2.3 dev update feedback mega thread

[Robert Maynard]

Teleporting around the Galaxy was never on the table, so this was not a compromise. It was always going to be instant telepresence. Maybe there was some internal debate about the LY range, but the people who are coddling explorers with infinite range ADS god vision seem to have won the day.

imo the range should be no more than 25,000 LY and not be able to function through or inside the galactic core.

Why should some players be arbitrarily excluded from participating in a new feature that is designed to remove barriers from multi-player?

.... and Michael has said in the past that some Exploration features might be better if they were different but it's too late now to change them.

 

[Krieger]

That much work would mean you could join your ship to them instead of multi-crew. That means the group is even more powerful if you travel there and join as a wingman rather than a crewmember. So joining as a crewmember would be a downgrade and suboptimal play. But if you can't get there because you're 100+jumps away,you can still join in, but it won't be as effective a presence as someone who joined up in their ship. That would, however, still be more effect than not playing with them at all.

If you look at it that way, what's the use of the MC feature then? Apparently, if the going gets tough, winging up is best because that gives a lot more firepower.

 

[Sterling MH]

If you look at it that way, what's the use of the MC feature then?

You don't have to spend time doing nothing but preparing for the game, but you still get the same game played.

Instead of your E|D interactions with other E|D players being baiting on forums or playing PvP "pirate" they can be "Help that person out".

MC, like Wings, is a team CO-OPERATION game play mechanism.

We need more player co-operation in this game.

And Wings required too much not-cooperating before being able to co-operate, whilst TP for a MC role is an easier, but less powerful, method of co-operating with another player in Elite: Dangerous.

 

[Sterling MH]

On what planet is this the case?

This one.

Otherwise we would not bother to train armies to move as a unit, we'd just throw 100,000 individuals into battle, and the Romans would have lost to the Goths. Since the Romans won because they learned how to fight as a unit and were equipped to be able to fight as a unit, whilst the northern barbarians were all individuals who fought as they pleased one-on-one, the Romans winning is where we have proven that a group is more powerful than a lone wolf in battle.

 

[Sterling MH]

Ah this. And I thought we're talking about games. Stupid me...

Ah, so when you said "In what world" you meant not to say "In what world" because there is no world in "games". Just the coding of the game.

Do you want to keep arguing silly semantic one-upmanship and increase the toxicity of the forums yet more to "win" an internet?

Because sure as santa, there'll be another person complaining about the length of this thread in less than five pages, and you will have added several pointless ones, including the entirely pointless "In what world?" one.

 

[frostypaw]

The problem with all these people seems that they actually don't like *space* games or have no idea what the term space actually means. My question to them would be why of all things does it have Elite Dangerous for you, the only currently real existing space game that comes at least close to the idea of vast distances? Why do these people need to shrink this concept more and more into matchbox size and the direction of arcade, moba or other action multiplayer games? As if we wouldn't have it already in form of hundreds of already existing games, there's even CQC for you which I'm pretty sure would work a lot better if only enough of you would actually play it?

Because it has the best combat. I was hoping Eve Valkyrie was going to sap their numbers, but ED is too damn good.

Fixing CQC so that type of near consequence free action can be done in all ships and with all mods would help a lot and give all the instant action that people so desperately desire. It should be able to fix everything - instant death on combat logging, no RNG rolls just click'n'upgrade after you collect a few tokens in the arenas etc - almost every whinge we hear can be addressed in that separate game - all the friction is from trying to pretend the two styles of play are compatible.

 

[Sterling MH]

Ok you won. If it means something to you.

It doesn't. But it meant enough to you to try and push it on to me. [blah] Why?

 

[Krieger]

You don't have to spend time doing nothing but preparing for the game, but you still get the same game played.
<snip>

Interesting reply you gave there. For me travelling those 10+ minutes to meet up already qualifies as playing the game. For you it doesn't? What is the game then for you? Only the parts where you are joined up in a multi-crew and the rest is "preparing for the game"?

BTW I'm not baiting you or anyone else. I'm genuinely interested how you (and others) see the game and experience it.

 

[Sterling MH]

Interesting reply you gave there. For me travelling those 10+ minutes to meet up already qualifies as playing the game.

No, if you spend 10 minutes, then you should wing up. But not everyone is 10 minutes jump away from anyone else.

