Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Why?
add jump mini-game
- Thread starter Darth Ender
- Start date
While overall I am opposed to a mini game when it comes to jumping, I did have a thought about how it could work and not affect players who don't want to use it. If we are only talking about jumping to a different star in the system how about this:
After engaging your FSD and entering hyperspace an indicator appears for each known star in the system labelled with it's corresponding letter. Similar to how an interdiction works, you could chase the star you want to jump to but the indicator moves around a bit and you're constantly being tugged back towards then center (hence if you don't want to participate you just don't touch anything). If you end the hyperspace jump with the star centered then that is where you appear. Otherwise you appear at the main star OR appear in the middle of nowhere in that system indicating you miss jumped, how far away you end up depends on how far off you were while trying to track your intended target. Could be a fun little mechanic. Maybe.
After engaging your FSD and entering hyperspace an indicator appears for each known star in the system labelled with it's corresponding letter. Similar to how an interdiction works, you could chase the star you want to jump to but the indicator moves around a bit and you're constantly being tugged back towards then center (hence if you don't want to participate you just don't touch anything). If you end the hyperspace jump with the star centered then that is where you appear. Otherwise you appear at the main star OR appear in the middle of nowhere in that system indicating you miss jumped, how far away you end up depends on how far off you were while trying to track your intended target. Could be a fun little mechanic. Maybe.
Because it makes sense from a lore perspective and from a logical one. Just considering the current gameplay mechanics, high jumps are kind of a burst of energy to reach a destination and once you reach it, you have to cool down. It makes sense that cooling down can only occur if the FSD is inactive. Hence not actively keeping you in hyperspace (SC - is hyperspace).
Additionally with the other changes i described, hyperspace is not how you would be able to view the system you jumped in. You'd only be able to see it in normal space. So you'd want to drop out anyway to take a look around.
This also has the benefit of creating situations at jump destinations that would otherwise be hoopty or not possible to implement to any meaningful way if you could just stay in SC.
This is not a major hindrance in my idea because you're not jumping system to system to system all the time. Such an activity would be very rare. Additionally, much of the journey's stopping points would benefit you or provide meaningful gameplay even more so than reaching whatever destination you had desired to reach most of the time. So these intervals between jumps are less of a speed bump and more of a cross-roads where the alternative routes may end up being more lucrative or fun than the route you had originally intended.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Ah - so it's a bottleneck - whether the player wants it or not....
Nah - I'll pass.
that's not how misjumps were represented in canonical books (the newer ones) all the time. Most of the time misjumps just drop you into "dark systems" or the vast expanses between systems...usually with ship damage that you wouldn't be able to repair and you'd be lost forever. But the protagonists usually find some way to get back on track and use it as a trick to escape pursuers in at least one occasion when it's done on purpose.
For gameplay purposes, it would be closer to the new books usage.
It's not a bottleneck unless your intention is to ignore everything in the game for the explicit purpose of reaching some destination. In my idea , this way of playing the game would be stamped out. It's a byproduct of the current way the game is designed and plays out and it's cancerous.
Would it slow down venturing out into the deep reaches of the galaxy? yes. But that's by design. every step of exploration should be a vast experience rather than the vast experience of space simply being something you are looking to skip over.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
So those who don't want to play the game the way that one player considers it should be played should have their preferred play-style restricted to suit?
.... I'm glad that Frontier clearly defined the fundamentals of travel long ago - and are, therefore, unlikely to change them to the degree proposed here.
you're not currently playing the game by jumping dozens of systems one after the other. You're watching a loading screen on repeat. That's not a play-style. It's a problem.
I do not accept anyone's opinion that the status quo method is working and desired. All we've seen since the game was released is it (travel mechanics) failing to provide any meaningful experience for the player and so is being squashed and removed as much as possible at the detriment of the game and the players. It destroys scale, creates endless repetition and provides nothing while still consisting of the majority of where players spend their time when not camping in a station - trying to decide if they hate themselves enough to put themselves thru doing it all over again.
I do not accept anyone's opinion that the status quo method is working and desired. All we've seen since the game was released is it (travel mechanics) failing to provide any meaningful experience for the player and so is being squashed and removed as much as possible at the detriment of the game and the players. It destroys scale, creates endless repetition and provides nothing while still consisting of the majority of where players spend their time when not camping in a station - trying to decide if they hate themselves enough to put themselves thru doing it all over again.
Last edited:
I am sorry but it is YOUR proposal that cant be considered serious.
So is walking around in an FPS/FP-RPG, does that mean every one of those games should be turned into Daily Thompsons Decathalon or Viz just because getting from A to B can not be done quicker.
The gameplay is not in the actual movement but what you do around it - if you can not find redeeming gameplay in the other mechanics and the general environment itself then clearly the fault is with your perceptions.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's one opinion.
