Should ship transfers have a risk vs reward element?

[Sandmann]

I think it's a given that the vast majority of players approve of the upcoming ship transfers in 2.2, in one form or another. The question of if it should be instant or delayed is another matter but is NOT a matter for this thread so please avoid posting about that. My question is this:

If you flew from Jacques Station to Sol you'd face some risk and have a chance of losing your ship along the way. If you were a noob in a Hauler that risk would be significantly higher than if you were an experienced player in an Anaconda. So if you were transporting your ship (instantly OR delayed) should you have to choose the pilot who would fly it there for you, paying higher amounts for higher ranked players who have a lower chance of damaging or losing your ship? Should more expensive pilots come with references which would reduce the chance of them stealing your ship? Or should it just be a flat fee with guaranteed, damage free delivery? Should the chance of damage/loss/theft increase with the distance it needs to be transferred?

 

[Leo Sagan]

Risk = realistic
Safety = gamey

As for me, I'd much prefer solution 1, but as I see no major inconvenience with the Safety option, I'd accept it.

But there is ONE condition to that : it has to be impossible to do it many times, all the time. A cooldown for instance.

 

[Helfar]

No.

It either works or don't implement it. Even with a 1% chance of failure, you will not be happy if you transfer your 1billion credit cutter, and hit the 1%. The whole point of the ship transfers is for gameplay ease, it is not ment to be realistic, it is to reduce the time sink for gameplay accesibility.

 

[warbaby2]

Short answer: Yes!

If we have to have NPC transport, it should have a chance to fail... but I can tell you now that, stuff like that is too "hardcore" or not "fun" enough for FD.

 

[Sandmann]

Sorry, poll added now. (Why does this forum post the thread before the poll's complete?)

 

[Ian Phillips]

Because a poll cannot exist without a thread!

 

[Sandmann]

Because a poll cannot exist without a thread!

Ever heard of a buffer?

 

[Weps]

Not sure what the difference between theft and loss is. I mean, if loss means that you have to rebuy it, whereas with theft there is some mechanic where you can track down the thief, then sure, but that would mean hugely overestimating the amount of content FDEV can squeeze in a single patch.

I chose the 6th option, so I'll explain: I wouldn't mind a mechanic where being stingy about transfer cost would mean a chance to get your ship dinged up, but losing the ship altogether would make too many people angry. I'm a realism/consistency fan, but I'm also realistic about the players and their reactions. So to sum it up: yes to player choice and distance, yes to change of damage, no to ship loss/theft.

 

[Sandmann]

Not sure what the difference between theft and loss is. I mean, if loss means that you have to rebuy it, whereas with theft there is some mechanic where you can track down the thief, then sure, but that would mean hugely overestimating the amount of content FDEV can squeeze in a single patch.

I chose the 6th option, so I'll explain: I wouldn't mind a mechanic where being stingy about transfer cost would mean a chance to get your ship dinged up, but losing the ship altogether would make too many people angry. I'm a realism/consistency fan, but I'm also realistic about the players and their reactions.

From a gamey point of view not much difference at all right now, but it'd leave the door open to missions to regain your ship, or perhaps to ransom it back.

 

[Yaffle]

Duplicate, closing. Please use the threadnaught.