Reduce Transfer Times?
- Thread starter Colonel Kenney
- Start date
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Tarring everybody that doesn't agree with you with the same insulting brush is really going to win those people over and help to build some common ground.
Mhmmm...because it's not mine?
Like my Corvette for instance, we've been through a lot. I would never sell it for another one even if they look exactly the same.
ROFL....
Last edited:
This is completely true. However unless the remaining 30% are white supremacists or something, their opinion is still valid.
If I said you had a 30% chance to win the lottery tomorrow you'd say those were pretty good chances considering your normal chances of winning right?
All people like me want is a small reduction in time. Not 5 minutes across the bubble, just more in line with the average jump ranges of the ships in question perhaps. I don't understand why people want to so badly ignore any concession. We play the game too and despite not getting instant, a small reduction in time would mean a lot.
Why people think we need to just be quiet since we lost I don't know. I don't know of any "democracy" where just because you didn't "win" you had to be quiet or stop promoting what you believe in.
That's because what everyone wanted was ship transfer, nobody thought about how it would happen. So it was a non issue until Ship Transfer became a reality.
That has nothing to do with telling people to stop talking about something just because they lost. Which is what I called them out for and "mod hat" or not, a moderator telling someone to not speak about something is an ignorant thing to say. They are obviously, allowed to say it just as I'm allowed to call them out on it.
The other point I'm making, is that if these people are fine with the delay just being there, why are so many telling us to shut up because we lost? Or that our opinion doesn't matter?
Of course I don't honestly believe that everyone who wants a delay thinks that or does that. I don't have fine print with every post saying "I don't actually believe everyone thinks the same way" because I'm kind of hoping people will infer that when I speak broadly, it's to keep it simple.
I have a lot of friends and have a lot of respect for people I've disagreed with on this issue. I also have an aggressive nature because I am in the minority and I'm constantly being told I don't matter. So yes I can be belligerent and yes I could word things better but it's a little hard at times to respond nicely to someone who says stuff like this (and this is a direct quote:
We play, we love, and we support this game as much as you do. If some people, and a lot in this thread alone, can't even give up a minor concession to us, what they are saying is we don't matter. And that upsets the internet me (The real me is watching Halo 5 right now) because all I want is something really minor after conceding that a delay will happen.
30% of us is still a lot of customers for Frontier anyways.
Last edited:
I wholeheartedly agree, however, reducing the wait times would be, essentially, like having it instant. Elite is more a sim than an arcade game so the delays do make sense (and the overwhelming majority of players wanted them too), not to mention that lore wise, a player ship is loaded onto some sort of ferry that takes it to its destination system.
What would prevent a player from starting the game in solo, summoning his ship, and then going back to open? For that idea to work, FDev would need to separate solo open and pg completely, essentially having 3 separate background simulations. I know some would welcome this idea with open arms and flowers, but it would separate the community beyond repair and maybe even drive some away from the game. Not to mention of the nightmare of actually implementing something like this.
70% of the people voted to twiddle their thumbs.
Also as I stated before - this is the free ice cream effect you get with the small percentage of active ED players who are the most "participatory" of the 1.5 mil who have actually purchased the game. If you took an actual poll of everyone the numbers would be drastically altered. Only people who pay attention to the community, the newsletters etc were involved in these polls.
But it makes sense for them to pander to the most die hard fans! Logic gets thrown out the window as it always does when dealing with the desires of the few die hards.
Also as I stated before - this is the free ice cream effect you get with the small percentage of active ED players who are the most "participatory" of the 1.5 mil who have actually purchased the game. If you took an actual poll of everyone the numbers would be drastically altered. Only people who pay attention to the community, the newsletters etc were involved in these polls.
But it makes sense for them to pander to the most die hard fans! Logic gets thrown out the window as it always does when dealing with the desires of the few die hards.
Last edited:
And everyone who checks their e-mail.
I mean come on, you're *still* trying to hold on to your mythical "silent majority" when we e-mailed the entire playerbase out of the blue and got over 40,000 responses?
At that point, anyone who didn't participate in the poll probably didn't watch the Gamescom stream either. Thus they will be unaware that instant was ever on the table, and when the patch drops they're just going to say "We have ship transfers! Sweet!"
There is no mythical silent majority. They are the majority. The bulk of the active fans that play are literally about 30k people that are "leftover" from the initial sale of the game. 1.5 mil or more. That is a very very small sample size and extremely slanted. But like I said.. I'm all for realism as well but you have to suspend your belief for all these other things but can't for this shows hypocrisy at its best.
Like I said for the sake of "realism" sure we can have a delay. Just a short one though. A SHORTER one.
Last edited:
How do you propose we get the opinions of all of those people? FDEV emailed them. All of them. If this is not good enough, what are you suggesting we do?
How do you know it would be drastically altered? Based on what? Have you asked them? Did you do a separate poll and get 1.5 mil responses?
How do you know that the 70/30 split is not a accurate indicator of the whole?
If you have reached out to your audience you can only go off what you get back. FDEV did that. Or are you saying we should assume the people who did not respond agree with you, and change it based on that?
Salty post is salty.
Enjoying this thread so very much : keep the sodium flowing please
Except.....they didn't,
The 70% voted on a less game breaking solution.
The 70% voted on a more realistic solution.
The 70% voted on a mechanic that at least has the scope to be build upon and expanded, (unlike instant).
The 70% voted on maintaining the scale of this wonderful 1:1 galaxy that we play in.
The 70% voted to carry on playing while another ship they own is in transit.
meanwhile....
The 30% voted for none of that, all they voted for was 'I want my ship NOW'.
Last edited:
FD can do what they like. I've been too busy flying my Spitfire around the world. After that I'll be in DCS.
Salty post is salty.
Enjoying this thread so very much : keep the sodium flowing please
Sodium is just sodium. A salt needs more than just Na, and Na is not the only positive ion that can produce a salt. NaCL, is table salt, but not the only salt around.
Tell you what, if your convenience is that important to you, you can PM me your login credentials and a destination, then I'll move your ship there and deduct a reasonable fee by buying gold with your account and selling it with mine. It won't quite be instant because it'll be "whenever I get around to it", but it will be completely hands-off for you.
(don't actually do that, PMing your login credentials to strangers on the internet is a terrible idea)
Yes, but 70% is more if you want to play it that way.
How can you say that with any certainty? Have you polled them?