Alteration to wake scanning - You follow them no matter what their jump range?

[c00ky1970]

Subject to abuse? You didn't list one thing?

Nope I didn't as I saw previous posters had discussed this.

That sounds complicated... And, if you're having to fly 2-4 systems for each one your target is... Who's going to bother?

Sorry didn't realise this was just an "I win" button you wanted to introduce ;-) , you have to consider both sides of the interaction.

A wants to run away and B wants to catch them. If A has invested in long jump range this should give them an advantage? But if B is tenacious they should be rewarded with an opportunity to demonstrate to A that investing in a ship with lots of large weapons and a low jump range is a viable alternative.

Your effects you discuss are purely a minor penalty to B, how many people are inconvenienced by FSD damage from neutron stars/white dwarfs FSD charging in the bubble, there is a maintenance option at most star ports and the cost is minimal.

If you are chasing a quarry, be it NPC or Player, then the Wake Scanner gives you the information that you need to know where they are.. The issue is that A could jump and jump again, so your trail goes cold automatically. Adding an in game timer means that there is a hook to give the pursuing B player an opportunity to pull out the stops, forgo scooping, or jump whilst scooping to get to A's destination. This means that B has some decisions and associated consequence to catch up with A.

Initially A has no idea that B is chasing them via Wake Scanner so might not jump again, but if this is a follow up encounter they will then be wanting to do something that will discombobulate B.

A could start buckyballing around at max range to hopefully evade B. Or call up his chums arrange a system and have a welcome party waiting for B.

In the mean time B will be tracking A, trying to get to each destination before timer expires, maybe getting his chums to wing up and join him, and then hopefully catch up with A and offer a free demonstration of B's range of discipline.

Your suggestions smacks of "I cant be bothered to chase and outfox my target" rather than adding a level of excitement and intrigue to such a cat and mouse opportunity for both sides.

Also why isn't this in the suggestions part of the forum?

 

[vampireuk]

If you want to jump long distances then build a ship capable of it. Imagine how much fun it would be if you made a 50ly jump to get away from another ship only to find they can now follow you despite their ship not being able to jump that far. No thank you. The wake scanner allows you to follow a ship subject to the limitations of your own ship.

 

[Jack Schitt]

I suppose you think the magic escape pod which is both invisible and faster than the fastest ship in the game by an infinite factor, DOES fit in with the lore and what we know about the galaxy.

Your supposition is wrong. There is no magic escape pod. There is a mechanism by which a player playing a game can continue playing the game after his or her in-game spaceship/character is destroyed. Other interpretations are available.

Sorry, but that's a weak reason to shoot down the best ideas for how this 'could' be justifiable. The lore can always be retconned in (technological improvements for example).

When I said "I'm not dismissing this entirely", in the bit that you quoted, I thought it was fairly implicit that I don't have a dog in this race. But then I briefly forgot that parts of the internet are black-n-white-o-world where anything short of a total endorsement is the equivalent of "shoot[ing] down the best ideas."

I don't think it has any basis in 'lore' but it's just us discussing a possible game feature and creating our own justification that suits our immersion.

Thanks. It's open to interpretation either way but a few posts on the first page read as though it was already canon, which is why I asked. I thought it might have been in one of the official books I've yet to read or something (not that they're wholly consistent either).

 

[Lobstris]

The idea of being able to overcharge a drive for a certain extension of jump range (25%-50%) for a major chance of damaging the drive seems viable to me. And 'forcing misjumps' has been an Elite thing.

 

[Straha Yeagar]

Meh... if they add something like this in, it gives birth to a new strategy...high wake, and log for the win!

 

[Riverside]

Meh... if they add something like this in, it gives birth to a new strategy...high wake, and log for the win!

The ship is considered in danger when close to a star.

 

[Straha Yeagar]

The ship is considered in danger when close to a star.

Never had the danger timer kick off for me, and just tried it again to make sure. High wake, throttle down, and logoff upon arrival. Worked a treat, with no timer.

Perhaps rather than allowing inadequately built ships to go sometimes way farther than they are built to go, the inadequate ship should carry premium jumponium. Problem solved with already existing in game mechanics.

 

[SushiCW]

Interesting idea! Although I suspect the design goals could also be met in other ways.

(I haven't read the whole thead, apologies if any of this has already been said).


For pirates/BH, I'd rather see some sort of "tracking missile" that plants a bug on the hull of a ship. Hit them with it and for the next hour or two you can track them just like you could track a wingmate with the beacon active: they can't hide on the galaxy map, they can't hide in a low-wake. While the bug is active you know exactly where they are and can reach them.

For cooperative jumps, I'd rather have some way to directly sync drives with wingmates. Not only would this mean jumping out properly at the same time (instead of how it works now when nav-locked, where your jump starts after they disappear) but it could also mean things like formations in supercruise, pooling resources for long-distance jumps, mass-weighted average of jump range between the ships involved, etc. Lots of coolness.

So I guess I don't *dislike* your idea, I just like other ideas that accomplish the same things more.

 

[vampireuk]

The idea of being able to overcharge a drive for a certain extension of jump range (25%-50%) for a major chance of damaging the drive seems viable to me. And 'forcing misjumps' has been an Elite thing.

You can boost the range of your FSD already by using materials in flight.

Interesting idea! Although I suspect the design goals could also be met in other ways.

(I haven't read the whole thead, apologies if any of this has already been said).


For pirates/BH, I'd rather see some sort of "tracking missile" that plants a bug on the hull of a ship. Hit them with it and for the next hour or two you can track them just like you could track a wingmate with the beacon active: they can't hide on the galaxy map, they can't hide in a low-wake. While the bug is active you know exactly where they are and can reach them.

