POLL: Should ED have an Auto Pilot?

Should Elite Dangerous have an autopilot that can only be used for jumping to systems (and be able t

  • YES

    Votes: 242 30.6%

  • NO

    Votes: 550 69.4%
  • Total voters
    792
  • Poll closed .
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

CTCParadox

CTCParadox
We have an autopilot that can dock the ship (most of the time anyway) yet we don't have one that can line up a dot and push a button. Or keep a dot lined up and then throttle down to 75% when the timer hits 6 seconds. It's a bit strange.

I mean I would prefer if FDev actually added some skill to flying in Hyperspace and Supercruise, but if that doesn't happen then an autopilot would be fine.

CMDR CTCParadox
 

Jazzy

Jazzy
=71st=RuSh said:
My only hope is that FD release an AUTOPILOT ROUTE COMPUTER.

The NO guys are invited to not buy it (as they do with the STANDARD DOCKING COMPUTER), and thats all, everybody is happy!, the YES guys will buy it, and waste another module slot enjoying the travel while sip a good coffee or beer or whatever.

I hope the NO guys are no selfish enough to not ban this proposal!
Click to expand...

I see no issues with that, outside of all the "I DIED whilst AUTO PILOT was on" compliant posts that will come rolling in.

Honestly automating things in Elite, I would not bother to play. Once that came in, next they would want Auto Trader, Auto this, Auto That and so on.

The game shall be renamed Elite: Auto Gaming - Watcher Edition!
 

Falcon_D

Falcon_D
Hello,

Just started on my trip to Sag A*, and man is the constant engage jump, wait to get through witchspace tunnel, throttle to zero before hitting star, honk, scan, fuel scoop, target next system, jump, rinse and repeat, getting to me. My biggest gripe at the moment is how long it takes to do a DSS of a planet/star.

Having gotten that off my chest, there is no way I would want some navigation computer doing that for me. I would rather do those jumps manually than having them automated.

To me that's part of the exploration game play. It's tedious, repetitive and does not really require much skill. However, what is does require is patience, a bit of fore thought and some planning. This type of "gameplay" is not really everyone's cup of tea. I listen to youtube music videos while exploring now, others watch movies while others play other games. Which means that this part of the ED gameplay is the portion where you take it nice and easy, and pretty much do other things while "playing" the game. I like it. If I want to be constantly at my controls dodging NPCs, killing NPCs, smuggling stuff, doing trade runs looking for new stations and new routes while trying to fend of intradictions, I can do those too.

If there was ever a navigation computer that would take up an internal slot like a DSS or ADS, then my suggestion would be that the nav comp have to following properties:

1. It cannot do fuel scooping.
2. It can only do as many jumps as the ships fuel stores allow. (Obviously)
3. It can only plot navigation routes using systems which you've already explored or a known:
a. Systems in which you have used the Discovery scanner and scanned the main star.
b. Systems in which you have scanned the Nav beacon.
c. Well known systems which already have system information available in the GalMap.
4. It's a star to star navigation system. Not a station to station navigation system. To me this kind of makes sense as I can see where the stars are on the Galmap and then don't really move, but there have been times when I've hit a system and the target planet is nowhere near where it was shown on the system map.
5. It takes a class 1 module slot and weighs the same as an ADS.
6. It does not zero throttle when intradicted.
7. Upon entering normal space it immediately zeros throttle. Either due to intradiction or some celestial event such as being too close to planetary/solar bodies.

That's just my opinion.
 
Last edited:

Argus Leadhead

Argus Leadhead
Adhock said:
Small recon aircraft that require a lot of precision adjustments to avoid inciting incidents. Sure it's not Commercial but when you're flying something that heavy you don't ever take your hands off the controls.

It's driving a car. Would you take your hands off the wheel and look anywhere else but the road?

Automated transport may be the future but computers do what they're told. Even if that means ignoring hazards and plowing right into them because the route says to go to some place on the other side of said hazard. You told it to go to destination and unless it has several hundred other lines of code telling it what to do when it encounters certain conditions, it's going to plow right through. You need to be VERY SPECIFIC when designing automation protocols.

Honestly, unless you can predict every single thing that will ever happen. A Human pilot will always be better then a computer.

What did you think the first time you came across a White Dwarf and was suddenly yanked out of SC by it's deceptively large gravity well when you've already run face first into a few suns?

Bet you learned something the next time you ran into one.



So you're saying your secondhand hearsay is better then my firsthand experience? You must live in a nice reality. Are they accepting immigrants?
Click to expand...

The "hazard factor" would be amplified in 2.2 as well. If you plot a route in a fairly straight line (or at least in the same general direction) warping between systems now puts your destination almost directly across from the star. Because of the more accurate warping introduced in the 2.2 beta, that would mean you aren't off set from the star upon exiting warp but instead cantered on it.