Seriously, all this has been gone through before with you, go (re?) read the posts I made to you on this topic, you clearly have either forgotten or never read them. If there's anything in them you remain unclear or want expanded, let me know. But as far as I can tell, all the information you need to know is in them. Just keep clicking on Source to trace back the conversation, and read the posts. Posting again the small segment relevant to this post of yours will not suffice if there are other posts giving the information you will ask for again because you've forgotten or ignored them.

 

[lokvette]

You could just stop there. But ok. Thank you.

It would made life so much sweeter if he had..

 

[Muetdhiver]

Because it has the best combat. I was hoping Eve Valkyrie was going to sap their numbers, but ED is too damn good.

Fixing CQC so that type of near consequence free action can be done in all ships and with all mods would help a lot and give all the instant action that people so desperately desire. It should be able to fix everything - instant death on combat logging, no RNG rolls just click'n'upgrade after you collect a few tokens in the arenas etc - almost every whinge we hear can be addressed in that separate game - all the friction is from trying to pretend the two styles of play are compatible.

I think fixing CQC will not be the answer. People don't want instant action. I think that most want instant Coop, be it for combat, exploration or trading.

It just turns out that the only viable coop gameplay is combat and that coop is plagued by the time cost of setting up a session. (20-60min is bad as far as setting up coop play is concerned)

 

[Sterling MH]

It would made life so much sweeter if he had..

It would have made life even sweeter if you'd not posted anything at all there. Myself and Juke are conversing off the thread because throwing tantrums and snark in public is merely throwing toys out of the pram at others, and discourteous of anyone having to read this thread, long as it is already. But if you prefer to add yet more noise and handbags to gain props for beating other people up verbally in public, you can hardly claim any ground against others for what they post.

Not if you're being honest anyway.

 

[lokvette]

It would have made life even sweeter if you'd not posted anything at all there. Myself and Juke are conversing off the thread because throwing tantrums and snark in public is merely throwing toys out of the pram at others, and discourteous of anyone having to read this thread, long as it is already. But if you prefer to add yet more noise and handbags to gain props for beating other people up verbally in public, you can hardly claim any ground against others for what they post.

Not if you're being honest anyway.

If I was being honest ...... . . . . . . .

 

[Cobra1984]

Not sure if it has been mentioned before, but there's another good reason (apart from the many others) of having instant multi-crew.

Sometimes, when I want to play with a mate - we'll log on and find out we're, say, 300ly apart. No problem, one of us will fly to the other to have some shenanigans.

Prior to multi-crew the general idea would be to either wait for your buddy to arrive, or do some trading/bounty-hunting until they arrive (which lets face it could be well over an hour), and then you get on and do what you want.

With instant multi-crew, I can go gun for my buddy as he comes to me (or vice-versa), and earn some cash blowing targets out of the sky. Sure, it'll take him longer (potentially way longer) to get to my location, but we're playing together whilst he does it.

Suits me just fine.

Great idea!

I can actually use this to persuade a friend of mine back into the game.

 

[zzehirbazz]

51% in unreleased titles, not including Planet Coaster, which you can rest assured has the Lion's share of devs on it right now given that it's a new product that's still getting the kinks ironed out. If there's any doubt about that look at Planet Coaster's pace of development and compare that to ED.



http://ar2016.frontier.co.uk/assets/pdf/frontier-developments-2016-annual-report-and-accounts.pdf

Why are you so surprised? I told all of you this was going to happen because Horizons sales were garbage and it turns out the long tail wasn't enough to justify the continued pace of development.

Time and time again, I pointed out that FDev's business model wouldn't support the game, and you all poo-poo'd it and said that dreams can happen. Meanwhile, FDev is moving away from the seasons model because they are unwilling to keep up even the turtle's pace of development we're getting from Horizons.

Enjoy your dreams and rainbows. This is what you wanted.

Is that why Frontier took the drastic measure of optimizing the game for PS 4 since they were so inclined to drop it in the near future?

I hope not! I have not even had chance to get it on my PS4 yet!

Exactly! Good one!

Can someone fill me in, what's the lore explanation for the pilot of a ship destroyed at Beagle Point turning up alive in an insurance claims office on the last station that they visited? And could that bit of handwavium not also be used with regard to multicrew's proposed matchmaking system?

Teleportation according to lore. When your ship is destroyed you immediately are teleported to the nearest station by your ship`s defense measures.

There is no such thing as teleportation in the elite universe , they can not teleport humans. thats part of the lore

Please read above. It is a proof.

Hush hush, everyone keep the topic civil as possible, please.

Aynen dostum

For example I'm happy with what I know about the commander creator, I'm undecided about some multi-crew mechanics, I'm not happy with 3rd person cam.

You are not happy that you can see yourself as an existing being in your ship rather than a seat cover? Or having that weird experimental 3rd person camera being converted into a useful one?

In Türkiye we call that a "sidik yarışı"

Indeed we do, it`s called: " P.ss Fight"

In Italy it's "Chi ce l'ha più lungo" [praise]

"Whom has the bigger one"

Credo che significa "Cazzo" Tutti Il`uomini sono stessi nel mondo.

As a 1984 forum dad and a huge fan of the original game to this day, I'm delighted to see Frontier starting to leave 1984 behind.

I think we were able to land on atmospheric planets in Elite? That makes me a forum grandpa

My fear is that Elite Dangerous is going to become an Actiony Arcade Lobby Game (Space MOBA) to appease the Insta-Gratification Pew-Pew Console Kiddies. While the Open World aspects are being phased out or left to collect dust and rot

Fear not! It needed some action for a long time. Just hope that it will breathe some life into the game and pray that they will improve the other aspects in another season.

You have a commander in game. It's who you are in game. Let's say you're name is Cmdr Bob. You will design how he looks in the next update.
But with multicrew, cmdr Bob can teleport anywhere in the galaxy if he joins a crew. When you join a crew on the other side of the galaxy you are still Cmdr Bob.

I think it would be nice if we could be Crewmate John when we "teleport" to another place using multicrew. And at the same time if we meet the crewship in a station Cmdr Bob could play himself on a crew. Do I make sense?
This would keep the notion that you have to go through some lengths for your commander to go out in the galaxy and explore for himself. But at the same time would not put any barriers between a quick multicrew session and your time.

I wish more people would get behind this. Now it's either -don't ruin my immersion OR -don't you dare suggest any wait times.

I thought about the same solution as you do and immediately stopped when I realized that different commander will have to cough up the earned dough to your commander whenever he quits multicrew session, which makes it a bit meaningless.

 

[Krieger]

No, if you spend 10 minutes, then you should wing up. But not everyone is 10 minutes jump away from anyone else.

Seriously, all this has been gone through before with you, go (re?) read the posts I made to you on this topic, you clearly have either forgotten or never read them. If there's anything in them you remain unclear or want expanded, let me know. But as far as I can tell, all the information you need to know is in them. Just keep clicking on Source to trace back the conversation, and read the posts. Posting again the small segment relevant to this post of yours will not suffice if there are other posts giving the information you will ask for again because you've forgotten or ignored them.

I think you are mixing me up with someone else. AFAIK this is the first time I had (an attempt at) a discussion with you. No problem though I'll read back the thread.

Seeing how active you are on this thread, and may I say how agitated you come across, maybe it's better to let this thread go. Just a well meaning tip.

 

[Sterling MH]

I think you are mixing me up with someone else.

It was in the thread of conversation you jumped into, so go back and check the track back, your confusion is resolved there. Lets not add even more to the thread than necessary by making multiple repeats of information that is easily available, just not instantly available, to you.

 

[Krieger]

It was in the thread of conversation you jumped into, so go back and check the track back, your confusion is resolved there. Lets not add even more to the thread than necessary by making multiple repeats of information that is easily available, just not instantly available, to you.

FYI my initial post was directed at GREYLOCK, not at you. You are mixing things up. Have a break. I mean it. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/326569-2-3-dev-update-feedback-mega-thread?p=5114556&viewfull=1#post5114556

 

[Sterling MH]

FYI my initial post was directed at GREYLOCK, not at you. You are mixing things up. Have a break. I mean it. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/326569-2-3-dev-update-feedback-mega-thread?p=5114556&viewfull=1#post5114556

FYI

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?p=5114986&viewfull=1#post5114986

Is where you started with me. So, no, I didn't get you mixed up.

Stop with the slurs and accusations, i mean it.

 

[vulkman]

As the mods closed down my thread and pointed me here: Mark me down as strongly opposed to non-localized (it's not about instant or not, it's about in the same place or not, please don't just add a delay ) multicrew matchmaking. To me Elite so far is pretty good at story telling through game mechanics and a mechanic like that would do nothing but hurt the story telling. It's bad enough we have to deal with the cognitive dissonance of respawning lightyears away due to the real-time nature of the game, let's not make it worse if we don't have to.