proposal for alternative SC mechanic

[dxm55]

It isn't the game that's wasting player's time. It is the players wasting their time. Assuming you're only one jump away, it is possible to go from undocking at one station, to docking at the majority of stations in the Bubble, in under four minutes in a Type-9... the most unresponsive ship in the game. 90% of likely bubble destinations are within 10k light seconds, and only 0.006% of systems have secondary stars greater than 700 kls out based on post 3.3 registered systems on EDSM.

Nearly all long Supercruise journeys are avoidable if you do your research before you hit "accept mission." The rest can be avoided by doing a little scouting near where you're operating, or hitting "abandon mission" if you consider a Supercruise trip excessively long. In addition, should you decide that a longer Supercruise trip is still "worth your time," you can use that time productively in the game. If you're out exploring, use that time to scout along your galactic route, searching for hidden gems a few hundred light years off your path. If you're in the Bubble, use that time to examine your local stellar neighborhood, or search for those opportunities for extreme profits that sites like EDDB inevitably miss.

I do this with Inara as a guide, all the time.
I would rather make 3 jumps to a system with a station within 500Ls of the arrival, than 1 jump to system with a station 8000Ls away.

Imagine that. It takes less time to reach a station 120Lys away than one less than 30Lys away.
Just part of the nonsense that is slow SC travel.

It gets worse if there is more than 1 star in a system, and especially so if the only planets are orbiting the B star.
That's why SC travel has to be faster, via increased acce/decel rates and cruising speed, by maybe as much as 5-fold.

Or allowing direct jumps to the secondary stars.... but only from another system. I understand that many geeks here don't like intra-system microjumps.
So perhaps being able to jump to the second star from outside the system would be more acceptable?

Finally, active piloting can reduce travel times, sometimes considerably, vs the "Set it and Forget it" method you describe below.

Speaking of the "Set it and Forget it" method, this is likely why you consider travel times excessively long. This is literally the worst way to travel in Supercruise. Large mass interferes with FSD efficiency, decreasing how much the FSD can bend space around it. This effectively reduces your top travel speed. By practicing active navigation and hands on piloting, you can plot optimal routes through a system, avoiding large mass and getting to your destination quicker. In addition, you can shave off even more time by practicing gravity braking, flying close to massive objects near your destination to slow your ship down faster than the "six second" rule. In fact, even overshooting and looping back is faster than the "six second" rule.

Oh I manual fly it all the time. Aim 45 degrees above the orbital plane, full throttle, then once at the halfway mark, aim it down at the destination until 7 secs and cut it to the middle of the blue zone.

and you know what? It stil takes TOO DAMNED LONG. Pfft.
I actually have to keep one eye on the game because you never know exactly when you reach 7 secs.
The timer changes as your ship accels/decels.

So I would rather have an autopilot that flies in the blue zone. Only for those silly super long SC runs.

Then I can leave the ship to its own device to cruise, drop out of cruise and auto-dock, while I go to the kitchen and get a sandwich.... or ask the GF/wife to make me one.

 

[Atol]

I do this with Inara as a guide, all the time.
I would rather make 3 jumps to a system with a station within 500Ls of the arrival, than 1 jump to system with a station 8000Ls away.

Imagine that. It takes less time to reach a station 120Lys away than one less than 30Lys away.
Just part of the nonsense that is slow SC travel.

It gets worse if there is more than 1 star in a system, and especially so if the only planets are orbiting the B star.
That's why SC travel has to be faster, via increased acce/decel rates and cruising speed, by maybe as much as 5-fold.

Or allowing direct jumps to the secondary stars.... but only from another system. I understand that many geeks here don't like intra-system microjumps.
So perhaps being able to jump to the second star from outside the system would be more acceptable?