For cooperative jumps, I'd rather have some way to directly sync drives with wingmates. Not only would this mean jumping out properly at the same time (instead of how it works now when nav-locked, where your jump starts after they disappear) but it could also mean things like formations in supercruise, pooling resources for long-distance jumps, mass-weighted average of jump range between the ships involved, etc. Lots of coolness.

So I guess I don't *dislike* your idea, I just like other ideas that accomplish the same things more.

How does said missile work if the target has high waked and had full shields whilst doing so?

 

[SushiCW]

How does said missile work if the target has high waked and had full shields whilst doing so?

Obviously you'd need to tag the target *before* they high-wake. This is an alternate to wake scanners, not a replacement.

I'm not sure whether you should be able to do so through shields or not, I can imagine arguments both ways. I'm leaning more towards allowing it to go through shields, but the "missile" is specialized enough that it causes little or no damage. It could also be another variety of limpet ("tracking limpet controller") which would be consistent with how the hatchbreakers work.

 

[vampireuk]

Obviously you'd need to tag the target *before* they high-wake. This is an alternate to wake scanners, not a replacement.

I'm not sure whether you should be able to do so through shields or not, I can imagine arguments both ways. I'm leaning more towards allowing it to go through shields, but the "missile" is specialized enough that it causes little or no damage. It could also be another variety of limpet ("tracking limpet controller") which would be consistent with how the hatchbreakers work.

Hatchbreakers require the shields to be down, letting a missile travel through shields and attach itself to the hull makes zero sense and just gives an even bigger advantage to the combat ship over the target. The target manages to keep his shields up and jumps away further than the combat ship can jump to escape any further hostility only to find the magic shield penetrating missile has allowed the ship to now jump further than it can do normally just to follow them. What possible escape tactics can a non combat player take up if these ideas were implemented?

 

[FatzDomingo]

Nope, what about if you're in a similar sized or smaller ship you just get dragged along with them until they exit jump? As long as the combined mass doesn't exceed the ship that you've locked onto capabilities then you won't pull it out. Larger ships of course will drag out a followed ship or, even better slow it down with an alert to the pilot that you've pulled something into the wake with you.

The power draw when slowed down would be an obvious indicator to expect trouble. The foil for this would be to add a new engine module (Skip Drive) which permits a followed ship to interrupt its FSD travel temporarily thereby leaving the "passengers" behind and unable to lock onto them again (got to give the rabbit a fighting chance)

This Skip Drive might be an exotic upgrade from an engineer......... just thinking!

 

[SushiCW]

Hatchbreakers require the shields to be down, letting a missile travel through shields and attach itself to the hull makes zero sense and just gives an even bigger advantage to the combat ship over the target. The target manages to keep his shields up and jumps away further than the combat ship can jump to escape any further hostility only to find the magic shield penetrating missile has allowed the ship to now jump further than it can do normally just to follow them. What possible escape tactics can a non combat player take up if these ideas were implemented?

To be clear, I'm not saying that the attacker's jump range would increase. The missile would only have the tracking effect. So if you've got better jump range, you can absolutely just outrun your pursuer on the galaxy map to buy more time to make it to a station where you'd be temporarily safe. (Maybe you could get trackers removed while at a station? Maybe only certain kinds of station, to make things more interesting?)

 

[vampireuk]

To be clear, I'm not saying that the attacker's jump range would increase. The missile would only have the tracking effect. So if you've got better jump range, you can absolutely just outrun your pursuer on the galaxy map to buy more time to make it to a station where you'd be temporarily safe. (Maybe you could get trackers removed while at a station? Maybe only certain kinds of station, to make things more interesting?)

Such a thing should only ever be able to attach itself to a hull if the shields of that ship were down. Otherwise what is the point of shields?

 

[Lucius-Darcia]

Hmm a re-use of a fresh existing hyperspace conduit? Someone "created" the path and you just use it too as long as the wake exists?
A nice idea that would be reasonable and i like it. Wouldn't have a huge impact on gameplay but would mke it more worthfully to equip a wakescanner.
Rep+

 

[SushiCW]

Such a thing should only ever be able to attach itself to a hull if the shields of that ship were down. Otherwise what is the point of shields?

It's a fair point in favor of requiring shields down.

From a gameplay perspective, though, I can't help but think that tracking someone should be easier than damaging them or stealing their cargo, and that there are a lot of uber-shielded ships that players would want to be able to bounty hunt. But then again, you can already track someone (within the limitations of the wake scanner.)

 

[space voyager]

Personally I wouldn't like such a feature. If the ship can't make, she can't make it, period. Though it might be interesting to see a player loaded on jumponium and huge jump range leading others to Colonia or wherever.

 

[NeilF]

Hatchbreakers require the shields to be down, letting a missile travel through shields and attach itself to the hull makes zero sense and just gives an even bigger advantage to the combat ship over the target. The target manages to keep his shields up and jumps away further than the combat ship can jump to escape any further hostility only to find the magic shield penetrating missile has allowed the ship to now jump further than it can do normally just to follow them. What possible escape tactics can a non combat player take up if these ideas were implemented?

Ummm... On a side note, hatch breakers don't require shields to be down! They now go through the most powerfull fully charged shields around.

They used to need shields gone, but FD decided a less complex, point and click was an improvement. Personally I think shields should need to be reduced down to 1 bar to allow the hatch break to lock...

 

[SushiCW]

Ummm... On a side note, hatch breakers don't require shields to be down! They now go through the most powerfull fully charged shields around.

They used to need shields gone, but FD decided a less complex, point and click was an improvement. Personally I think shields should need to be reduced down to 1 bar to allow the hatch break to lock...

That's what I thought! Grr, y'all are confusing me. I've never bothered with the things myself and it's been a long time since any NPC used them on me (WHY! It was fun when they did), so I'm rusty on how they work.