For auto pilot to work, it would have to steer around each star, which would require even more coding than it would in the current 2.1.05 build we have now. Especially since it would have to factor in things like: Gravity well magnitude, the distance correlation between temperature and the spool up for h-jump, and the distance you're dropped out from any given star. Throw in binary (or more) stars and it'd start to get even more complicated.

Not only would it detract from what Elite is in my mind (and the roughly 70% of players that've voted "no") but it'd be pretty hard to implement from a technical standpoint.

As others have said, if your ship is moving, you should be in control.
 

Sandmann

Sandmann
Prediction: the same result more or less as the instant vs delays transport polls.... and the open vs solo polls... and the pvp vs pve polls... and the guilds/clans/corps vs not polls...

Reasoning: the same people who don't want realistic transport times also don't want to actually pilot their ships around.

Theory: roughly 30% of players only realy want to gang up on someone smaller for pewpew and find the rest of the game tiresome. Everyone else wants to play elite.

Observation: thus far after 319 voters my prediction's spot on. Watching with interest.
 
Last edited:

Sandmann

Sandmann
Panticus said:
That is the 'logic' in having a docking computer, whilst still being forced to stare at a dot and hit 75% at 7, and all that nonsense.
Click to expand...

Flawed logic. We have docking computer not because it's needed, but for the same reason it plays the Blue Danube - legacy. The original games had them coz it actually WAS difficult to dock back then. These days we need docking computers like a fish needs a bicycle.
 
Last edited:

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Adhock said:
S

It's driving a car. Would you take your hands off the wheel and look anywhere else but the road?
s?
Click to expand...
Firstly just to say i would not be bothered if fd added a jump computer so long as use at own risk and it used a module slot, and that you had to be around ... ie i woukd actually like more stuff that can happen when long range travelling. I woukd not use it however.

But with that our there. Your logic is flawed. Volvo sell a self drive car right now which they say you can sit and read the paper whilst it drive. Its very limited run now but 10 years from now i fullg expect self drive cars to be a viable option for everyone.

Google also are currently in final testing phase of self drive cars. Its exciting times. Whilst the petrol head in me will want to own a manual drive car whilst i can, an option to have a self drive so i can go the pub or watch tv when i am crossing the country is great
 

Jason S

J
Personally yes,
The jumping about it kinda tedious after a while and I have plenty else to do in my other PC window and only keep a side glance on that would be good.

Also the polls on forums are not that representative of the player base as a whole.
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Jason S said:
Also the polls on forums are not that representative of the player base as a whole.
Click to expand...

again, devils advocate and all, (and indeed in the past I used to share your opinion) however Both the brexit Poll and the timed ship delivery poll both of which had forum only polls AND external far larger polls both seemed to indicate the forum was well within half a percent of an accurate representation. That does not mean all polls on here are representative and it certainly does not mean FD should listen to every poll here if it is outside the scope of their vision...........,

But it does mean imo you cant (shouldn’t) state this forum is not representative without some facts to back it up... all the (limited) evidence we have so far shows it to be fairly on the money.
 
Last edited:

Winterwalker

Winterwalker
Mad Mike said:
But it does mean imo you cant (shouldn’t) state this forum is not representative without some facts to back it up... all the (limited) evidence we have so far shows it to be fairly on the money.
Click to expand...

Ccertainly representative of a least a section of the playerbase ofc, it might even be (going to be contraversial here), that it represents a certain section of the existing playerbase .. who don't necessarily speak for the potential playerbase ..

I personally prefer an in-system a-pilot over an interstellar one but that doesn't mean I hate the idea of the idea. Suggest too that the game playing itself doesn't HAVE to be the case because it depends how implemented. If there were risks and costs to using automted interstellar jumps in the game, it's possible both camps could be satisfied? It's certainly an idea that crops up from time to time, so worth more (I think) than just a flat "no". Why else no?

If voted Yes, what balances could be put on so you wouldn't get the sense of the game playing itself (more that the ship is being programmed to fly itself, under executive control, under what is a very believable autopilot mechanic). What ship risks might it involve? Could you/would you crash and how often? What exploitation might be possible and how could a design avoid that??
 

Komemiute

Komemiute
Every automation will make people care even less about what happens on the screen, make them wander off while AP, and then be all sed off and sulky when someone killed them while they weren't paying attention.
So, a resounding NO from me- if the flying across the vast space doesn't appeal to you, well- there's plenty other games out there.
 

Anthony Jones

A
I would like to see an autopilot for use in supercruise only.

Drop into system, manually select station destination and activate autopilot and it will fly to the station. You would still need to fly within 7500m and manually dock or activate a docking computer.

It it should only work with stations and planetary bases. It would not work to autopilot into a hazardous resource site

if you want to jump systems that should be done manually.

Anthony
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom