Oh god. Deciding which extended fuel tank of multiple possible "gets filled" as your primary is filled makes my head spin already... ofc there are options, but none that would please everyone.
Fuel tanks as an optional module should have an off switch
- Thread starter Hyoscine
- Start date
-
- Tags
- exploration fuel modules
Exactly. And that would be a more feature complete version of implementation. The alternate method assumes your design and coding rules/practices allow you to throw a feature check into the fuel scooping loop… and it just dawned on me… what if someone fuel transfers you against your will? Now you gotta add checks for that…. If you don’t could you imagine all the fuel rats
griefing explorers on expeditions by filling them past their jump threshold?!?!?! 
In order for multiple fuel tanks to work as one, the game has to function in close to one of those two ways already. Adding a single conditional to this really isn't very complicated. It wouldn't have to be a constant check; you could just have a new "operating fuel capacity" parameter that's updated as the modules come on or offline.
I agree that this functionality could be presented in a more pleasing way than the barebones thing I've described. I would love for this to be an addition to the inventory tab, with a similar look to the refinery interface. As you say though, UI alterations aren't quick or easy.
(edited for formatting)
Last edited:
I can only assume you explore the galaxy by gunship, as convenience is clearly the enemy of real players such as yourself.
Exploration should not be minimising # of jumps to 'points of interest'. That's tourism.
Exploration should be, y'know, exploring. Finding unknowns, spending time investigating a system and it's nuances. In Exploration, points of interest do not exist until you find them... and you don't know they exist until you get there
Exploration should also require complex fits including recon and research limpets, mining lasers and a diverse range of scanners. But that's a whole other bag.
"Max range jumps" simply maximises the amount of systems you skip per jump, which you actually should be stopping at and looking through.
The fact max jump range is the key factor of Exploration is, well, a pretty damning indictment of the current state of exploration. "Skip the galaxy as much as possible til you hit something already known to exist"
Don't get me wrong... there's validity to having a long range ship. But such a ship is the antithesis of what exploration should be.
Last edited:
Or just 'max jump' setting - it's nice to have a long range to get somewhere, but long JR gets in the way for exploring. Not that I'd advocate taking along an extra fuel tank just to reduce the jump range, that way madness lies
We're mostly on the same page, and I can see how "points of interest" sounded like sightseeing (which isn't a diss to sightseers, the sights are worth seeing!). I meant setting out with a rough destination in mind. I tend to aim for areas hundreds of LYs across, and tens of thousands of LYs away. Once I'm where I want to be, usually unvisited bits of the galactic edges, I think I probably spend my time exploring the same way you do. Improving the functionality of optional fuel tanks would enable more of the kind of exploration you're talking about, just minus scores of jumps through well-travelled systems.
Why would you need a recon limpet on an explorer?
You might find a megaship or an installation in a forgotten place...
Recently I was playing around with jump ranges and fuel consumption, considering to make a ship that could go to Beagle Point without a scoop. You fill up the ship with fuel tanks and make short jumps. It would take a while but seems doable. The problem is that the "GPS" tries to maximize jump range which is contrary to what you want, unless you go full "eco" mode with very short jumps and a very limited route length. You have a slider to add "cargo", but only if you use the module slots for empty cargo space, that you'd want to use for fuel tanks.
It would be nice with a limit to the maximum jump range in the GPS. (EDIT: Could perhaps be "Max fuel used per jump")
coriolis.io
It would be nice with a limit to the maximum jump range in the GPS. (EDIT: Could perhaps be "Max fuel used per jump")
Coriolis EDCD Edition
A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous
coriolis.io
Isnt that what the datalink scanner is for? All I've ever done with the RL is collect data mats with it.
Even before you go down to the actual implementation on how fuel is represented and managed inside the ship "objects", this is a new feature altogether.
An "on/off" button for a non-powered optional. Fuel tanks, cabins, don't show up in modules. Cargo racks do show up but there's no "off" button. If you now present Fuel tanks, that's UI work for the tab, any text added there has to be approved, go through localization to other languages, etc.
THEN the ship object needs to be able to update its max fuel state (regardless how is actually implemented) outside of outfitting, that's exposing other properties/methods, etc. Which is what you refer "operating fuel capacity", another feature/property that doesn't exist (I assume doesn't exist, and its state can't be changed other than through outfitting)
We all have to agree, when it comes to requesting features on code that we don't know, we can't just make assumptions that is easy, or trivial, or even super complicated either.
Cargo racks work similar to fuel tanks, you add them to the ship and is a flat currentCargo = currentCargo + newCargoRack;
To finalize, I did hit like on your suggestion, would be nice. But reiterate doubt it has any significant QOL improvements, plus the more I think about it, the more I believe is not trivial change at all.
Some megaships have Hackable comms array, or something like that. You scan first then sub-target the connection point (I forgot the actual name) and you send recon limpet there
I can't stress enough the relatively of my original post. Of course there's all the work that comes with making any changes to the game. Still, even with everything this addition would take to function, it feels like a very approachable thing to implement. Compare this thread to others in the Suggestions forum; there's some things on the front page I would love to see implemented, but all of them have a greater complexity than this.
I'm not sure I agree with calling any aspect of this interface work. Data shown by the UI isn't the interface it self, which is already designed to show any number of optional modules. Letting another module be listed, with a toggle that most already have doesn't seem like a change to the interface to me. It's why I was hesitant to call for a more visually pleasing implementation, like a cool new module tab along the lines of the refinery one.
We all play this game differently. I can see how this change might not make great waves for the average player. Being able to effectively manage multiple fuel tanks would literally open up the galaxy to me though. Exploring the rim is exciting, and I feel more people would be inclined to do so if carrying fuel reserves was more straightforward.
~edit~
Thanks for hitting like!