Your choice - as it is up to others whether to share your opinion, or not.
While technically true, it doesn't really form a coherent argument why watching loading screens for tens or hundreds of hours is desirable. So far the discussion is this:
OP:"We spend considerable time watching loading screens. I propose adding gameplay to this.
You:"No."
OP:"We don't have to accept watching loading screens over and over as desirable, improvement is possible."
You:"That is your opinion."
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The galaxy is big - and travel takes time - some players want the time element of travelling great distances effectively removed. The proposal seeks to change many things (i.e. not just travel) and seems to be at least as much about forcing interaction between players (who play in Open).
Not wanting this change is not the same as not wanting change - the challenge being that there are many players and they rather obviously don't all want the same things.
You can't force interaction between players. You have mode selection the same as always.
My proposal is specifically to combat removing scale without adding anything for all travel mechanics. Which is all that Fdev has done so far.
What is your proposal? or are you only able to be contrarian for arguments sake?
A hyperjump minigame ? Every time we jump ? Boredom replaced by tedium ? Please no. OCCASIONAL mishaps in hyperspace (like hyperdictions currently) might be fun, depending on how frequent and severe they are, but every fricken jump ?
As for the supercruise, it's a player decision if they just point at the destination, set throttle to the blue and wait. Maneuvering in SC in something else than a straight line might actually get you where you want to go faster, by avoiding gravity wells that slow you down.
The one thing I'd really like to see are insystem minijumps from primary to secondary stars. Needn't even be instantaneous, but could be a greatly increased acceleration and deceleration as you move between the stars in SC, shortening the travel time, but not eliminating it. You'd be locked to the straight path in this case.
As for the supercruise, it's a player decision if they just point at the destination, set throttle to the blue and wait. Maneuvering in SC in something else than a straight line might actually get you where you want to go faster, by avoiding gravity wells that slow you down.
The one thing I'd really like to see are insystem minijumps from primary to secondary stars. Needn't even be instantaneous, but could be a greatly increased acceleration and deceleration as you move between the stars in SC, shortening the travel time, but not eliminating it. You'd be locked to the straight path in this case.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I'm not the one stating:
Why should others' ways of playing be stamped out because a player thinks that they are "ignoring everything in the game"? Why should any player be unable to effectively ignore particular aspects of the game if they so choose to do?
I don't have a proposal to replace travel - however I was involved in the discussions that ended up with Frontier's proposal for SuperCruise in the first place....
So, if I understand you right, you wouldn't be opposed to adding gameplay elements to the hyperjump in and of itself? For example, something skill-based where if you fail travel would be slower than it currently is so the 'scale' is unaffected would be fine with you? The thing is that gameplay should have a purpose, and it can be either positive (succeed and get something, for example less fuel consumption than normal: you 'reserve' the usual at the start but get something back if you jump particularly well) or negative (you lose something if you fail, and try to succeed to get what you currently have).
Both have 'drawbacks'. The former would be a 'buff' to something, the latter would 'enforce' the minigame on people. The third alternative is no gameplay at all. Which of the three woulld you prefer?
keep in mind, if you read the posts... you're not jumping a lot anymore. high jumps become infrequent compared to today by a significant amount. You're spending much more time in normal space and at different places within the system. You're becoming much more invested in a given region and there is much less need to venture all around the place constantly to get your kicks.
jumping constantly across hundreds of systems is not playing. Watching loading screens one after another with no real gameplay in between the 1st or the thousandth is not playing. Your argument that this is a mode of gameplay is disingenuous at best and far more likely trolling. People do this because they have to. Not because they want to. That's not an opinion. That's common sense.
I'm not the one stating:
Why should others' ways of playing be stamped out because a player thinks that they are "ignoring everything in the game"? Why should any player be unable to effectively ignore particular aspects of the game if they so choose to do?
I don't have a proposal to replace travel - however I was involved in the discussions that ended up with Frontier's proposal for SuperCruise in the first place....
jumping constantly across hundreds of systems is not playing. Watching loading screens one after another with no real gameplay in between the 1st or the thousandth is not playing. Your argument that this is a mode of gameplay is disingenuous at best and far more likely trolling. People do this because they have to. Not because they want to. That's not an opinion. That's common sense.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's not a debate where a "winner" gets to have something implemented - it's a discussion - where participants of all viewpoints are free to express them (within the forum rules, of course). Not finding the proposal attractive is a natural consequence of not all players wanting the same things.
Indeed. What constitutes an improvement is a matter of opinion.
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
You seem very certain of what I want to do and how I derive my enjoyment of the game, and yet you're completely and utterly wrong.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I doubt that any proposal to introduce a semi-mandatory mini-game (i.e. not to play it would result in worse than we have at the moment) would be met with approbation - I certainly would not be in favour of it. The potential for improved fuel consumption would likely be more appealing.