Consider the impact of a tether for colonization mechanics ...

Yure

Yure
Currently colonization mechanics is tethered by a limited range. While this may seem like a good way to hamstring player expansion to buy you time, consider that players ARE going to get to where they want to get. Yes, it might take longer but consider that they are now making assets all the way there. Assets that will now take up space in servers to some degree.

Removing the tether would allow players to develop colonies in more interesting locations, but also would have the effect that everything in between Sol and anywhere won't be cluttered with junk. At least not for a longer while. Not only that, but not having a tether would also limit expansion by the logistical portion of having to ferry materials from where they are available to somewhere in the black. Which you can then adjust if you needed to speed or slow down the process.

Something to consider.
 

Mussurana

M
Perhaps, but the BGS and therefore missions available in those systems would be extremely awkward.

Arguably this will also be the case for systems linked by a long range tether of underdeveloped claims too.

Had it been me, I'd probably have set a bar at a certain level (representing a viable economy) before a beacon could be purchased.
 

photomankc

photomankc
Mussurana said:
Perhaps, but the BGS and therefore missions available in those systems would be extremely awkward.

Arguably this will also be the case for systems linked by a long range tether of underdeveloped claims too.

Had it been me, I'd probably have set a bar at a certain level (representing a viable economy) before a beacon could be purchased.
Click to expand...
Agree. The stars will now be littered with abandoned outposts that have nothing to provide.
 

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
aRJay said:
Which reminds me of the Hinder Stars in CJ Cherryh’s books, the ghost towns in the USA and the Abandoned Engineering series on satellite TV.

So a certain realistic flavour.
Click to expand...
An in-game mechanics to decay these stations and settlements would be a great addition to the game. Similar to the burning stations after a Thargoid attack, it would be fantastic to fly into a dilapidated orbis, evade drifting debris and then walk the empty concourse. Maybe some mats to collect or encounter a group of scavengers? Perhaps the frontline store still active or a few missions to bring back the station to an operational state? Ruins of planetary settlements?

Would truly add a huge amount of gameplay and atmosphere.
 

Mussurana

M
Jinx Chrome said:
An in-game mechanics to decay these stations and settlements would be a great addition to the game. Similar to the burning stations after a Thargoid attack, it would be fantastic to fly into a dilapidated orbis, evade drifting debris and then walk the empty concourse. Maybe some mats to collect or encounter a group of scavengers? Perhaps the frontline store still active or a few missions to bring back the station to an operational state? Ruins of planetary settlements?

Would truly add a huge amount of gameplay and atmosphere.
Click to expand...
Perhaps an option to depose the architect for such systems too?

Naturally should only apply to such underdeveloped systems, ones with viable economies should not decay.
 

Inscydeus

Inscydeus
Jinx Chrome said:
An in-game mechanics to decay these stations and settlements would be a great addition to the game. Similar to the burning stations after a Thargoid attack, it would be fantastic to fly into a dilapidated orbis, evade drifting debris and then walk the empty concourse. Maybe some mats to collect or encounter a group of scavengers? Perhaps the frontline store still active or a few missions to bring back the station to an operational state? Ruins of planetary settlements?

Would truly add a huge amount of gameplay and atmosphere.
Click to expand...
It would be cool if abandoned stations had a possibility of being taken over by roving bands of pirates, reavers etc.
 

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
Mussurana said:
Perhaps an option to depose the architect for such systems too?

Naturally should only apply to such underdeveloped systems, ones with viable economies should not decay.
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't even care if the architect's name stays or not. It is nothing which adds or removes value for other players.

And I agree with your statement, adding to it: A lifecycle is something which favours life and a decay should not happen within a few weeks or so. Kind of a quarterly up- or downtick for such settlements.
 

Nadreck

N
Given the current jumprange of ships, the current 15ly range will create "highways" with stations rather too close together, most ships will be jumping past several of them with every jump. Like putting motorway service stations a few miles apart.
 

Greasetrap42

Greasetrap42
Yure said:
Currently colonization mechanics is tethered by a limited range. While this may seem like a good way to hamstring player expansion to buy you time, consider that players ARE going to get to where they want to get. Yes, it might take longer but consider that they are now making assets all the way there. Assets that will now take up space in servers to some degree.

Removing the tether would allow players to develop colonies in more interesting locations, but also would have the effect that everything in between Sol and anywhere won't be cluttered with junk. At least not for a longer while. Not only that, but not having a tether would also limit expansion by the logistical portion of having to ferry materials from where they are available to somewhere in the black. Which you can then adjust if you needed to speed or slow down the process.

Something to consider.
Click to expand...
Something To Consider:

It will take a very long time for colonies to make it further than 500Ly from the bubble. Unless Frontier can come up with a solution for high volume fleet carrier jumps, the need for fleet carriers for building long distance colonies would immediately kill the concept.
 

Jinx Chrome

Jinx Chrome
Nadreck said:
Given the current jumprange of ships, the current 15ly range will create "highways" with stations rather too close together, most ships will be jumping past several of them with every jump. Like putting motorway service stations a few miles apart.
Click to expand...
The range of our ships is not the factor for the BGS. Correct me if I am wrong but the state of the system is dependent on the BGS and that has a max range of 20 ly IIRC. Therefore, a system outside of that range would zombify because it cannot thrive.
 

metatheurgist

metatheurgist
You guys are missing the big picture. They always said Raxxla was in the game but no-one had found it. Raxxla has to be close to the bubble because there's no reason for the Dark Wheel to be out in the middle of nowhere. How else to force the playerbase to painstakingly examine every nearby system except to start "colonisation" that can't go further than one system at a time? 🤯
download (5).jpg
 

Yure

Yure
Greasetrap42 said:
Something To Consider:

It will take a very long time for colonies to make it further than 500Ly from the bubble. Unless Frontier can come up with a solution for high volume fleet carrier jumps, the need for fleet carriers for building long distance colonies would immediately kill the concept.
Click to expand...
That's the point. Far off logistics would require a good amount of coordination and group work. So still very much possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom