limit max jump in route plotter (beyond just your cargo capacity)

[Winterwalker]

Hmm. Fine in principle but speaking as someone who always carries ballast, would take away the (enjoyable) reasons for doing that.

Hydrogen fuel isn't expensive, is available everywhere, can be dumped on pirates if they interdict you (your range increases so no worries there) and adds some complexity to loading / unloading .. including mental arithmetic and cargo juggling in SRV. Plus ditching ballast over the side, to get yourself out of a sticky situation on jump range is a great feeling of escapism.

So I'm afraid it's a down vote from me.

 

[Dillon Fallon]

I have a good few ships that don't have cargo racks, so these only have the options of fast or efficient. There is no middle ground and it seems like a rather strange thing to do to fit empty cargo racks just for the purpose of route plotting. I'm not going to put a module on my ships that I have no intention of using for it's intended purpose.

I'd definitely like to see this.

 

[glaukos]

ie you dont know how the system works and you thought fuel usage is off of jump range of the ship.
further more you not knowing how the fsd and fuel works is on topic and it show others that you have no clue what your asking and massively hurts any arguments you make.

What are you smoking? I've never claimed that the fuel usage is calculated from the jump range of the ship.

if you knew that fuel economy was off of ship mass and not fsd range. you would grasp the nonlinear nature of the math.

Fuel usage is calculated by multiplying the ship mass and the jump distance together (and then dividing by optimal mass etc.). So fuel usage is not just affected by ship mass. It is also affected equally by jump distance. If you limit the maximum jump distance in the route plotter, you will be making shorter jumps. If you make shorter jumps you will use less fuel. This has nothing to do with the maximum jump range of your ship; it's about the maximum jump distance that the route plotter is allowed to plot. Longer jump use more fuel. Shorter jump use less fuel. Make longest jumps shorter, save fuel. Honestly, if you can't understand this, then you're in no position to be insulting anyone else's understanding of anything.

and if you got that you would see that the practical solution to your problem (which your problem is that the economic jump routes are to long) is increasing the min range which would let you perfectly tailor your economic plotting while leaving your fast route free from tamper and still serving its purpose when needed. but you didn't get that and why you thought LOWERING the max jump range would be a good idea.

Ok. I've never claimed there was only one way to do it. Sure increasing minimum jump range and then plotting an economical route would be another way to achieve this. I'm fine with that. Though it would probably easier to do it my way because the cargo slider which decreases your max jump distance in the plotter already exists in game, so what I am asking for could be implemented simply by uncapping what already exists in game rather than adding something new. But as I've already said in one of my earliest posts, there's more than one way to implement this, and I'm not telling the devs how to do it. I wouldn't complain if they did it the way you just suggested, though it would be a bit of a bummer for the people who would also like the ability to plot routes based on their fuel tank being half empty. My idea could accomplish both the goal of limiting the max jump distance as well as increasing the max jump distance.

but this entire thread is pointless because in the long run the loss in cargo of attaching a fuel scoop is completely overshadowed by the increase in the number of trades per hour. IE SLAP A DAM SCOOP ON YOUR TRADE SHIP AN LEARN TO SPEED SCOOP

No, I don't want to use a fuel scoop ON MY COMBAT SHIP, and I don't have to. Not sure why you are assuming this is just about trade ships. The fuel scoop is an optional module. The game is designed so that it is possible to fly around the bubble without a fuel scoop, and so I will. Just because there's one way to do something doesn't mean I can't ask for another. If you don't like it, that's just your opinion, man. The flaw running through everything you've said is that you are trying (and failing) to prove that is wrong for me to have a different opinion from you. I'm entitled to want and ask for something that you think is unnecessary. Just because you believe it is unnecessary doesn't mean I can't want it or ask for it. But please, go ahead, continue trying to convince me that it is wrong for me to have different preferences than you do.

 

[glaukos]

so you were exploring and not actually trading which this thread is about.


the thread is about a person running a trading ship they want to not take a fuel scoop but want to speed up economical plotting. IE fast uses up to much fuel and economy is to slow. they basicly want to be able to run out of fuel while coming in to dock. ie the current tools allow for them to manually speed up the slowest route. furthermore the selution to their problem is incressing the min jump range not decressing the max range. but this whole thing is pointless because running a fuel scoop is the fastest and honestly every ship except for combat ships should have a fuel scoop.

Where the heck did you get the idea that this thread was exclusively about trading ships? You're clearly just out to pick fights with people. You're making up complete garbage like "this thread is about trading not exploring" as an excuse to pick a fight with someone else.

Interesting that even you agree it is reasonable to not have a fuel scoop in a combat ship because combat ships are exactly the primary (but not exclusive) use case that I had in mind when I posted this suggestion. But for some reason you made the assumption that I was only suggesting that this was for trading ships and so you shouted at me in all caps to put a fuel scoop on my trading ship when I'm not even talking about trading ships. I don't think there's any reasonable way that you can claim you aren't here just to troll people and pick fights.

 

[Darkeyed]

No, I don't want to use a fuel scoop ON MY COMBAT SHIP,

you dont want to use a fuel scoop on your combat ship well then heres what you do you go out buy a bus then pay to haul your combat ship to the next station like any rational person does with a combat ship.

Ok. I've never claimed there was only one way to do it. Sure increasing minimum jump range and then plotting an economical route would be another way to achieve this. I'm fine with that. Though it would probably easier to do it my way because the cargo slider which decreases your max jump distance

not really and in lowering the max jump range all you are doing is completely ruining the ploting system as ecnomical no longer has a purpose as you would need to use fastest to chart you jump routes. incressing the min jump range means you plot with economical which means the fastest route is left untouched and still has a purpose. your trying to throw the baby out with the bath water.

What are you smoking? I've never claimed that the fuel usage is calculated from the jump range of the ship.

I quoted the very line were you implyed it and while yes you have never said it direcetly you have implyed it.
"it's unlikely that you have enough unused cargo capacity to really move the needle much on jump range. Why not just let us limit jump range as much as we want without being restricted to limiting it based on unused cargo capacity " see a partial unloaded ship has a massively diffrent mass calculation than a fully loaded one... yet you claim it doesnt move the needle cuss you didnt understand that fsd fuel economy is based off of ship mass. ie a fully loaded ship will guzzle more fuel than a half loaded ship by a decent margen.

Where the heck did you get the idea that this thread was exclusively about trading ships? You're clearly just out to pick fights with people. You're making up complete garbage like "this thread is about trading not exploring" as an excuse to pick a fight with someone else.

oh you want to use it for a combat ship why the hell would you want to weigh down your ship with a fsd that can jump your actually going and and making your combat ship worse at combat sense to give you combat ship legs you will have to give it it above a D rated fsd drive which will make you slower in the turns. you should be parking your ship hopping in a bus and ship tranfering your combat ship to where you want it to be. it cheap relatively fast as long as you not doing a ungodly huge distance.

 

[Northpin]

That's not a range limiter. That'll still plot jumps up to max jump range.

One time I got stuck around 200Ly from with stuff all fuel left. Both plot methods had me run out of fuel 50-100Ly away. The only way I could get back to refuel was to plot a series of jumps no longer than a particular distance.

What i needed in that case was to plot a route where no jump was bigger than around 6Ly.

Problem: I want to plot routes that use less significantly fuel per jump than "fastest", which can be completed in significantly fewer jumps than "economy", but cannot carry sufficient cargo racks.

Solution: Let me drag the cargo slider to any number I want, no matter the actual cargo capacity of my CMDR's ship.

The simplest way would be if the plotter would let us plot jumps by putting a limit of max fuel usage per jump.

For example the Anaconda has a 32t fuel tank. Its 6A fuel tank FSD can use maxim 8t per jump.
A slider like the one for FSD Boost, but with stops for every 10% of the max fuel used per jump - 0.8t, will provide great degree of customization in fuel efficiency.

I posted this earlier in this thread ^^

Is it really dumb or it went unnoticed?

Edit: what i meant to say was if i set the slider to its 3rd notch - the plotter will set jumps that will not use more than 2.4 tons of fuel per jump - so it will do 13 jumps on a full tank at a way greater fuel efficiency

 

[glaukos]

I posted this earlier in this thread ^^

Is it really dumb or it went unnoticed?

Well I wasn't going to say anything... j/k Your idea is fine, but I do think it's less intuitive. So in my mind it is not "simpler," but I don't have a problem with it. It's another way to accomplish the same thing. I also would like a little more granularity than stops every 10%, but if the devs put it in exactly they way you describe it I wouldn't complain.

 

[Dillon Fallon]

you dont want to use a fuel scoop on your combat ship well then heres what you do you go out buy a bus then pay to haul your combat ship to the next station like any rational person does with a combat ship.

Why, when a jumping using a single tank would get you there faster? Nothing you have suggested means that the OP's idea is a bad one.

not really and in lowering the max jump range all you are doing is completely ruining the ploting system as ecnomical no longer has a purpose as you would need to use fastest to chart you jump routes. incressing the min jump range means you plot with economical which means the fastest route is left untouched and still has a purpose. your trying to throw the baby out with the bath water.

No, we'd have no need for economical route planning as we'd have something better.

I quoted the very line were you implyed it and while yes you have never said it direcetly you have implyed it.
"it's unlikely that you have enough unused cargo capacity to really move the needle much on jump range. Why not just let us limit jump range as much as we want without being restricted to limiting it based on unused cargo capacity " see a partial unloaded ship has a massively diffrent mass calculation than a fully loaded one... yet you claim it doesnt move the needle cuss you didnt understand that fsd fuel economy is based off of ship mass. ie a fully loaded ship will guzzle more fuel than a half loaded ship by a decent margen.

I have some ships which if I remove all the modules, replace them with cargo bays and plot as if fully laden I drop one light year. This method seems like a waste of time to me.

oh you want to use it for a combat ship why the hell would you want to weigh down your ship with a fsd that can jump your actually going and and making your combat ship worse at combat sense to give you combat ship legs you will have to give it it above a D rated fsd drive which will make you slower in the turns. you should be parking your ship hopping in a bus and ship tranfering your combat ship to where you want it to be. it cheap relatively fast as long as you not doing a ungodly huge distance.

Using an a rated FSD has no impact on combat performance. Why wait 15 minutes for a ship transfer when you could jump it in 5?

 

[Bigmaec]

Using an a rated FSD has no impact on combat performance. Why wait 15 minutes for a ship transfer when you could jump it in 5?

You tell that to the 2 m/s I gain by D-rating my FSD * shakes_fist *

 

[glaukos]

heres what you do you go out buy a bus then pay to haul your combat ship to the next station like any rational person does with a combat ship.

No, thanks. I prefer to spend my time playing the game, not waiting in a station for my ship to be transferred.

not really and in lowering the max jump range all you are doing is completely ruining the ploting system as ecnomical no longer has a purpose as you would need to use fastest to chart you jump routes. incressing the min jump range means you plot with economical which means the fastest route is left untouched and still has a purpose. your trying to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Dude, this is so funny. I am laughing out loud right now. Your concern is that adding a new feature would mean an existing feature would get less use?!?! LOL. You have some really strange priorities. Are you shilling for the Economical Route Plotter Union or something? Putting in a new option to the route plotter would take away jobs from the economical route plotters... LOL dude. You are freaking hilarious. "Oh no, we can't put in a new feature that might cause an existing feature to get used less." Strange priorities. I love talking to you. This is great.

I quoted the very line were you implyed it and while yes you have never said it direcetly you have implyed it.
"it's unlikely that you have enough unused cargo capacity to really move the needle much on jump range. Why not just let us limit jump range as much as we want without being restricted to limiting it based on unused cargo capacity " see a partial unloaded ship has a massively diffrent mass calculation than a fully loaded one... yet you claim it doesnt move the needle cuss you didnt understand that fsd fuel economy is based off of ship mass.

Uh, you completely missed a word there, buddy. I said it didn't "really move the needle MUCH." This means that it does in fact move the needle by a small amount. So once again your claim that I implied that changing ship mass doesn't change jump range is completely false. Actually you also missed the part where I said, "Unlikely to have enough cargo capacity to really move the needle." See even if didn't use the word "much," the implication of saying "unlikely to have enough" not only implies but in fact expliclity means that there is some amount of cargo that would move the needle. The only reasonable way to to interpret my statement is the exact opposite of what you claim. I am very clearly saying that cargo does affect fuel economy.

 

[Darkeyed]

Using an a rated FSD has no impact on combat performance. Why wait 15 minutes for a ship transfer when you could jump it in 5?

d rated fsd is lighter which brings down the mass of your ship which in turn means your thrusters preform better making you better in combat.....

 

[Ganogati]

I’m honestly, truly fascinated that there’s any pushback on this request. When I first saw it on the board, I figured it was simple and helpful; a low hanging fruit win for quality of life. There is literally no downside to any playstyle or player to allow a user to tell the plotter “plot a course using a maximum of 8LY jumps” other than it taking development time to produce the change. Despite this, somehow we’re 3 pages deep in this thread.

I don’t even know what to say.

 

[Dillon Fallon]

d rated fsd is lighter which brings down the mass of your ship which in turn means your thrusters preform better making you better in combat.....

Not by any perceptible margin. If you were bad with A rated, the slight loss of mass using D rated won't make you any better.

On my FdL, dropping to a D rated FSD with the same engineering gains 1 degree of yaw turn rate (no difference elsewhere), 1 m/s normal speed and 4 m/s in boost. Not worth the trade off of an 8 ly jump range.

 

[Darkeyed]

I’m honestly, truly fascinated that there’s any pushback on this request. When I first saw it on the board, I figured it was simple and helpful; a low hanging fruit win for quality of life. There is literally no downside to any playstyle or player to allow a user to tell the plotter “plot a course using a maximum of 8LY jumps” other than it taking development time to produce the change. Despite this, somehow we’re 3 pages deep in this thread.

I don’t even know what to say.

the push back is because one thier is a better way to do it which is let people incress the min range letting a player put a cap on the max range would make the current system redundant or pointless what the point of having a fastest or economical when a player can just cap their fsd. it also has downsides as it adds more complexety to a system that really doesnt need it as the current system lets players achive they same results manualy. remember your galaxy map settings don't change if you tell the map to only show scoopable stars it will only show you scoople star till you go in and undo that setting meaning if you kneecap your max jumprange its gonna stay kneecapped till you go in and manualy undo it.
now boosting the min jump range keeps the current system viable as all it would change is economical route plotting. meaning that a player can then switch over to fastest without having to undo their settings.

Not by any perceptible margin. If you were bad with A rated, the slight loss of mass using D rated won't make you any better.

ok then by that logic your shouldn't have any problem wedging in an undersized fuel scoop ether do you want to play this game?

 

[Bigmaec]

Not by any perceptible margin. If you were bad with A rated, the slight loss of mass using D rated won't make you any better.

On my FdL, dropping to a D rated FSD with the same engineering gains 1 degree of yaw turn rate (no difference elsewhere), 1 m/s normal speed and 4 m/s in boost. Not worth the trade off of an 8 ly jump range.

This. But I bet we're noobs and have no plan

Edit actually most of my combat ships have an undersized scoop wedged in.

 

[GroG79]

I always wanted this and I have never understood why Fdev have not made it ingame yet.

A slider:
Set max jump/plot range: 0-100%

If you do not understand why this is a great option (for everyone) to have... Then we need to talk ;-)

 

[Ganogati]

the push back is because one thier is a better way to do it which is let people incress the min range letting a player put a cap on the max range would make the current system redundant or pointless what the point of having a fastest or economical when a player can just cap their fsd.

Ok, you need to elaborate on this, because based on the very confused responses you have been getting from other players I can safely say that I'm not the only one who has no earthly idea what you are talking about.

We have a system with 3 possible options:

1) Economical: Aims for the shortest jumps, which saves gas
2) Fastest Route: Aims to jump the furthest it can with every jump
3) Fiddling with the not-at-all-user-friendly Laden modifier, which allows you to cap your maximum jump by at most 50-60% of your total if you're running a hauler or trader build, but usually much less than that as most people don't load large cargo racks on their explorers.

So if I have a ship that can make 40LY jumps, I can either do little 1LY jumps, do 35-40LY jumps, or fiddle with the laden thing IF I have enough cargo racks, any maybe can reduce my max jump down to 20-25LY. But if I don't have cargoracks, I can't use that at all.

So, can you please elaborate how allowing a user to have a little text box that they can type "Maximum LY to Plot: __" where they could type, say, "8" would somehow make Economical, Fastest route and the Laden modifier redundant and useless? Honest to god that makes no actual sense to me at all.

And obviously the "they can just cap their FSD" is ridiculous, right? Users may have a reason that they want to make shorter jumps in the moment, and the answer of "you should have to return to a station, dock, remove your engineered FSD and put a class D on which STILL wont get you anywhere near the range you want but hey it's a little closer right?" would actually be viable.

it also has downsides as it adds more complexety to a system that really doesnt need it as the current system lets players achive they same results manualy.

... what? No, it doesn't. At all.

remember your galaxy map settings don't change if you tell the map to only show scoopable stars it will only show you scoople star till you go in and undo that setting meaning if you kneecap your max jumprange its gonna stay kneecapped till you go in and manualy undo it.

So... we shouldn't add this because a user might do it and forget they did it?

now boosting the min jump range keeps the current system viable as all it would change is economical route plotting.

This... is literally the exact same suggestion but backwards. A max jump range on fastest route vs a min jump range on economical route. How... how is this not subject to any of the same things you've argued for max jump range with fastest route. Hell, they could do both with the same amount of effort. It changes to min vs max depending on whether you've chosen economical or fastest.


I am truly stumped here. I've reread your posts multiple times and I am truly confused. It's obvious that you are really against this change, but if there is any hope that we will be able to understand what you're saying then we are going to need a bit more elaboration.

 

[Bigmaec]

An "optimal jump setting" would be appreciated.
Dividing the jumps into just as many as you can manage with one ton fuel left.
At least I'd love that.
If there are more jumps then I have in the tank -> automatic fastest.

 

[Ganogati]

An "optimal jump setting" would be appreciated.
Dividing the jumps into just as many as you can manage with one ton fuel left.
At least I'd love that.
If there are more jumps then I have in the tank -> automatic fastest.

Honestly, I wish they swapped it up a bit and instead of having Economical route as it is, you would have:

1) Fastest Route (furthest you can go per jump)
2) Economical Route (builds route based on diminishing returns of fuel per jump)
3) Least Fuel Route (what we call Economical now)

The formula for fuel consumption basically results in further distance being jumped affecting your fuel consumption at a similar rate to adding mass to your ship. Of course, there are other factors but the end result is that you hit a point where you'd peak on how much fuel you use before diminishing returns had you consuming more fuel than it was woth. Jumping 1LY consumes FAR less fuel per LY than a 40LY jump, meaning you can make a 1000LY run on a single gas tank using 1LY jumps if you were so inclined, but would have to fuel scoop very very often on the 40LY jumps.

I'd love an option that is basically "here's the magic falloff. This is the maximum LY you can jump before you start to lose 'bang for buck' on your fuel economy."

Thinking about it, if we had a maximum LY option we could probably do that math ourselves.

 

[Northpin]

The simplest way would be if the plotter would let us plot jumps by putting a limit of max fuel usage per jump.

For example the Anaconda has a 32t fuel tank. Its 6A fuel tank FSD can use maxim 8t per jump.
A slider like the one for FSD Boost, but with stops for every 10% of the max fuel used per jump - 0.8t, will provide great degree of customization in fuel efficiency.

Well I wasn't going to say anything... j/k Your idea is fine, but I do think it's less intuitive. So in my mind it is not "simpler," but I don't have a problem with it. It's another way to accomplish the same thing. I also would like a little more granularity than stops every 10%, but if the devs put it in exactly they way you describe it I wouldn't complain.

Well... one way would be to simply have a box to enter max jump range in light years. but this will be a bit crude and not very useful.
Or to go the technical way and put a limit on max fuel usage (that i'd say it will be more useful in calculating ranges based on available fuel)

For example, my armed exploration conda does 69 ly per 8t fuel - that's 4 jumps on a full tank and it means about max range 280ly

But it will do close to 40 ly per jump if limited to 2.4 tons of fuel per jump, which means more than 500 ly range.
And if i could limit the fuel usage to 1.6 tons per jump, it will do 33 ly jumps with a total range of 660 light years.
Or, using only 0.8t per jump will mean jumps of 25 ly and a total range of over 1000 light years.

Spoiler

Calculus Fuel Consumption

FuelConsumedPerJump = LinearConstant * 0.001 * ( Distance * ShipMass / FSDOptimalMass ) ^ PowerConstant

FuelConsumedPerJump = Exactly what it says, in Tons.
LinearConstant = This is a number that depends only upon the Rating (not Class) of the Frame Shift Drive.
A: 12
B: 10
C: 8
D: 10
E: 11
Distance = The distance to be jumped, in light years.
ShipMass = The mass of the entire ship and its contents in Tons, including cargo and fuel, before fuel is removed for the hyperspace jump.
FSDOptimalMass = Whatever number the Outfitters reports for the Frame Shift Drive, in Tons. The mass of the ship can exceed this value.
PowerConstant = This is a number that depends only upon the Class (not Rating) of the Frame Shift Drive.
2: 2.00
3: 2.15
4: 2.30
5: 2.45
6: 2.60
7: 2.75
8: 2.90

credits here
SPOILER]

edit: ninjaed by @Ganogati but cheers anyway, i forgot where i picked the formula, but i added the credits in the spoilers