2.3 dev update feedback mega thread

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Elite is a game of inconsistencies..


2: How does an automated docking computer take up literally tons of space in the TYOOL 3300+ while in 2015 a Honda Accord can park itself with a module the size of a desk phone?

This one is hand waived by the mechanical requirements, servos and that kind of thing.


And I do agree with you, it's a personal thing, people are willing to suspend disbelief when it suits "them".
 
Put yourself in the shoes of the multicrew member instead of the person at the helm, and tell me what you think is missing in the dev update.

You can go further .. of course you can;

Tactical; handles KWS, wing beacons, comms, synthesis reloads
Explorer; downloads extended DSS data, potential for efficient (system-tour) route plotting
Pirate; enhanced hatch breaker targetting, police/security band monitoring and/or anti target-SOS msg scrambling
Miner; refinery control, enhanced collector or prospector targetting
Trader; enables commodity stock prices information, remote access to commodity missions, interdiction evasion assist
Bounty Hunter; enhanced intediction attack, USS monitoring / pre-drop scans, receives pre-targetted wanted ship alerts from nav beacon
Canonn; direct monitoring of dangerous cargo, enhanced UA containment, hyperdction wake monitoring
Fuel Rats/Buckball/CG; reduced hyperspace countdown / fuel scooping .. reducing overall respsonse time
CZ Mercenary; civil and war alerts, may receive invitation from allied factions requiring combat fighters
CZ Navy; capital ship wake alerts.

Off the top of my head. Though that would be quite a bit for a first draft (and Commander 'Creation') I'd say?
 
Last edited:
The weirdest thing about the immersion argument is if it was worded differently peeps would be fine with it!?

It called creating an universe which make sense, that allows players to immerse themselves in such a universe. So yes a narrative where Rah Tal reverse engineers the Guardian technology allowing players from across the galaxy to control another human being across the galaxy would make more sense than them just magically teleporting about.
 
It called creating an universe which make sense, that allows players to immerse themselves in such a universe. So yes a narrative where Rah Tal reverse engineers the Guardian technology allowing players from across the galaxy to control another human being across the galaxy would make more sense than them just magically teleporting about.

Again.. because telepresence is the only thing that doesn't make sense? Really?

There are so many arcade elements that are a major part of this game that don't make sense against half of the other "immersion" decisions and mechanics. The fact that Frontier listens to this forum at all is asinine. Half of us want a fun game. The other half of us want to go back to 1984 mechanics. We all think everyone else is wrong and if we all had our way you'd have Elite Online: The MMO and a solo-standard Elite: 1984 Revisited.

Given that it's 2017. I think it's time to kiss the nostalgia of 1984 goodbye, put it back into it's box and back into the closet. Then we need to crowd fund some servers for FDev so we can get rid of this annoying P2P crap instancing system and get some legit server backed instances.
 
It called creating an universe which make sense, that allows players to immerse themselves in such a universe. So yes a narrative where Rah Tal reverse engineers the Guardian technology allowing players from across the galaxy to control another human being across the galaxy would make more sense than them just magically teleporting about.

Here's a copy from another locked thread (that's mussing up the works a bit imo) on a potential lore explanation for the temporary telepresence (a work around made necessary by the fact we don't get a separate Commander or crew log in, but access through the Commander account, from the ship as far as we know and for the time being).

I still think it's a different topic but 50% want consistent lore, 50% don't care and would prefer everyone ignore a consistency approach (actually maybe it's more 70/30) but anyway, both are fine (unless you happen to be in the other camp).

Anyhow's .. here's some Fizziks

I'd go for a Quantum Tunnel Link Up, entangled particles.

See Wikipedia; Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently of the others, even when the particles are separated by a large distance—instead, a quantum state must be described for the system as a whole.

Your limited abilities on the ship, when crewing, correlate with the difficulty of providing a large amount of bandwidth with the method, but (using Bell's Theory, EPR Paradox) you would be able to explain FTL sharing of a limited size information packet, instantaneous and interstellar. To provide more bandwidth you require more entangled particles greatly increasing the size of decoder needed, and soon becoming too big for most ships and certainly too big for the Core Dynamics encoders currently being produced in Cambridge (Earth, Sol).

You would need an encoder/decoder and, as it's in their interests to get you into dock to use their other facilities, there's no special reason why stations would allow remote access of commodity prices, and drop their firewalls, or lower their physical secuirty at this time. Likewise remote piloting may have been disabled by Core Dynamics under license of manufacture (Health and Safety during Travel, see TheSunGirl post above)

The Quantum link would need a specialist encoder probably too big for fighter or SRV to equip. For ship to fighter controls you can still use radio, to relay controls via the ship, so fighter range is still limited by manufacturer's license (brought in so fighters are readily identifiable by authorities, in case of crime) to their 30km range, as per 2.2.

Quantum Entanglement is not 'invisible'. The Q tunnel has to use some dimension, to get between A and B. Witchspace. While Core Dynamics have been pre-testing remote crew from their labs in Cambridge, we have seen (alleged) sightings of Aliens. In folklore, these beings are thought to occupy Witchspace and, if they were able to detect a quantum signal (and the evidence may be there, that they have recently been drawn in through curiosity) they may also be able to disrupt certain quantum frequencies at their discretion. Meaning that interstellar (quantum connected) telepresence would be open to disconnect at any time, by Witchspace parties unknown.
 
Last edited:
It called creating an universe which make sense, that allows players to immerse themselves in such a universe. So yes a narrative where Rah Tal reverse engineers the Guardian technology allowing players from across the galaxy to control another human being across the galaxy would make more sense than them just magically teleporting about.

