snip....
The thread is off topic since quite some time.
It's a very silly thread to begin with.
Why is it still open?!
The moderators need something to laugh at?
I love the game but FD ignoring 95% of folks and caving to 1% makes me want to walk away.
- Thread starter Aaron T
- Start date
The moderators need something to laugh at?
So far it looks like literally nobody agreed with OP (I wonder where the 95% are?!).
The thread is off topic since quite some time.
It's a very silly thread to begin with.
Why is it still open?!
The thing is, if FD were doing what the OP wanted, then these threads would still exist from other people who would claim that FD listen to the 1% and ignore the 95%. But in this case, OP would be among the 1%... the shoe would be on the other foot as it were.
I think the other 4% are busy writing threads on the forums about how nobody listens to them.
Obviously they are busy being ignored by FD!
I liked the T-7 boost. People keep going on and on about wanting a balanced game. I want a fun game instead.So far it looks like literally nobody agreed with OP (I wonder where the 95% are?!).
The thread is off topic since quite some time.
It's a very silly thread to begin with.
Why is it still open?!
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
hehehe i think everyone no matter the side of the fence want a fun game.... but to me part of the fun is verisimilitude
I absolutely want more exploration ships.
its just nothing about the T7 makes sense for it to be a superior exploration ship than the asp Ex (i dont even think about the anaconda now, that ship is so silly it is not worth putting in the equation imo)
someone said something about a long range tade ship, and this dog could bark imo........ however it needs to be done with a way of making it specialised to do just that, and i think this could be done by giving such a ship 1 massive internal compartment, which is locked down as a none modular cargo hold, with a massive FSD and a slot for a shield.
then give the exploration ships hard built in exploration slots
but it needs to be something thought very carefully about imo and not just a beta experiment which makes a currently underpowered ship to be massively one of the best all rounders in the game for everything except combat.
You mean, a completely debalanced game is fun to you. That's alright I guess, but doesn't go for everybody.
I prefer a game without exploration trader ships and overpowered combat Haulers.
I agree to some extent. The problem with that question was that it was worded in a binary way: does a 2 hour reduction impact your enjoyment, yes or no. And of course if you do the maths and try to measure "enjoyment per second", whatever that is, you come unstuck. Forced at gunpoint to give a "yes" or "no" answer to that question I too would probably have said "yes", not because a 2 hour difference would have me tearing my hair out in frustration, but because the only alternative answer -- "no" -- might suggest that there's no impact at all. And that invites the inevitable slippery slope. If 2 hours is OK, what about 3? What about 50%?
This, too, is a perception problem. It's not that we want things to happen more slowly, it's that we want the distances to feel large. It's very, very difficult to address the "wasted" time issue without making the galaxy feel tiny.
Where you see only time, I see distance. From a totally objective point of view you're right and I'm wrong; the time can be empirically measured whereas the distance is just numbers on the screen and a fantasy world in my head. But my subjective enjoyment is very real. In doing a long series of hyperspace jumps I might not be "playing a game" in a moment-to-moment hands-on way, but I'm certainly getting something from the experience that no other game has ever offered.
I do agree that the option to fill the time with something "gamey" would be wonderful. Back in the early design phase I had dreams of being able to do something akin to Han Solo flying to Alderaan: setting a course for somewhere then going into the back of the ship to do some maintenance or play a holographic game, waiting for the alert to tell me we'd arrived. CQC was supposed to offer that to some degree, but CQC is meh and in the absence of an autopilot you can't play CQC while the ship travels somewhere, a major design oversight IMO.
Alas the structure of the game doesn't allow for anything like that, but what it does do is give an incredible sense of scale. Anything that threatens to remove that is a problem as far as I'm concerned, but I fully understand why not everyone sees it that way.
Well said.. I also enjoy the feeling of scale and the immersion that comes with that. If I could shoot to any place at a whim, I'd quickly lose interest.