Oh I manual fly it all the time. Aim 45 degrees above the orbital plain, full throttle, then once at the halfway mark, aim it down at the destination until 7 secs and cut it to the middle of the blue zone.

and you know what? It stil takes TOO DAMNED LONG. Pfft.
I actually have to keep one eye on the game because you never know exactly when you reach 7 secs.
The timer changes as your ship accels/decels.

So I would rather have an autopilot that flies in the blue zone. Only for those silly super long SC runs.

Then I can leave the ship to its own device to cruise, drop out of cruise and auto-dock, while I go to the kitchen and get a sandwich.... or ask the GF/wife to make me one.

I find your idea of mini wormhole an terrible idea. It ruins what Elite Dangerous is all about. I did not pay to play a dumb down Arcade game. I paid to pay a Space sim.

I think you need to do listen to the other people and how they avoid long distance travel. They are sound and they have logic behind them and yet you and your group of 5 ignore them.

 

[dxm55]

I find your idea of mini wormhole an terrible idea. It ruins what Elite Dangerous is all about. I did not pay to play a dumb down Arcade game. I paid to pay a Space sim.

I think you need to do listen to the other people and how they avoid long distance travel. They are sound and they have logic behind them and yet you and your group of 5 ignore them.

What mini wormhole? I didn't suggest intra-system jumps.
I would welcome it though.

I said we should be allowed to jump to secondary stars from OUTSIDE the system.
That means I can jump from Sol to Sirius A OR Sirius B.
But not Sirius A to B.

And I already know how to choose my missions and avoid those with stations far away from the arrival point.
Ditto selling my void opals. Trust me, I know my way around this game very very well.
All the legal ways, all the loopholes, all the exploits.

What I'm saying is simply.... Travel takes too long, even by the fastest known methods. It is what it is. My opinion.
You can't change my mind bub.

 

[Atol]

What mini wormhole? I didn't suggest intra-system jumps.
I would welcome it though.

I said we should be allowed to jump to secondary stars from OUTSIDE the system.
That means I can jump from Sol to Sirius A OR Sirius B.
But not Sirius A to B.

And I already know how to choose my missions and avoid those with stations far away from the arrival point.
Ditto selling my void opals. Trust me, I know my way around this game very very well.
All the legal ways, all the loopholes, all the exploits.

What I'm saying is simply.... Travel takes too long, even by the fastest known methods. It is what it is. My opinion.
You can't change my mind bub.

I read all your post dude Making SC shorter. If I answer. Its like Worm hole or not most likely I answer for one of your older posts. Sorry my bad. I try to understand people before posting.

So your asking to double the amount of system on the game? I am a role player. Distance is part of my game style. Making it shorter hurt my game style. I don't care for a bad Arcade type game styles that has mass amount of short cuts.

Now your lower part of the post. If you know your way around this game very very well and you can Avoid those system with station that are far far away from the arrival point. Why are you having such a bad issue? You know, I have to agree with the people who use Logic when they play ED. Just going by credit earn or a set goal thinking about is the distance worth traveling time? A lot of times I will say no. Maybe because the credit are too low. Some times I go Damn that a lot of credits. I don't mind the 15 Minutes travel time.

Yes, I do love Arcade type games. But I like Elite Dangerous for how it is. It don't feel like another Arcade game. It feel more like a Sim type game.

Oh by the way You can't change my mind.

 

[dxm55]

TLDR

Oh by the way You can't change my mind.

I know. You're entitled to your opinion, as am I.

 

[nanite2000]

I think you are over-simplifying the issues in play and are not considering the overall impact of said changes, you are also assuming that changing base acceleration would have a significant effect - something myself and at least a few others dispute.

Things are reasonably balanced as they are, what yourself and others are asking for would require a not-insignificant amount of work.

It's software. It can be changed by a software developer.

It's not up to us to declare whether it's 'too hard' to change because neither of us have access to, let alone seen, the source code for this game.

ANY attempt to alter SC travel times (inc. just changing baseline acceleration) would notionally require revisiting of various areas including but not limited to interdiction mechanics and mission rewards.

