is clean that Multicrew proposed by Frontier is extremely simple, the question is why that happen? Then now more than a year ago they have to develop proper multicrew, they should design it well and develop it to create some interesting gameplay, but we have this... Looking like placeholder solution developed in recent month or two...

EDIT:

Then everybody can stop discussing, because in recent polls, most people votet for the mechanics that FDev sneakpeaked last week (instant transfer).


But in generell i think its not logic and objectiv to argue about 2.3 without more information and a Beta.

The biggest problem is not related to telepresence but simplicity...! We will continue to talk about it because this is important.

 

[Mystixx Foxx]

These are not comparable. With the destruction of the ship, it's not reasonable to expect a player to log out for (potentially) weeks as the pod jumps aaaaal the way back to the last station you were at.

It is however, totally reasonable for 2 players to meet up at a location, if they want to play together.


I actually have no idea what you're talking about here Remlock is the mechanism for the re-breather used when a canopy is deployed. And I don;y know what you're refering to the "time of Light". Sounds like a lame fantasy novel.

*Sigh* I was referring to the speed of light, surely you are smart enough to reckognize a typo when you see one. No need to act smart.

As for the suit, well, It was quoted to me as a remlock suit, IDC really what kind of suit it is, we were talking about how reasonable it is to have the suit tank a plasma slug trough an open canopy.

As for beiing totally reasonable, well...
Let's just say I'm glad we are allowed to have different opinions, and FD isn't going with the "Don't break my roleplaying fantasy" moving away from adding yet another waiting element to the game

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Blowing up in Sag A and then have your Escaped pod Fsd boost out of the event horizon itself all the way to the bubble is Ok and convenient.

Telepresence yourself to a friends ship over the same distance is not Ok. Gotcha.

Again it is nothing to do with realism, it is all about the ingame lore, why do you have such difficulty with this concept. Escape Pod is ingame lore. If we have telepresence, then there are no escape pods because we are in our front room telepresencing into the ship. As has been stated a lot of time, it makes a mockery of the ingame lore.

Escape pod have to be like that otherwise we would not be able to play the game for months on end and that would be the end of the game.

As I have stated many times, I have no issue with it being instant, but don't give some lore breaking reason for it that makes a mockery of other stuff you have just put in to the game such as NPC crew.

Also, I don't know what remlock suits are made of either, but I want that beast armor on my ship.

And the canopy..You're gonna have some real arms if you manage to hold onto a chair moving at speeds several hundreds the time of light without beiing sucked out into space

We don't know how a hyperspace conduit works, also during supercruise you are warping space around you, you are not actually going faster then the speed of light, and there is no friction is space, why would you get pulled out of your cockpit, I am sure you are connected to the seat in some way. Anyway as I said these bits you talk about are irrelavant as they don't take away from the gameplay experience.

 

[Winterwalker]

The biggest problem is ... simplicity...!

It's 'creating the commander' (avatar), that is all. My guess is you'll have a UI to design a face and the update just allows the game to tag your actions (outside your cockpit, on the other bridge, pushing buttons) and track where you are physically, when in fighter .. ergo, 2.3 – The Commanders (see store) = Commander 'created'.

 

[Heavenly-Hammer]

I really doubt that drones are going to become less useful over time. In fact, I expect the opposite.


As for the rest... *Sigh*. Re-read my post on it, I'm not going to repeat myself.

You re-quoting yourself doesn't make the comment more meaningful, though.

At some point, you'll remember that the game is...oh snap...a game. As such, hundreds of features in the game are abbreviated or designed with the convenience of the players in mind in order to maximize their opportunity to enjoy the experience. From ammo being reloaded in seconds in ports to the entire plating on your hull being replaced with no wait, with a single click to being able to load and unload hundreds of tons of cargo in less than a second...all of these features are designed to maximize enjoyment of the game. Because some smart people realized that maybe people wouldn't want to have to wait how long it might *actually* take to unload 572T of cargo...or to wait for an engineer to remove a weapon from a hard point, then install, wire and test a new one...or to strip each plate of armor from the hull and replace it with some other type.

So we come to this. This feature doesn't "make the idea of flying a spaceship trivial". The only person flying the ship is the owner of the ship. You don't get to join a friend from across the bubble and fly someone else's ship. At best, you get to shoot their turrets or their SLF or whatever. Sounds like a fun break from driving all the way to or from Colonia, for example. Little things that would functionally be simply a change of pace for CMDRs and an opportunity to actually play in a more engaging way with their mates. It's not breaking the game. It's not "cheapening" anything. If you don't want to use the feature, then don't use it. If you don't have any friends, life sucks I guess but that doesn't mean it's time to attack the ability for the rest of us to mix up our gameplay experience. I'd recommend getting some friends on your friends list and enjoying yourself.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

When Horizons first released, 2.3 was slated to be the Commander Creator, only. As it happens we have news that you'll be able to put that created commander somewhere else (on the bridge of a different vessel pusing buttons and/or moving around 3D space, in a fighter). That's a bonus. It means that, though limited when first created, your created commander can actually do something outside your own bridge, which is a first, and means the commander genuinely has been 'created' (not just an avatar, it's active). The chances of that being the only thing your created commander will ever be able to do (eg. in future updates) are, I would say, around about nil?

No, when Horizon was introduced 2.3 was always multicrew and commander creator. Not sure where you get your news from but it is wrong.

 

[Winterwalker]

No, when Horizon was introduced 2.3 was always multicrew and commander creator. Not sure where you get your news from but it is wrong.

Ahhh, I see .. FIRST world problems.

 

[Mengy]

I think that FD have come to realise that Multi-crew is a feature that most players aren't interested in. Given how most polls are in favour of NPC crew, I'm hoping that the decision to make Multi-Crew this lame and shallow was a deliberate one to make up for lost time. Cos the alternative is that they couldn't think of anything better than a remote turret control... and that's sad.

I think they rushed it to get it out the door faster. The season two schedule obviously slipped and they are behind, so rather than take the time to do multicrew the way they wanted they are making it combat only and leaving it to be improved at a later date (if ever).

I wish the whole multicrew feature had been done in stages, like this:

Stage 1: Implement NPC crewmembers along with the commander creator. This would allow players to hire crew to fill the seats in their ships. Different crew professions would be available, each with slight passive bonuses or minor active abilities:

• Combat Officer – might provide skills like small dps increase, better weapon energy management, faster turret tracking, etc.
• Engineer – could provide minor system repairs without AFMU, or make the ship run cooler, or make fuel use more effecient
• Science Officer – could increase scan times, or scanner ranges, or quicken FSD charge times
• Trade Specialist – might increase trade profit margins slightly, or boost trade mission payouts

Stage 2: Implement Multi-crew. Players can now “jump into” anyone’s ship who has a crew aboard by taking the place of the NPC crewmember, essentially replacing that NPC crew for as long as the player desires. When the multicrew player quits then the NPC crewmember simply comes back to fill the seat again.

This way the whole telepresence explanation wouldn’t even be needed, as anyone playing multicrew would just be taking the place of an NPC for awhile. It would also have given the feature some use for non-combat and solo players too. It just seems to me like this order of development for the feature would have been better overall.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

You re-quoting yourself doesn't make the comment more meaningful, though.

At some point, you'll remember that the game is...oh snap...a game. As such, hundreds of features in the game are abbreviated or designed with the convenience of the players in mind in order to maximize their opportunity to enjoy the experience. From ammo being reloaded in seconds in ports to the entire plating on your hull being replaced with no wait, with a single click to being able to load and unload hundreds of tons of cargo in less than a second...all of these features are designed to maximize enjoyment of the game. Because some smart people realized that maybe people wouldn't want to have to wait how long it might *actually* take to unload 572T of cargo...or to wait for an engineer to remove a weapon from a hard point, then install, wire and test a new one...or to strip each plate of armor from the hull and replace it with some other type.

So we come to this. This feature doesn't "make the idea of flying a spaceship trivial". The only person flying the ship is the owner of the ship. You don't get to join a friend from across the bubble and fly someone else's ship. At best, you get to shoot their turrets or their SLF or whatever. Sounds like a fun break from driving all the way to or from Colonia, for example. Little things that would functionally be simply a change of pace for CMDRs and an opportunity to actually play in a more engaging way with their mates. It's not breaking the game. It's not "cheapening" anything. If you don't want to use the feature, then don't use it. If you don't have any friends, life sucks I guess but that doesn't mean it's time to attack the ability for the rest of us to mix up our gameplay experience. I'd recommend getting some friends on your friends list and enjoying yourself.

I have never played a game that has a load of mini game without any context. If you crap all over the ingame lore you may as well not have one, then you get a load of meaningless mini games. Sounds utter pants to me. All it will do is the opposite of maximise enjoyment, it will actually kill the game if it keeps doing these things.

Game lore in a game like ED is very important as there is no proper storyline to follow. Destroying the game lore is like playing the Tomb Raider mechanics but without a story to put it all together. A game like that will fail every time. Is this what we all want?