And man, would it be cool if we COULD plot a course and then set our attention to others things on board the ship. That's a great notion.
absolutely spot on Jack. I would would welcome "stuff" to do when travelling, either via hyperspace jumping being a skill (carrot and stick perhaps if we do it well we charge our drives a bit faster, do it badly however it takes longer), or like you said we can use the time to do other mainanency stuff - tho that would ideally need ship legs and a co-pilot to do that properly.
but the ultimate issue is as you said, speeding up travel is less about "I want to stare at a hyperspace conduit for hrs on end" but absolutely about "I want the milkyway to feel massive, and if (when) i go to colonia i want to feel like i have don a lord of the ringsesq actual journey.
Arguably this has already been eroded, its not like FD have not been bending over backwards to make long travel relatively trivial since launch..... would it have been me it would have not only been HARDER to get to sagA on day 1, it would have been objectively impossible.
I went from page 1 to page 17.So far it looks like literally nobody agreed with OP (I wonder where the 95% are?!).
The thread is off topic since quite some time.
It's a very silly thread to begin with.
Why is it still open?!
Did I miss anything, or have the crybabies who agree with the OP been crying rivers of entitled bollox?
Explorers bad. That's it.
Ah, so they've met us.
T7 fsd boost is good, but it needs a cargo boost too which would lower jump range and make it better than a medium ship which it should really be.
Needs about 40ly with full cargo. Then it becomes useful as a long range trader or deep space miner without nerfing exploration ships.
T7 does need to be more than a stepping stone and that means either my preference to drop it to medium pads or give it a role niche. Long range trader/miner is not something I would object to but it shouldn’t become the best exploration ship.
Needs about 40ly with full cargo. Then it becomes useful as a long range trader or deep space miner without nerfing exploration ships.
T7 does need to be more than a stepping stone and that means either my preference to drop it to medium pads or give it a role niche. Long range trader/miner is not something I would object to but it shouldn’t become the best exploration ship.
That doesn't work since the jump-range fetishists, the noble explorer who think jump-range is something for the lazy while they use a jump-range optimized ship, will strip that T-7 to the bone and do everything they can to increase the jump-range.
Since jump-range is affected by mass, a ship with a lot of cargo space will always jump much further without cargo than with cargo.
The only solution would be a new ship, with exact the same stats as the buffed T-7, but with a new name (with Explorer at the end) and a different look (shouldn't look like a trading ship) and everybody will go crazy about the cool new ship.
I think the T-7 could be a really cool exploration ship. The cockpit is quite nice. It has plenty of module slots. It has no weapons to speak off. (OK, and I think it really looks like a utilitarian exploration or cargo ship).
What makes the T-7 such a no-go as an exploration ship?
Would changing the name of the "new" T-7 to T-7 Explorer help?
I think the T-7 could be a really cool exploration ship. The cockpit is quite nice. It has plenty of module slots. It has no weapons to speak off. (OK, and I think it really looks like a utilitarian exploration or cargo ship).
What makes the T-7 such a no-go as an exploration ship?
Would changing the name of the "new" T-7 to T-7 Explorer help?
but lakon already make a (infact TWO) exploration ships..... and yet you would rather their medium sized heavy cargo hauler out explore their actual exploration ships.
personally i would rather see a zorgon peterson explorer or a saud kruger exploration ship..
(but then i would be more in favour of more specialised ships which are actually honed towards specific tasks where as it seems some (you?) would rather every ship be capable of excelling at every role if you buy the correct modules.
then again me personally i would rebalance the multiroles to make sure that whilst they CAN do all things, they are not optimal at any of them.
Last edited:
Very much this, otherwise I don't see why a heavy trader can't out-jump exploration ships if multi-purpose already can. As in - logically, the precedence is already there.
Pretty much shows the mess this balancing is, when "multipurpose" - as in jack of all trades, king of none - is better at exploring that dedicated explorers...