Yes. But if SuperCruise travel times are reduced by a relative amount, then all other factors (rewards, ability to interdict) should remain unchanged.

It may take less time to get to a distant destination, but that doesn't mean the mission rewards have to change since every destination travel time will be affected by the same amount, so the net result is a consistent difference in travel times between near and far destinations. Far destinations can still net higher rewards than near destination because they will still take longer to get to.

As for interdictions, this should also still be OK, since interdictors will be accelerating by the same amount as all other ships. OK, there may be physically less time to do it in, but that's no different to what we have now when pirates operate in small systems. Basically, pirates will just need to be a bit more proactive.

 

[nanite2000]

So your asking to double the amount of system on the game? I am a role player. Distance is part of my game style. Making it shorter hurt my game style. I don't care for a bad Arcade type game styles that has mass amount of short cuts.

I'm an explorer, and the needlessly long travel times hurts my game style.

Now your lower part of the post. If you know your way around this game very very well and you can Avoid those system with station that are far far away from the arrival point.

Yes, we already know that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way.

Why are you having such a bad issue? You know, I have to agree with the people who use Logic when they play ED. Just going by credit earn or a set goal thinking about is the distance worth traveling time? A lot of times I will say no. Maybe because the credit are too low. Some times I go Damn that a lot of credits. I don't mind the 15 Minutes travel time.

Yes, we already know all that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way.

Oh by the way You can't change my mind.

So are you just going to keep repeating your same point over and over again? What good will that do?

 

[lenna]

Yes. But if SuperCruise travel times are reduced by a relative amount, then all other factors (rewards, ability to interdict) should remain unchanged.

Most common motion calculations emulated control systems is at the most basic level represented by the equation s=(u*t)+(0.5*a*(t^2)) where s is the distance travelled between frames, u is the current scalar velocity, t is the frame time to the next frame, and a is the notional scalar acceleration.

In ED where SC is concerned it is obvious to at least some of us that the variable a in that equation is at least a function of u, the throttle value (a signed floating point value in the range -1 to +1 derived from the current throttle setting for the sake of argument), and a variable local space maximum velocity. For the sake of argument this could be expressed as (0.5*a*(t^2))=fn1(ship,u,throttle,fn2(system, x, y, z, dx, dy, dz, t), t) where fn1 is the basic acceleration/deceleration curve calculator and fn2 is the local space maximum velocity calculator. Both functions/calculators are likely to be relatively complex but based on experience probably logarithmic in general form (empirical evidence being the nature of motion in sc). However, without true inside information the actual nature and complexity of this calculation is an unknown.

What is quite clear though is that changing the mean 1st order acceleration curve is unlikely to be a simple matter and resolving the end effect on other factors is going to be even less simple. Attempting to reduce SC travel times in general also introduces other complications such as the overall "feel" of SC and there is no justification to alter that.

[NOTE]This is just derived from first principles and experience flying in SC in ED.[/NOTE]

 

[lenna]

Imagine that. It takes less time to reach a station 120Lys away than one less than 30Lys away.
Just part of the nonsense that is slow SC travel.

Not nonsense, whether such a case could occur is a matter of local conditions - the more dense the system, the slower SC travel will be. Then there is the matter of line of sight which means you could have a clear run to the 120Ls object but have a dense field of bodies in-between you and the 30Ls object.

 

[nanite2000]

Most common motion calculations emulated control systems is at the most basic level represented by the equation s=(u*t)+(0.5*a*(t^2)) where s is the distance travelled between frames, u is the current scalar velocity, t is the frame time to the next frame, and a is the notional scalar acceleration.

In ED where SC is concerned it is obvious to at least some of us that the variable a in that equation is at least a function of u, the throttle value (a signed floating point value in the range -1 to +1 derived from the current throttle setting for the sake of argument), and a variable local space maximum velocity. For the sake of argument this could be expressed as (0.5*a*(t^2))=fn1(ship,u,throttle,fn2(system, x, y, z, dx, dy, dz, t), t) where fn1 is the basic acceleration/deceleration curve calculator and fn2 is the local space maximum velocity calculator. Both functions/calculators are likely to be relatively complex but based on experience probably logarithmic in general form (empirical evidence being the nature of motion in sc). However, without true inside information the actual nature and complexity of this calculation is an unknown.

What is quite clear though is that changing the mean 1st order acceleration curve is unlikely to be a simple matter and resolving the end effect on other factors is going to be even less simple. Attempting to reduce SC travel times in general also introduces other complications such as the overall "feel" of SC and there is no justification to alter that.

[NOTE]This is just derived from first principles and experience flying in SC in ED.[/NOTE]

Yea, you're clearly overthinking this.

I'd prefer to leave it to the developers who actually have access to the game's source code to determine the impact of changing super cruise acceleration rates.

Thanks though.

 

[lifeschool-amiga]

SC is SC. I wish people would give up with the 'can we tweak' threads. FDs game is what they gave us, and I'm sure they have better things to do than read this stuff, or change game core principals now. Good or bad, its not a community project, and as far as I can see, the game hasnt had new technology since Ship Launched Fighters, and is now a sandbox for stories and goals. At least they are keeping the spirit of the game alive, and not just leaving the game - like 99.9% of other producers do as soon as its finished.

 

[Atol]

I'm an explorer, and the needlessly long travel times hurts my game style.


Yes, we already know that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way.


Yes, we already know all that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way.


So are you just going to keep repeating your same point over and over again? What good will that do?

Please nanite2000. Repeating "Yes, we already know that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way." That really don't help the Op suggestion in any way. Dose that not also fall under Spam? You know Post over and over the same thing? We can ask the mods about this. I think Frontier want Construction criticism not spam.

 

[nanite2000]

Please nanite2000. Repeating "Yes, we already know that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way." That really don't help the Op suggestion in any way.

Well, I already support the OP's suggestion, and I have written several messages contributing to these discussions in both this and other similar threads.

I have only repeated the phrase "Yes, we already know that. It doesn't invalidate the OP's suggestion in any way." to those posters who repeatedly miss the point of the OP, and who repeatedly try to 'suggest' ways to avoid long super cruise journeys. This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what the OP is asking, because you assume he doesn't already know all this. You assume he (we) don't already know how to pick and choose missions based on target distance.

But your assumptions are wrong, since the OP (and other OP's in similar threads) are usually long-time game players and know how the game mechanics work, and they know how to do the things you suggest, and they know that missions are not the only source of long super cruise journeys.

The people who start these threads are not asking for gameplay advice - they are suggesting enhancements to the existing super cruise mechanic to be tweaked for faster and/or more engaging super cruise travel.

Dose that not also fall under Spam? You know Post over and over the same thing? We can ask the mods about this. I think Frontier want Construction criticism not spam.

To the best of my knowledge, repeating a phrase is not against the forum rules since many other posters here regularly repeat the same phrases over and over again without penalty.

But by all means, ask a mod if you want to be sure. Before you do, I would ask you to look at your own posts first where you have repeatedly told anyone who suggests improving super cruise that they are asking for "a dumb down Arcade game".

 

[VR Golgot]

SC is SC. I wish people would give up with the 'can we tweak' threads.

You do know you're in the Suggestions sub-forum right?

FDs game is what they gave us, and I'm sure they have better things to do than read this stuff, or change game core principals now.

Think I'll go with their take on that over yours

(source)

Q: Any plans to allow faster Supercruise travel within systems?

A: We have talked about this at great length in the office, and we've considered various things to do with different speeds, maybe even different speeds between ships. There are some interesting possibilities, but no plans at the moment. But we never keep that door completely closed just in case.

 

[lenna]

Yea, you're clearly overthinking this.

Not really, I am pointing out why your specific solution is poorly thought out. I am also reinforcing my point that even in the most basic case that the impact of what you are asking for would be much more involved that what you think it is.

Ultimately, FD should leave SC as-is - the mess they have made of exploration with the FSS/DSS changes is reason enough for them to leave it well enough alone.

 

[nanite2000]

Not really, I am pointing out why your specific solution is poorly thought out. I am also reinforcing my point that even in the most basic case that the impact of what you are asking for would be much more involved that what you think it is.

...using theory crafting.

Ultimately, FD should leave SC as-is - the mess they have made of exploration with the FSS/DSS changes is reason enough for them to leave it well enough alone.

Ultimately FD should decide whether and what changes to make to SC, since they have access to the source code.

 

[Sysmon]

What mini wormhole? I didn't suggest intra-system jumps.
I would welcome it though.

I said we should be allowed to jump to secondary stars from OUTSIDE the system.
That means I can jump from Sol to Sirius A OR Sirius B.
But not Sirius A to B.

And I already know how to choose my missions and avoid those with stations far away from the arrival point.
Ditto selling my void opals. Trust me, I know my way around this game very very well.
All the legal ways, all the loopholes, all the exploits.

What I'm saying is simply.... Travel takes too long, even by the fastest known methods. It is what it is. My opinion.
You can't change my mind bub.

I do like the idea of being able to pick what star to enter at. Provided that star has a nav beacon though. Otherwise we should still be stuck with the current system of entering at the main star.

S

 

[lenna]

...using theory crafting.

Nope, using real-world science and maths which back the empirical evidence, and is further backed by FD's self-professed commitment to maintain verisimilitude where it makes sense to do so. Some compromises are justifiable, but the kind of compromise campaigned for by threads like this is not.

Like it or not, there is no good reason to reduce super-cruise times to less than they are now. I can see FD perhaps ensuring that FSD modding affects the blue-throttle zone appropriately but that is about the limit of what they should be changing now. However, they could reasonably introduce new optional ship modules that could perhaps have a beneficial effect on SC motion (c/f the Guardian Tech module FSD Booster that increases Jump Range) but the current baseline FSD SC experience should remain unchanged.

 

[nanite2000]

Nope, using real-world science and maths which back the empirical evidence, and is further backed by FD's self-professed commitment to maintain verisimilitude where it makes sense to do so.

Sorry, but unless you have access to FDev's source code, or confirmation from FDev themselves about the specific formulae and mechanics implemented in their code, then it's just a theory based on observation.

Some compromises are justifiable, but the kind of compromise campaigned for by threads like this is not.

Asking for slightly faster travel while in super cruise is not an unreasonable request.

Like it or not, there is no good reason to reduce super-cruise times to less than they are now.

Like it or not, your personal feelings on the matter have to give way to empirical evidence. Speeding up super cruise and/or reducing needlessly long super cruise journeys is one of the most frequently requested changes in the Suggestions forums, and is clearly desired by lots of people.

I think that fact alone is a good enough "reason to reduce super-cruise times to less than they are now."

I can see FD perhaps ensuring that FSD modding affects the blue-throttle zone appropriately but that is about the limit of what they should be changing now. However, they could reasonably introduce new optional ship modules that could perhaps have a beneficial effect on SC motion (c/f the Guardian Tech module FSD Booster that increases Jump Range) but the current baseline FSD SC experience should remain unchanged.

I already suggested this last year: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/in-system-jumps.424339/

If you think an optional module is an acceptable compromise, then add your support to my suggestion thread above.

 

[dxm55]

Not nonsense, whether such a case could occur is a matter of local conditions - the more dense the system, the slower SC travel will be. Then there is the matter of line of sight which means you could have a clear run to the 120Ls object but have a dense field of bodies in-between you and the 30Ls object.

You misread it. Read my post again.
Light years not Light Seconds.

120Ly and 500Ls from arrival is faster than 30Ly away and 8000Ls from arrival.

That is all.