2.3 dev update feedback mega thread

[Commandeur_Brin]

I've come to the conclusion that instant crew transfer won't bother me as much as I thought it might as long as there's no attempt to explain it in the game.

I've been searching for this exact sentence all day ! Thank you sir ! Thank you very much ! Hope FD sees your post !

 

[Sterling MH]

Something in 2.3 that just fired me up. Talking on the "making CQC Arena great again" thread and I got the idea to just divorce the CQC from the rest of the game and make it the sandbox play area where you can test drive ships or new mechanism, play different games, all without consequence to the main game. And, being so divorced, it doesn't have to balance or fit in with the rest of the game, like the Arena mode was supposed to do.

And we could go in it via the same method we would multi-crew.

Someone goes in to CQC then asks others if the want to join for a bit of X, whatever X they like. Two people can play head-to-head for 20 minutes. Or race buggies on a high-grav moon. On their own, bots could be shot and any ship "bought" to play with to see what the ship is like to fly or fight in.

And an explorer could submit some location as one to replicate in CQC for playing in. So imagine running a time trial buggy course on a planet orbiting a ringed gas giant whose parent star is a pulsar... If there's one like that out there.

Want to insert new ships? Put them in CQC to see if they break. Then release them to the world. If it becomes the sandbox game in the sandbox game of Elite Dangerous, it could be quite fun.


---
"I went to SagA* recently. It's not very special as a sightseeing spot and I stayed about 15 mins.
However, I felt that I earned it. It was my achievement. I didn't cheat the galaxy. I paid my dues and put the hours in."

Sheesh. Flipping crab buckets.

For those who haven't read Terry Pratchett:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

 

[Alec Turner]

All though I'm not against people wanting to play with their friends or family the whole idea that pilot A can join Pilot B who is 65K Ly away by space magic and then take control of part of pilot A's ship just doesn't sit right with me, I know why they are doing it, and I'm sure a few people will use it, but it just doesn't sit right with me.

It takes all that I love about Elite as a whole, and rains a golden shower upon it from a great height.

LOL - repped for making tea come out of my nose.

 

[sorcer3r]

Why even call it multi-crew? it's not, it's people remote controlling aspects of your ship from their ship... That's not multi-crew.

Agree. It is more a combat coop gimmick but multi-crew?

 

[Martian Successor]

I like it, it keeps all the whinging in one place. Forum then stays useable and we don't have thread after thread of the same old. [up]

Too heavy handed for my liking. It all too often becomes an excuse to shut down the productive discussions and chuck them in with all of the nonsense thereby effectively drowning them out. Just take a look at the Alien hyperdiction megathread - people couldn't get the facts through in that thread for days! It was/is full of the same questions being repeated and debated in the same way in an infinite circle of noise.

There are many aspects to discuss about 2.3 and it would be better if we could at least split it up into 2 or 3 megathreads:
- Everything to do with Commander Creator
- Everything to do with instant transmission/Force projection in Multi-crew
- Everything to do with the combat balance in Multi-crew

If needed:
- Everything to do with the non-headline features of 2.3

Now that would be tidy, orderly and productive rather than a room full of different sounds all going off at the same time. Much easier for the devs to gather general feedback as well as specific feedback as well

My two tele-credits worth

 

[Sterling MH]

What's stopping me from buying 2 more copies of elite and playing on low settings on my other computers in my house and get a buff to my ship?

Nothing. But asking someone else to help is simpler, cheaper and has someone actually manning the guns.

But its your call, dude.

 

[Greyza Badger]

Something in 2.3 that just fired me up. Talking on the "making CQC Arena great again" thread and I got the idea to just divorce the CQC from the rest of the game and make it the sandbox play area where you can test drive ships or new mechanism, play different games, all without consequence to the main game. And, being so divorced, it doesn't have to balance or fit in with the rest of the game, like the Arena mode was supposed to do.

And we could go in it via the same method we would multi-crew.

Someone goes in to CQC then asks others if the want to join for a bit of X, whatever X they like. Two people can play head-to-head for 20 minutes. Or race buggies on a high-grav moon. On their own, bots could be shot and any ship "bought" to play with to see what the ship is like to fly or fight in.

And an explorer could submit some location as one to replicate in CQC for playing in. So imagine running a time trial buggy course on a planet orbiting a ringed gas giant whose parent star is a pulsar... If there's one like that out there.

Want to insert new ships? Put them in CQC to see if they break. Then release them to the world. If it becomes the sandbox game in the sandbox game of Elite Dangerous, it could be quite fun.


---
"I went to SagA* recently. It's not very special as a sightseeing spot and I stayed about 15 mins.
However, I felt that I earned it. It was my achievement. I didn't cheat the galaxy. I paid my dues and put the hours in."

Sheesh. Flipping crab buckets.

First part sounds great. I'd get behind that.

The bit where you quoted me...'crab buckets'?

 

[Dbrn47]

I take it back, i have to.
I've always said this forum is no different from any other online game forum, i was wrong.
Never have i seen a forum for an online game, where significant parts of the player base lobbied against convenient and "on the go" grouping tools and mechanics.
Perhaps it's part of this ungodly "the journey is the destination" philosophy....or was it the other way around ?
Apparently it's more important to some folks how you get to the fun bit (multi-player game play) than that you get to it so you can enjoy it.
Sorry, guys, it just beggars belief.
There are going to be several controversial topics with regard to Multi Crew as more details are revealed, no doubt about that.
But this isn't one of them, FD does the right thing in trying to make it as easily accessible as possible.

And that's the 0.02 $ from the 1.7 guy.

Immersion > Game play

*shrug*

Teleportation and Telepresence (remote control, let's be real) are a bridge too far, even for science fiction I guess.

 

[mossfoot]

See, this is actually something explorers would WANT. Drop off a crewmate to explore an area while the ship goes off to check something else out on the other side of the planet. This is what bugs me in that focus on features tends to be overly limited.

Wouldn't you like to dismiss your main ship and just fly around in your fighter untethered? Again, lots of exploration possibilities there as you could have up to three teams exploring an area in different sectors, or even planets!

Even if you're thinking combat, I had hoped to be able to attack a ground base in my SRV and still have my fighter around for air support. Can't happen. Not yet, anyway.

If you're talking about abandoning an SRV as being abused to be douchey? Well, there's already tons of abuse potential with confirmed features as it is (crewmate opens fire on station as captain comes to dock comes to mind)

Worst case scenario, SRV self destructs, crewmate teleports back to ship just like he would in a normal scenario. Jerk captain is minus one SRV.

Not seeing the problem.

Eh, you're right. Self-destructing SRV shouldn't be a feature because it occurred to me the person in the SRV could just log back into their main ship if they get abandoned. If it automatically self-destructed you wouldn't get the benefit of exploring multiple planets at once.

Well, I didn't mean self destruct in a fighter kind of way (exceeding range), I meant if they were stuck on a planet and wanted to get back on the multicrew ship they could self destruct. But yeah, they could also go back to their own ship (which would still result in the loss of the SRV for the multicrew ship, but I have no problem with that).

 

[Ignition]

Probably already been said, but and Engineer-style role would be aweseome. I'm thinking damage control, module repair, systems optimization, that kinda thing. Think Scotty from Star Trek.

Agree. I thought they were going to do it. Shiled managment (resistances and side shields finally coming to the game), advanced heat and energy redirection managment, repairs (with some hull repairs too), systems overdrive...

Its really disappointing they have limited the "multicrew" to pilot, gunner and slf.

Also an Engineer could be usefull in ANY ship with 2 seats.

 

[Martian Successor]

repped

- - - Updated - - -



What's stopping me from buying 2 more copies of elite and playing on low settings on my other computers in my house and get a buff to my ship?

Good point. Nothing would be stopping you far as I know and you'd be able to have 4 pips to SYS and 4 to WEP at all times.

 

[Monk]

I went to SagA* recently. It's not very special as a sightseeing spot and I stayed about 15 mins.
However, I felt that I earned it. It was my achievement. I didn't cheat the galaxy. I paid my dues and put the hours in.
If the insta-gratz crowd piggy-back their mate's efforts, then fine, that's up to them. I know I wouldn't feel honest about it. I just hope they don't get any recognition for the effort they didn't put in to it.

Seeing as we hardly get any recognition for doing it in the first place...a scan and a post in a forum thread that nearly no one looks at...I'm not too worried about ride-alongs clawing for recognition on this one. For me, I love viewing my accomplishments on EDSM.

 

[Greyza Badger]

Seeing as we hardly get any recognition for doing it in the first place...a scan and a post in a forum thread that nearly no one looks at...I'm not too worried about ride-alongs clawing for recognition on this one. For me, I love viewing my accomplishments on EDSM.

You need to be on Xbox, mate.. I got a shiney 'chievo.

 

[Thetele]

Can i land on planet, let crew member (or two?) go drive around in SRVs while i fly helm and 4th player fly in fighter?

Why not allow player host (owner of the helm) give control of helm to one of the crew mates (helm owner would still pay insurance even if crew mate kill the ship) and meanwhile go drive with srv/fly fighter.

Also can crew mates activate stuff (like launch fighter/open fire with turrets etc.) when ever they want? Or does the helm owner need to give them launch permission for fighters or to open fire?

 

[Muetdhiver]

...Also an Engineer could be usefull in ANY ship with 2 seats...

Hm, and what would said engineer actually do ? It easy to come up with role names, but much harder to come up with
engaging/interesting/challenging gameplay associated with it.

And I have no issue with having telepresence for long range. I mean, we get galnet and powerplay information at beagle point ...

 

[Monk]

You need to be on Xbox, mate.. I got a shiney 'chievo.

Oh really, I forget about thsoe...so does a little thing pop up when you jump to Sag A and you get a badge or somesuch?

I would expect that to be disabled for anyone riding as crew...though unimportant to me, calling it an achievement should require some effort put into it.

 

[Pumabear8]

Can we please stop "it's about the journey"; no, no it is not, because there is very little of interest along the journey except to scan planets and build your explorer rank, is it about achievement? for me personally no, I did Colonia and back before I knew neutron boost jumps were a thing, Jaques, I was going to stay at Jaques, but suddenly there was really nothing but mining, a nice place to visit, would not want to do it again with those aids.

 

[Greyza Badger]

Hm, and what would said engineer actually do ? It easy to come up with role names, but much harder to come up with
engaging/interesting/challenging gameplay associated with it.

And I have no issue with having telepresence for long range. I mean, we get galnet and powerplay information at beagle point ...

But still have to dock to cash in Exploration data.
Maybe this new fangled telepresence transmitter can transmit exploration data as it is collected and our credits awarded by return message? The future really is almost upon us.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh really, I forget about thsoe...so does a little thing pop up when you jump to Sag A and you get a badge or somesuch?

I would expect that to be disabled for anyone riding as crew...though unimportant to me, calling it an achievement should require some effort put into it.

Yep, you get a digital badge to polish.
I'd expect it to be disabled for hangers-on.
You could give them a, "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants" achievement though, with zero points attached.

 

[Olivia Vespera]

Please use this mega-thread to discuss your thoughts/opinions/feedback on the upcoming 2.3 game update. Thanks!

Could we at least have a summary of all the threads so far in the first two posts of all the concerns people have voiced?

For example here is my thread's issue that was locked was about the restriction on the Owner of the ship in Multicrew.

The owner will always be the Helmsman. They can't switch from that position and kick back and relax and watch the action.
If friends want to explore together, they can't take turns flying the ship when someone gets tired.

Now I'm not saying:

1. Owner shouldn't have the authority to maintain control over their ship
2. Can't get regain Helm control when they want
3. There aren't inherent risks from letting someone fly your ship.

I'm saying at least give the Owner the choice to let someone else take the wheel.
Let us be willing to take responsibility as a true captain should for the actions of their crew.

There was a poll attached to it with these options:

1. The owner should be allowed to give up Helmsman control to another player
2. The owner should not be allowed to give up Helmsman control to another player

Until it was locked, there were 287 votes:

1. 245 in favour of giving the owner this freedom (85.37%)
2. 42 not in favour of giving the owner this freedom. (14.63%)

This is my contribution to the megathread. I would have liked to have continued collecting a larger sample if it wasn't locked.

 

[bitstorm]

Can we please stop "it's about the journey"; no, no it is not, because there is very little of interest along the journey except to scan planets and build your explorer rank, is it about achievement? for me personally no, I did Colonia and back before I knew neutron boost jumps were a thing, Jaques, I was going to stay at Jaques, but suddenly there was really nothing but mining, a nice place to visit, would not want to do it again with those aids.

What people mean by "it's about the journey" it's in the act of doing it yourself. There's kudos and pride for a self professed explorer to make the trip to Beagle point or Sag A.

Are the planets more beautiful at Beagle point? Well maybe they are if you've made the journey.