 

[Deadspin]

Again it is nothing to do with realism, it is all about the ingame lore, why do you have such difficulty with this concept. Escape Pod is ingame lore. If we have telepresence, then there are no escape pods because we are in our front room telepresencing into the ship. As has been stated a lot of time, it makes a mockery of the ingame lore.

I disagree. We don't have escape pods. The existence of escape pods is assumed to explain away the rebuy/reappear-in-station mechanic. There's never actually been a player pod sighted and there never will be. I would sooner expect ships to go dead in space rather than magically explode but Frontier made concessions to arcade gameplay elements and we have what we have now.

Frontier has been hacking away at Elite lore for 2+ years now to make this game fit into the Elite universe. Who are you, who is anyone on this forum, to say what Frontier can and cannot do to the lore of this game?

Those of you crying about lore or immersion need to take a step back, maybe even go outside for a bit.

 

[zzehirbazz]

I think they rushed it to get it out the door faster. The season two schedule obviously slipped and they are behind, so rather than take the time to do multicrew the way they wanted they are making it combat only and leaving it to be improved at a later date (if ever).

I wish the whole multicrew feature had been done in stages, like this:

Stage 1: Implement NPC crewmembers along with the commander creator. This would allow players to hire crew to fill the seats in their ships. Different crew professions would be available, each with slight passive bonuses or minor active abilities:

• Combat Officer – might provide skills like small dps increase, better weapon energy management, faster turret tracking, etc.
• Engineer – could provide minor system repairs without AFMU, or make the ship run cooler, or make fuel use more effecient
• Science Officer – could increase scan times, or scanner ranges, or quicken FSD charge times
• Trade Specialist – might increase trade profit margins slightly, or boost trade mission payouts

Stage 2: Implement Multi-crew. Players can now “jump into” anyone’s ship who has a crew aboard by taking the place of the NPC crewmember, essentially replacing that NPC crew for as long as the player desires. When the multicrew player quits then the NPC crewmember simply comes back to fill the seat again.

This way the whole telepresence explanation wouldn’t even be needed, as anyone playing multicrew would just be taking the place of an NPC for awhile. It would also have given the feature some use for non-combat and solo players too. It just seems to me like this order of development for the feature would have been better overall.

I Agree. They definitely rushed it so that they have something new to show at PAX East. It is a financial/commercial decision and I can`t blame them. I can only hope that in the future they put more variation into this roles as you said..maybe not trade specialist though.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I disagree. We don't have escape pods. The existence of escape pods is assumed to explain away the rebuy/reappear-in-station mechanic. There's never actually been a player pod sighted and there never will be. I would sooner expect ships to go dead in space rather than magically explode but Frontier made concessions to arcade gameplay elements and we have what we have now.

Frontier has been hacking away at Elite lore for 2+ years now to make this game fit into the Elite universe. Who are you, who is anyone on this forum, to say what Frontier can and cannot do to the lore of this game?

Those of you crying about lore or immersion need to take a step back, maybe even go outside for a bit.

The escape pod is in the offical ED manual. I agree, they can do whatever they want to the ingame lore, but if it just becomes a mess, with nothing making any sense whatsoever, then the game just becomes a series of minigames without any context.

I think people who don't care about the lore need to take a step back. What do you want, a game like angry birds, which has a load of different scenarios but with zero story. Oh its good fun for a bit, but then you discard it. Is this what we want with ED, is this what you want for ED?

I cannot comprehend why people push for cheap lore breaking mechanics which if FDev keep putting into the game will destroy it sooner then later.

 

[Xender]

Boarding ship should be persistent until you leave it. Even if you are offline you move with the ship. You should be able to pilot friend ship even if the is offline. Whole ship should be shared, even helm. Just think about all exploration possibilities and Star Trek like journeys!

After that you can imagine all kine of roles as you wish, add it and voila you have the best possible multicrew experience

 

[Mystixx Foxx]

Again it is nothing to do with realism, it is all about the ingame lore, why do you have such difficulty with this concept. Escape Pod is ingame lore. If we have telepresence, then there are no escape pods because we are in our front room telepresencing into the ship. As has been stated a lot of time, it makes a mockery of the ingame lore.

Well, if it's Lore you're fussed about...
Elite is a growing video game, frequently updated to bring what the developers belive are exciting new updates, no doubt in union with their own vision of the future of the game. You had to know that lore would take a hit at some point of the development. It's never going to be the holy grail of space role playing, and making shortcuts here and there to make gameplay more accessible to everyone, is bound to happen at several stages. You're better off looking for your lore in a book.

Or maybe they will have a Galnet article fleshed out with the backstory of telepresence. Would that fix anything? Would probably seem cheap by alot of people, but then again, it is what I outlined above, a growing game. The majority will just take it for what it is.