Personally I don't have a real problem with instant 'telepresence' as the mechanism to join a crew as I'm not sure multicrew would even get used otherwise. I would have included a max range though, of maybe 1000-2000 ly. But then again I wouldn't use telepresence as the mechanism.....I would simply have explained it away as you temporarily playing the NPC crew member already occupying the crew station.....except we don't get NPC multicrew do we........
 
You can go further .. of course you can;

Tactical; handles KWS, wing beacons, comms, synthesis reloads
Explorer; downloads extended DSS data, potential for efficient (system-tour) route plotting
Pirate; enhanced hatch breaker targetting, police/security band monitoring and/or anti target-SOS msg scrambling
Miner; refinery control, enhanced collector or prospector targetting
Trader; enables commodity stock prices information, remote access to commodity missions, interdiction evasion assist
Bounty Hunter; enhanced intediction attack, USS monitoring / pre-drop scans, receives pre-targetted wanted ship alerts from nav beacon
Canonn; direct monitoring of dangerous cargo, enhanced UA containment, hyperdction wake monitoring
Fuel Rats/Buckball/CG; reduced hyperspace countdown / fuel scooping .. reducing overall respsonse time
CZ Mercenary; civil and war alerts, may receive invitation from allied factions requiring combat fighters
CZ Navy; capital ship wake alerts.

Off the top of my head. Though that would be quite a bit for a first draft (and Commander 'Creation') I'd say?

So why is everyone sitting in here having a nice little circle-jerk about telepresence instead of demanding features for the game that actually involve playing the game?
 
So why is everyone sitting in here having a nice little circle-jerk about telepresence instead of demanding features for the game that actually involve playing the game?

I think we could use another sticky personally .. one to discuss ideas like that, another to try to decide whether a consistent lore is possible, or whether a good request would be a separated Cmdr log in. Personally I think you can make a pretty workable lore (one that involves aliens).

Equally I'm not unhappy with the basic features that is the dev update.

I think FD have to start somewhere .. and allowing your Commander to get a remote tag (away from your ship), a knowable position in 3D space (fighter) and be able to push some buttons (interaction) then if that works bug free they can get on with adding other crew positions. The dev update might look like "not much of a mechanic" but from a networking / code point of view, in my opinion, it's a doozy.
 
Last edited:
I think we could use another sticky personally .. one to discuss ideas like that, another to try to decide whether a consistent lore is possible, or whether a good request would be a separated Cmdr log in. Personally I think you can make a pretty workable lore (one that involves aliens).

Equally I'm not unhappy with the basic features that is the dev update.

I think FD have to start somewhere .. and allowing your Commander to get a remote tag (away from your ship), a knowable position in 3D space (fighter) and be able to push some buttons (interaction) then if that works bug free they can get on with adding other crew positions. The dev update might look like "not much of a mechanic" but from a networking / code point of view, in my opinion, it's a doozy.

How about the mods just deem telepresence to be off-topic and start deleting posts?

Sounds like a better solution to me.
 
How about the mods just deem telepresence to be off-topic and start deleting posts?

What, even my awesome quantum mechanics one, signed sealed & delivered? :rolleyes:

I think beyond .. 'man the guns,' it's a starting point .. what else to say about 2.3?
Pick a career to discuss crew roles maybe? After you Cmdr ..
 
Their seems to be a lack of imagination on these forums.
All FD need to do is add a still image of the players ship winging its way to the destination during the loading screen,problem solved.
I don't like the idea of telepresence,so imagine something quite different.
 
Last edited:
Their seems to be a lack of imagination on these forums.
All FD need to do is add a still image of the players ship winging its way to the destination during the loading screen,problem solved.
I don't like the idea of telepresence,so imagine something quite different.

I'd quite like to see a quick hyperspace tunnel inserted between ship destruction and rebuy too personally.
Giving a sense of travel in escape pod, would add a little constistency there for me.

2. Galactic Powers button (left panel) rename "Galnet" (why? ... less is more)
3. Slow Down message (centre HUD) rename "Overspeed" (why? ... slow down = I can't !!)

o7 :D .. ??
 
Last edited:
Maybe it was mentioned before, but 109 pages is a bit too much to check. :)

Couldn't there be a galaxy wide law, maybe insurance based or so, that prohibits unmanned vessels with FSDs?
Though it's simply not allowed to fly a hyperspace capable ship via telepresence. The commander in charge have to be physically present, you know, for insurance reasons or so. :)
 
Probably not a good idea - given that telepresence is a fundamental enabler to multi-crew - and this is the 2.3 feedback mega-thread, after all....

No.

Matchmaking is an enabler for multi-crew. Telepresence is just a nonsensical word thrown around to hide the word matchmaking for people who want to pretend the game isn't a game.

No problem with immersion, but enough is enough. Telepresence has absolutely nothing to do with the 2.3 update's mechanics.
 
Personally, I believe people just need to suck it up.

FDev wants their game to cater to a lot of people, not just the hardcore few.

Telepresence isn't going to break combat, not that the lot of you even take part in combat to begin with if it's player on player violence.

If anything is broken and needs to go the way of the dodo it's the engineers.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: EUS

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Rob, for the love of your own sanity, did you not read my post?

Mine's fine. If Frontier want to describe the method of getting players into ships to serve as crew as telepresence, who are we to argue?

For the record I have nothing against it as I fully expected Frontier to lower this barrier to gameplay (by not requiring players to co-locate to join as crew) - however the same cannot be said for all participants. :)
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom