Having Only Timed Missions is Stupid

[Kaocraft]

Only because it doesn't fit your point.

If you don't have time to play the game. If the game isn't fun for you. Don't play it.

Unbelievable. Not only doesn't it fit my point it doesn't fit YOUR point. Or any point, really.


First of all, the mission timers have no bearing on whether the game is fun when you are playing it. The timers are too long to add any meaningful sense of urgency to a mission within the span of a given play session, so even if you have a problem with time limits, it probably doesn't impact (for or against) your sense of fun while you are actually playing.


The only thing the timers do is make it more annoying and cumbersome to STOP playing at your own convenience. It doesn't matter if you've been playing for 10 minutes or 10 hours; if you've been running missions during your play session then there's a good chance you'll have a few unfinished missions when it's time for you to stop playing. At that point you're stuck with a choice between playing past your intended time frame, or immediately making plans in real life for when you'll next be able to play the game so that you can finish the missions before the timers run out (oh and you *better* stick to that schedule and not do something dumb like allow other life requirements to interfere with your all-important play schedule otherwise "mission fail!"), or making peace with the fact that next time you log in you're immediately going to be bombarded with a bunch of "fail" notifications and angry "you suck!" messages from all the factions issuing those missions.


The solution according to you: when you play the game, always have in the back of your mind an awareness of when your play session is going to be ending, and how far off that moment is. Whenever you look at the mission board, you must accurately predict how long it will take you to complete this mission and any other missions you have already taken/are considering taking on. If there are any tempting missions which may exceed the scope of your current play session, you must also keep in mind what your real life schedule for the week looks like, and factor in whether you'll still have enough time to complete the mission during your next play session. If you leave the play session at any time for any reason, you must maintain an awareness of all the missions you had on your list, how far along your respective mission timers are, and make sure you log in and play again at an early enough time to complete the missions before the timers run out. Failure to do any of this perfectly and consistently will result in failure of the missions.


Sorry but I'd like to fail a mission because I lost the cargo, or was shot down by the assassin, or couldn't disable the target's drives before he jumped away. Not because I wasn't playing the game at a specific date and time.


If we had access to the statistics, I would be very surprised if the #1 reason for mission failure wasn't "timer ran out while i wasn't even playing."


How is this more immersive or realistic or whatever than the alternative? As things are now, you have to constantly be thinking about your life OUTSIDE of the game in order to properly play the game. If the timers froze in place when you logged off, you could be 100% invested in the goings-on INSIDE the game for the duration of your entire play session, however long or short it might be.


If things worked the way I am advocating, would you complain and demand it be switched back? Would you miss it? If so, why? Be honest here.

 

[Xenith]

I don't want to be dismissive, because there have been some excellent points raised, but I don't think I've ever experienced a situation in which 24 hours wasn't enough time for me to get a delivery or number of deliveries done. I can understand it being frustrating if your internet goes down for a day or more, maybe you're ill and can't play, or some family emergency crops up and you can't get on, but how common are these situations to warrant changing the system? I assume it's there to motivate people to log in regularly and play the game, rather than some in-universe reason, and it could be a lot, lot worse.

 

[DefiledDragon]

I don't want to be dismissive, because there have been some excellent points raised, but I don't think I've ever experienced a situation in which 24 hours wasn't enough time for me to get a delivery or number of deliveries done. I can understand it being frustrating if your internet goes down for a day or more, maybe you're ill and can't play, or some family emergency crops up and you can't get on, but how common are these situations to warrant changing the system? I assume it's there to motivate people to log in regularly and play the game, rather than some in-universe reason, and it could be a lot, lot worse.

I think the pertinent question is what damage would be done by changing the system? At the moment, some people have a problem with the mission timer and for good reason, others don't. If the timer was removed, would anyone have a problem with it and if so, why? If a change can improve the game for some while leaving the others unaffected, it's a positive change.

 

[Xenith]

I think the pertinent question is what damage would be done by changing the system? At the moment, some people have a problem with the mission timer and for good reason, others don't. If the timer was removed, would anyone have a problem with it and if so, why? If a change can improve the game for some while leaving the others unaffected, it's a positive change.

Well, I don't really care one way or the other, so no, I don't think we the players would suffer for such a change. But it must be there for a reason, we just don't know what that reason is... yet.

 

[DefiledDragon]

Well, I don't really care one way or the other, so no, I don't think we the players would suffer for such a change. But it must be there for a reason, we just don't know what that reason is... yet.

Only FD know the real answer to that.

 

[ThriveInDark]

1000th Monkey is technically right, but OP has a point.

The thing that kills me is the time taken to swap roles.
Until you have a ship dedicated to each task, rekitting for each this is a pain.
Want to go mining?
Refineries, cargo space, limpets, lasers. You get somewhere and you've forgotten something. Go back to pick up a prospecting module or stay and go without?

When you're set up for a thing you can make useful progress.
But if you're not, it's a PITA to change.

I think that's why you get players who grind Haz Reses forever.

To be fair I have always preferred combat for cash in general in games, never the trader/gatherer. Kill, get paid, buy materials on auction house, gatherer gets rewarded for gathering efforts, cycle complete. 2 players get to play the way they prefer and be happy about the progress.

And yeah, it can be a pain even changing to different ships if you only have 2 hours of playtime on deck. You'd be surprised how long it takes to go 3-4 jumps, then fly to station, dock, swap ships, get missions/cargo and relaunch.

 

[SentineI]

So given the troubles with the games constantly the past few nights after the tick (8:15pm), which coincides with when I play for a couple of hours, I would've liked my Deliver 88 Palladium with a 3mil CR fine not to be timed as I had to give up last night then wake up earlier today just to hand a bloody mission in!!

You don't need to get rid of mission timers completely, just have ones which don't count down *when you are not playing the game*, OR which don't completely fail you when they expire (and instead don't affect the BGS + perhaps lower player rewards). See my earlier post for more details.

 

[Xenith]

You don't need to get rid of mission timers completely, just have ones which don't count down *when you are not playing the game*, OR which don't completely fail you when they expire (and instead don't affect the BGS + perhaps lower player rewards). See my earlier post for more details.

Trouble is, if the timers froze, then I suspect they would just replace the global countdown with something even more obnoxious and constraining. They're obviously in place to control something, though quite what that something is remains a mystery.

On a positive note, I logged in and discovered that I had 4 deliveries to make in under 30 mins, in completely different systems, in completely different directions. That was fun! Flew like a complete lunatic, docked like a kamikaze, and still got them there on time. Not an experience I would welcome often though!

 

[Tarman]

You don't need to get rid of mission timers completely, just have ones which don't count down *when you are not playing the game*, OR which don't completely fail you when they expire (and instead don't affect the BGS + perhaps lower player rewards). See my earlier post for more details.

A goodly selection of casual-playstyle-suited non-BGS-connected missions could be a good avenue to pursue; if they're cool enough they'd just be another layer of the overall available missions. I find that most of the best solutions to issues in this game are to add MOAR things, not take away the things we already have.

 

[Faded Glory]

Last night I lined up 3 missions all to the same base. Flew there landed. Got called away, had coffee, went to bed. Logged in tonight the said missions failed cost me more in fines that I should have earned. Point to this na none really just thought it was rather funny.

That's kind of disappointing, although perhaps a bit surprising that you didn't have time to make half a dozen mouse clicks between being called away and going to bed...

All that aside, the issue IMO is that the timers add no challenge to the missions. In a real-time game, either a player has time to do something, or they don't (and frankly the timers as they stand absolutely give plenty of time to complete any mission). FD tried to make 'time' a thing when they added the rush delivery updates, but even there, nothing a player did or could do actually made a difference, you could either get to the destination in the time given, or you couldn't. Flying faster didn't factor...

Timers are probably a hangover from the previous games, where due to the way time was handled (it wasn't real time), you had to do a bit of planning to make sure that you would be able to complete missions by the date that they expired (note that this is slightly different to 'in the time' that they gave).

While I personally have never failed a mission because it timed out (not because I'm good, just because they give a lot of time), on reflection I think that having the timers seems redundant. If it's to stop players hoovering up a ton of missions, then I guess it works for that, although mission boards hardly allow for that much mission stacking anyway. As I said, they add no actual challenge, so they might just as well be dropped.

I did think about ways that time might be used to add a bit of planning or thought to gameplay, but that was ages ago...

I see that the impossible to make "Please get this here sooner..." seem to have made a re-appearance for delivery missions (unless it's a bug).

Here's the thing, either you can do it, or you can't. It's not a challenge, as the NPC who informs you that you've failed implies, I can only fly as fast as my ship can go, and if I can't get there in time, then the whole thing is a waste of...

I've suggested this elsewhere, a long time ago, but if you want to make time a thing, have it as part of the initial mission...

CMDR, we need this stuff delivered, you have 24 hours...

BUT, if you can get it there in the next 7 minutes (an example, not a suggestion), we'll pay a bonus.

Now I have to think about the missions I've accepted, think about the order that I will do them in, look at the system map to see how far the station is from the star, so many possibilities.

Wouldn't this be better?