ridiculous distance to mission signal
- Thread starter Asudragon
- Start date
It's not unusual for the target to interdict you on the way. It also gives time for the player's shields to recharge, or to synth ammo. They may also offer a high reward or you may have low local rep with the faction that offered the mission.
Some are excessive though & can be frustrating when you're in a hurry. I find the ones that tell you to locate a contact in another system similarly frustrating (when I'm in a hurry).
Some are excessive though & can be frustrating when you're in a hurry. I find the ones that tell you to locate a contact in another system similarly frustrating (when I'm in a hurry).
Drop from supercruise and go back, sometimes this resets the pirates and they come after you.
Also h-jump out of the system and back again can reset the mission signal.
What sort of mission was it? if it was a massacre or assasination mission then you can ignore those blue mission target locations. Mission targets for massacre missions appear pretty much anywhere as long as youre in system, nav beacons, haz rez or in supercruise. Assassination mission targets will more often than not turn up in supercruise and try to interdict you, also often at nav beacon. wing ass mission targets appear all over the place, nearly always at the nav beacon.
I guess my only question there is "Is it?"
In places like Sol, you have the Voyager Probes which are (some big number of) Ls away, while the celestial bodies are comparatively close.
If the distance is 1.8Ls, that might suggest something else (i.e a non-celestial body) is in the system, at a similar range.
What system is this?
If the mission is to kill 4 pirates, then I'm going to assume it's a massacre mission and not an assassination.
Massacre missions only target that system's anarchy faction.
Some of them will show up wanted at the nav beacon sooner or later, and since it's only four of them, probably sooner than it'll take to cruise out that far.
Massacre missions only target that system's anarchy faction.
Some of them will show up wanted at the nav beacon sooner or later, and since it's only four of them, probably sooner than it'll take to cruise out that far.
Come on now - that's not the attitude! Now repeat after me...
"Frontier don't respect our time..."
When I was a very new player, I made the mistake of taking a mission to Hutton Orbital (for about two whole minutes) before I checked my ETA/distance readout where I subsequently aborted the mission - simple, no drama!
However, don't worry...having accumulated many hours in the cockpit over the years, experiencing the gamut of the game, moreover learning the "ways of the forum" from the great & the good (& Stigbob)...I've realised the error of my ways; obviously, I would now start a paranoid conspiracy theory thread, exclaim that the devs patently don't play (or care about) their own game & rage quit via the medium of passive-aggressive modern dance - practise makes perfect! Now get a grip, OP!
Yep, it's frustrating to have a stupidly long SC trip imposed on you through RNG.
I made a thread about this ages ago.
forums.frontier.co.uk
I have no issue with SC travel times in general, and in cases where a mission specifies the distance then that's fine, we can choose to take it or not. But where no distance is specified, then to decide to abandon a mission, not because it's too difficult, but because it's simply too boring and not worth the time investment seems a shame.
Would be great if they could set a distance cap on mission types where the target isn't specified in the mission description. I can't believe they think that players would enjoy sitting in SC for an extended period to do a mission that takes a few minutes to complete.
I must say I haven't tried Para Handy's suggestion to jump out and reset the instance, will try that some time to see whether it works. But this also happens for planetary scan missions where the target body is fixed once you get the initial mission critical update.
I made a thread about this ages ago.
Travel time for missions where the destination is not specified.
Please consider putting a cap on the maximum distance that a mission target will be at for missions such as assassinations or salvage, where we know only the system from the mission description, not the actual target location. I have had three missions recently, with a combined SC travel...
I have no issue with SC travel times in general, and in cases where a mission specifies the distance then that's fine, we can choose to take it or not. But where no distance is specified, then to decide to abandon a mission, not because it's too difficult, but because it's simply too boring and not worth the time investment seems a shame.
Would be great if they could set a distance cap on mission types where the target isn't specified in the mission description. I can't believe they think that players would enjoy sitting in SC for an extended period to do a mission that takes a few minutes to complete.
I must say I haven't tried Para Handy's suggestion to jump out and reset the instance, will try that some time to see whether it works. But this also happens for planetary scan missions where the target body is fixed once you get the initial mission critical update.
yea, unfortunately just one of many weaknesses of the algorithms they use for generating missions and stuff. afaik there's not really a way to tell how far away a mission objective can be from your entry point. but there's multiple ways to find those signals and, not 100% sure, each method actually finds different signal sources. you could try scanning the nav beacon and using the fss and see if you get multiple results. i'd try to find a system where you don't have to travel those long distances to complete missions.
SC 2.0 needed
Shame there wasn`t a pay per mile bonus, then ya be an older richer type of guy.
Ok your ship will need an overhaul.
But think of the money (if you don`t die of boredom)
Ok your ship will need an overhaul.
But think of the money (if you don`t die of boredom)
Yeah... i flip instances only if the mission is critical for some reason, but generally it isn't.Yep, it's frustrating to have a stupidly long SC trip imposed on you through RNG.
I made a thread about this ages ago.
Travel time for missions where the destination is not specified.
Please consider putting a cap on the maximum distance that a mission target will be at for missions such as assassinations or salvage, where we know only the system from the mission description, not the actual target location. I have had three missions recently, with a combined SC travel...
I have no issue with SC travel times in general, and in cases where a mission specifies the distance then that's fine, we can choose to take it or not. But where no distance is specified, then to decide to abandon a mission, not because it's too difficult, but because it's simply too boring and not worth the time investment seems a shame.
Would be great if they could set a distance cap on mission types where the target isn't specified in the mission description. I can't believe they think that players would enjoy sitting in SC for an extended period to do a mission that takes a few minutes to complete.
I must say I haven't tried Para Handy's suggestion to jump out and reset the instance, will try that some time to see whether it works. But this also happens for planetary scan missions where the target body is fixed once you get the initial mission critical update.
I kinda understand what FD is going for... these things shouldn't necessarily be bound to x distance from orbital bodies, but they should albe bound by some reasonable distance (up to some cap) from a celestial body... i.e up to 5,000ls away from any celestial body, not anywhere in system up to 2-3 times distance of the furthest body from the primary star.
I disagree the distance should be known at the time of the mission being offered... the USS are dynamically generated, so it's not known at the time of mission generation. Generating the board is already an arduous process... this would make it much worse. It's not relevant that this information is already available for fixed point missions such as deliveries; that's a simple lookup... for assassinations it needs to consider the whole-of-system attributes to dynamically generate the target. In a more roleplay sense, the mission giver won't know anyway; that's why they advise you'll need to locate the target.
But... i still want to know the OPs system; I'm not convinced the nearest body is just 87k Ls, and there could be a generation ship or something else much further out (eg to 800k ls) ... I've never seen the mission system generate a 1.8m Ls uss for a "normal" system where everything is under 10k ls away... the most would be around 30k Ls under those conditions.
Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that these types of missions (where the system is known, but the actual target will only be revealed once you get to the system) should now have that info as part of the mission description.
I'm fine with the discovery of that info, be it by dropping at the nav beacon, an automatically generated mission critical message or even the FSS, but I do think that this particular mission template would be better if there were a cap on the maximum distance from the main star that the target can spawn.
It's really a design thing. I can't believe that the devs think that a 20 plus minute totally passive SC journey to destroy a pirate or two, to scan a beacon or to salvage a couple of canisters of stuff, all of which can be completed in a very short time, is good design. The game being what it is, the mission activity is what happens when we get to a target, not the process of finding the target.
