Jump to the Nav Beacon?

Phoenix_Dfire

Phoenix_Dfire
I'm wondering if we could suggest that something 'small' be tried in the next Beta?

When jumping to a system with a Nav Beacon, the ship arrives at the Nav Beacon (even if it's compromised) and they have to deal with any NPC or Player encounters there and then get out and super cruise to their destination. If there isn't a Nav Beacon then the gameplay carries on as it is. I know that this may cause a bottleneck, especially during CGs etc, but I feel anything that gives the player more gameplay/encounters is a good thing.

In addition, you could have more than one Nav Beacon in a system (I.E. Always next to a Stellar Body (I.e. Star, Black Hole, Neuton Star, etc) then if you jump into a system with a destination set, then the Nav Computer will drop you out at the closest Nav Point. (Sorry to the Hutton Truckers).

I'm just curious if the community would be interested in this kind of thing, or even if fdev would be willing to do this as an experiment?
 

Factabulous

Factabulous
Phoenix_Dfire said:
In addition, you could have more than one Nav Beacon in a system (I.E. Always next to a Stellar Body (I.e. Star, Black Hole, Neuton Star, etc) then if you jump into a system with a destination set, then the Nav Computer will drop you out at the closest Nav Point. (Sorry to the Hutton Truckers).
Click to expand...
Lost me there.

And not really a fan of the idea in general - it's swapping one global rule for two, and would mess up peoples muscle memory for jumping. Maybe if it was switchable as it helps with farming missions etc, which I guess is the idea of the suggestion.

Plus - what happens in the systems that already have 2 nav beacons :)
 

Rampant

Rampant
M00ka said:
Umm what happens if the Nav Beacon is on the other side of the star?

And to your suggestion - no thank you. Having to drop into normal space on every jump when travelling around even in the bubble would be disastrous.
Click to expand...

Basically, it'd more than double the journey time. Which I'm not saying that I'm against - but it would definitely split opinion.
 

M00ka

M00ka
Rampant said:
Basically, it'd more than double the journey time. Which I'm not saying that I'm against - but it would definitely split opinion.
Click to expand...

Can you image doing that with a ship full of Void Opals or Painite? Every jump having to a minimum, dodge a bunch of trigger happy NPCs, at worst, fight your way out just to jump and repeat it again.
 

Factabulous

Factabulous
M00ka said:
Can you image doing that with a ship full of Void Opals or Painite? Every jump having to a minimum, dodge a bunch of trigger happy NPCs, at worst, fight your way out just to jump and repeat it again.
Click to expand...
Well, in some way's that is the OPs idea - you'd get more interaction, and also for mission NPCs - they could just camp Nav beacons.Stop people using paper builds, which is probably a good thing ...
 

M00ka

M00ka
Factabulous said:
Well, in some way's that is the OPs idea - you'd get more interaction, and also for mission NPCs - they could just camp Nav beacons.Stop people using paper builds, which is probably a good thing ...
Click to expand...

No, I don't think it would change the way people build ships, it doesn't happen now with Open and NPC pirate activity. All it would do is add to the overall doom and gloom of the game. And since most people stack missions anyway, there is normally a string of interdictions during a mission anyway - well it is for me anyway lol
 

Phoenix_Dfire

Phoenix_Dfire
M00ka said:
No, I don't think it would change the way people build ships, it doesn't happen now with Open and NPC pirate activity. All it would do is add to the overall doom and gloom of the game. And since most people stack missions anyway, there is normally a string of interdictions during a mission anyway - well it is for me anyway lol
Click to expand...

Your lucky then, I hardly get interdicted when running missions. I'd probably be happier if I was interdicted by NPCs more but it does seem to be a rare event. Yeah, the main idea was to stop people Min/Maxing their ships.

The reason behind the Multiple Beacons is because I feel that more than five minutes is Super-Cruise without something happening isn't interesting, so if you can either cut down down the journey time or at least has something interesting happen to break up longer journeys, then more the better.
 

Kelster87

Kelster87
I'm going to say no to this as well.. Longer SC flights are part of the game mechanics, it makes you think if the trip is worthwhile. IIRC, the reason you drop out near the main star is related to how the FSD works - at least as established by lore.
 

Drelthar

Drelthar
Pretty sure this was the original design before they came up with supercruise.

It would have been great with that model (you were to jump between points of interest, no inter system travel)

With the way jumping between systems works now though, it would be pretty bad...

Which is a huge shame, because I think it would be great to drop into a populated real space location on entering a new system, as it would allow for pirates and bounty hunters alike to hang out there waiting for targets.

If you look at the NPC's at nav beacons, it really looks like that's what's supposed to be happening.

They only later introduced the concept of scanning the nav beacon to get useful information very late on, making it make some level of sense.
 

Bloodsign

Bloodsign
Interesting concept, but I don't like it as described. I agree with CMDRs who cite vastly longer travel times and messed up muscle nemory. Space is vast, travel is time consuming (biggest time sink in Elite) and any change that adds more travel time won't get my vote.

I do like the idea of being able to immediately jump to nav beacons while WITHIN a system though. Basically working around the "jump out to closest system, jump back in" thing. The idea being that for large systems, you might go out to a secondary star but then want to visit an inner planet on the primary star or something.
 

Stabby_Dave

Stabby_Dave
I'd go with "no", for the reasons stated above.

Also, unless I'm wrong (and that's a distinct possibility), doesn't the FSD mechanic drop you in at the main sequence star using it's gravitational properties as an anchor for the exit point. They'd need to be some sort of lore change if this was going to change.
 

Lestat

Banned
Lestat
When you travel to a group of systems, the direction can prevent you from seeing Nav Beacon. Ether they are on the wrong side of the star. Right now we travel in one direction when we are flying in a group of systems. The system we jump to blocks the system we are heading too. We don't want an exploit that players can use Nav Beacon give players a short cut.

I am also looking at PvPers Exploits in Major player base systems like Sol, Lave, or Founders world it would ruin gameplay for many people they will go into solo mode.

Sorry, this idea is a Fail.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Phoenix_Dfire said:
I'm wondering if we could suggest that something 'small' be tried in the next Beta?
Click to expand...
Creating a "campsite" in every system with a nav beacon is not "something small" - it'd quite significantly change the dynamic with respect to avoiding other ships - and not all players are focused on combat as a core part of their gameplay. While combat is one of the three Elite ranks, the other two can be achieved without firing a shot.

Not in favour of effectively removing in-system travel either.
 
Last edited:

Julio Montega

Julio Montega
Well, i'm not sure where i'd stand here:

Pro:
  • makes beacons serve more purpose
  • allows easier blockades of systems
  • becomes a meeting point

Con:
  • more hassle, having to jump -> SC -> dock at a station
  • more hassle for fuel scooping and just plain travelling through a system
  • more hassle for exploration in civilized space (FSS is SC only)
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Phoenix_Dfire said:
Not really removing, just cutting down. You still have to super cruise from the Nav breacon to the destination, it's just won't be 100,000 of ls of travel anymore.
Click to expand...
.... or near 7MLs. The proposal would result in the functional equivalent of removing long distance super-cruise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom