Patch Notes Update Beyond 3.0 Beta 3 Patch Notes

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Hm ... why if i may ask?

"Fixed the joystick move animation for the female pilot model, as it was reversed"


Because of all the jokes about female drivers!

And jokes aside... My company developed some software to capture car accident claims once. One of the questions was, "Was the driver at fault?".

The programmer made it default to "Y" if the drvier was female, and "N" if male. No one ever noticed, or complained, so we can only assume the defaulting was useful. :)
 
Madpanda because dark side of planets not really dark... again. :mad: FD, stop giving us false hope about planet lighting finally being good... Every time you fix the lighting, you consider it a bug and break it again.
 
RE dark side of planets? I'm surprised this has been undone (not as dark). We could engineer our SRV lights!

Agreed. Much more realistic surely? Some light enhancement via the cockpit processing of the ship perhaps but it really ought to be very, very dark on the dark side of a planet.
 
No point, I think - it's already slow enough to make waiting it out the inefficient method.

If I kill a clean ship in a FDL then I end up with Notoriety 1, and a sizable bounty.

I can clear that bounty instantly by attacking a station (at a cost of say 10 million in rebuy depending on loadout). I can then spend maybe 20 minutes doing some basic missions to earn that money back. Or, I can wait an hour and pay it off at IF for less.

With Notoriety 2 or higher then even in a full combat Cutter with a 50 million rebuy it's more time efficient to clear the bounty by dying, then do a bit of high-earning work to get the money back (since there are a lot of way to use a ship that big to earn well over 25M/hour), than it is to wait for it to just wear off.

So long as it stops people going kill-jump to IF-clean-jump back-kill in a short loop, it's enough.

Tell me more about these "basic missions" where I can just nip off to a random station and leave with 10million in 20 minutes.
 
Well I mean they will still be Wanted after all that time and will need to pay off their bounty. The timer just ensures that there is No Way they can clear their wanted status until X hours of good behavior have passed first.

So someone griefs a dozen CMDRs over the course of a joy filled day, and the carefully considered/planned penalty is.... they have to dock at a station and go to bed for the night (just leaving their PC on)... Next morning they're back to 0 notoriety?

Hours should be days surely?
 

Ozric

Volunteer Moderator
Errr, beigification? They have prior!

beigification was not remotely the same.

You do a change because while partially desired effect has appeared it does not work for everybody. And people already blast FD about not caring about 'all types of players'.

And glitching out planetary surface lighting up is not really desired, it looked broken every time I approached starports in beta.

I had no issues with starports in Beta, so I have to suffer for your settings? :D


Only FD have the numbers on how many people were "adversely" affected by this. So we only have people's reactions to go by and I don't see anyone saying thank god it's no longer pitch black.
 
They could go back to actual pitch black but give the ship/srv a mesh overlay for the hud. This can then be toggled on off.

something like this:
stock-vector--d-wavy-surface-grid-background-perspective-view-of-landscape-or-terrain-technology-style-vector-750085546.jpg
 
Oh I've just noticed this



This is not good news. Planets are too bright as it is anyway! When you approach a planet from the dark side and as you reach orbital cruise it suddenly gets much brighter, is a very jarring experience and one that I don't like.

It's the dark side of a planet, it should be dark!

Please make it so.

As an explorer, I am not thrilled with the latest, and apparently final iteration of this. It is good that the auto throttle down was removed, but brightening planets is disappointing, and not even an acknowledgement of the premium jumponium issue with the new material limit. The recipe for J3 either need to be changed to change the Niobium requirement to a different material, or the Niobium storage need to be increased to 300.
 
beigification was not remotely the same.



I had no issues with starports in Beta, so I have to suffer for your settings? :D


Only FD have the numbers on how many people were "adversely" affected by this. So we only have people's reactions to go by and I don't see anyone saying thank god it's no longer pitch black.

Ok, I'll say it. I'm happy it's not pitch black. But it's not a big deal either way, frankly.
 
Madpanda because dark side of planets not really dark... again. :mad: FD, stop giving us false hope about planet lighting finally being good... Every time you fix the lighting, you consider it a bug and break it again.

They didn't say they fixed lighting, they specially said it is coming for Q4.
 
So, about that Type-7 jump range buff. The exact change was that the base hull mass has gone from 420 T to 460 T, and it can now mount a class 6 FSD instead of a class 5. In practical terms, this makes the Type-7 Transporter better than the Asp and Diamondback Explorers, and on par with the Anaconda.
I hope that was an oversight (though a rather big one then), and this isn't meant to stay this way.

Quick screenshot as proof, it's just the FSD that's modded, it could be improved further:
 
Some Railgun Experimental Effects under the new system now all have a 40% heat reduction applied (applies to Feedback Cascade, Super Penetrator, Plasma slug)

I feel like this is a huge mistake.

The fact that you could accomplish this with secondaries before and entirely negate one of the chief trade-offs of using railguns was broken. This makes it worse.

I get that Frontier have entirely painted themselves into a corner with engineering balance and I wish they would have just bit the "sorry, gotta nerf ya" bullet. But understanding why they're doing it how they are doesn't stop me from being sad about it and considering it a bad move.
 
Last edited:
So, about that Type-7 jump range buff. The exact change was that the base hull mass has gone from 420 T to 460 T, and it can now mount a class 6 FSD instead of a class 5. In practical terms, this makes the Type-7 Transporter better than the Asp and Diamondback Explorers, and on par with the Anaconda.
I hope that was an oversight (though a rather big one then), and this isn't meant to stay this way.

Quick screenshot as proof, it's just the FSD that's modded, it could be improved further:
[url]https://i.imgur.com/zlIkM4ft.png[/url]

Okay, this sounds a bit extreme, but I don't think FD can do much more here than modify the hull mass (which also affects speed and agility) or the FSD class (which has very drastic effects). Now the buff is certainly nice but I don't think it is right to effectively overshadow the very 2 ships with Explorer in their name. That's a bit like buffing a Corvette's internals and oops, now it is a better trader than the T9...
 
Still no changes to material trader rates? Still no fix for the clusterfrack that is the raw material trader? Still no option to put any experimental (Stripped down, flow control and double braced would be all we need) on misc. blueprints?

I like the changes so far but you NEED to address all of the above.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom