Suggestion: Hyper-Factor (MetaDrive?)

[CMDR Dreamstate]

Hey folks, so, I've been thinking (hold tight)....

The community vastly agrees that Supercruising is muchly needed in order to make space feel "big".

However, there are those that hate cruising about because of the time it takes to fly 100,000ls just to reach a destination.

How about this for a compromise? A new "third" mode called "Hyper-cruising".

To those that follow Star Trek, this may sound familiar. So, this is how it would go in game...

You can have a destination set, such as a station, or just go free-mode, either or, the direction will only ever be a straight line.

Hyper-cruising's main strength, and get this, is that the speed, once set, isn't affected by gravity Wells, and the like, like regularly Super-cruising.

When initiating Hyper-cruising, you set a "factor" between 1 to 10, and these are linked to the Speed of Light (C). These are interchangeable, either through a simple panel instruction on you left-hand panel, or one you can customise by clocking in the exact numbers.

Hyper-cruising, Factor 1, could be the default "SoL" (speed of light or 1c) - however, to get somewhere faster, you would input Factor 10 - Factor 10 is the maximum speed-of-light speed, which is 2000c in the game.

So, for fun, you could go Factor 10 and go 2000 times the speed of light and zip right past a small system you started in, or use it to make your way to a binary 200,000ls away in a few minutes, as opposed to 30, for a rough example.

But, I hear you cry, how to balance?

Hyper-cruising can only be initiated in Super-cruise after 20 seconds (a similar soft cool down after a jump is completed, but this is to allow time for inderdiction from NPCs or PvP).

Once this condition has been passed, you line up where you want to go, then initiate Hyper-cruise.

This will cause the ship to generate loads more heat, and suck up a lot more fuel (part of the balance).

So, therefore, if your ship runs hot, and/or doesn't have a large fuel tank, using Hyper-cruising could be dangerous.

Heat build-up by Factors:

Factor 1: 0% heat (1c)
Factor 2: +5% heat (20c)
Factor 3: +10% heat (100c)
Factor 4: +15% heat (200c)
Factor 5: +20% heat (350c)
Factor 6: +30% heat (500c)
Factor 7: +35% heat (750c)
Factor 8: +40% heat (1,100c)
Factor 9: +45% heat (1,400c)
Factor 10: +50% heat (2,000c)

The same percentages for the heat also apply to fuel consumption used during the duration of the trip.

So yeah, basically, just a way to warp around without any restraints but with some kickbacks - what does the community and Frontier think?

Of course, fine tuning needed if and where it applies, I'm just asking if this is something people could get behind, since this is more for passenger missions, hauling, exploring, and general flying.

Thoughts?

 

[Lestat]

First off why Not use Suggestion forums?

Hey folks, so, I've been thinking (hold tight)....

The community vastly agrees that Supercruising is muchly needed in order to make space feel "big".

However, there are those that hate cruising about because of the time it takes to fly 100,000ls just to reach a destination.

How about this for a compromise? A new "third" mode called "Hyper-cruising".

To those that follow Star Trek, this may sound familiar. So, this is how it would go in game...

You can have a destination set, such as a station, or just go free-mode, either or, the direction will only ever be a straight line.

Hyper-cruising's main strength, and get this, is that the speed, once set, isn't affected by gravity Wells, and the like, like regularly Super-cruising.

When initiating Hyper-cruising, you set a "factor" between 1 to 10, and these are linked to the Speed of Light (C). These are interchangeable, either through a simple panel instruction on you left-hand panel, or one you can customise by clocking in the exact numbers.

Hyper-cruising, Factor 1, could be the default "SoL" (speed of light or 1c) - however, to get somewhere faster, you would input Factor 10 - Factor 10 is the maximum speed-of-light speed, which is 2000c in the game.

So, for fun, you could go Factor 10 and go 2000 times the speed of light and zip right past a small system you started in, or use it to make your way to a binary 200,000ls away in a few minutes, as opposed to 30, for a rough example.

But, I hear you cry, how to balance?

Hyper-cruising can only be initiated in Super-cruise after 20 seconds (a similar soft cool down after a jump is completed, but this is to allow time for inderdiction from NPCs or PvP).

Once this condition has been passed, you line up where you want to go, then initiate Hyper-cruise.

This will cause the ship to generate loads more heat, and suck up a lot more fuel (part of the balance).

So, therefore, if your ship runs hot, and/or doesn't have a large fuel tank, using Hyper-cruising could be dangerous.

Heat build-up by Factors:

Factor 1: 0% heat (1c)
Factor 2: +5% heat (20c)
Factor 3: +10% heat (100c)
Factor 4: +15% heat (200c)
Factor 5: +20% heat (350c)
Factor 6: +30% heat (500c)
Factor 7: +35% heat (750c)
Factor 8: +40% heat (1,100c)
Factor 9: +45% heat (1,400c)
Factor 10: +50% heat (2,000c)

The same percentages for the heat also apply to fuel consumption used during the duration of the trip.

So yeah, basically, just a way to warp around without any restraints but with some kickbacks - what does the community and Frontier think?

Of course, fine tuning needed if and where it applies, I'm just asking if this is something people could get behind, since this is more for passenger missions, hauling, exploring, and general flying.

Thoughts?

I guess you want to ruin Interdiction? You Also ruin Galaxy Map/System map to RESEARCH to see if that system is 100,000 LS away or not.

Note We already have 1,000 systems with Station to suit both our needs.

 

[Para Handy]

OMG - another thread bemoaning space travel in a space travel emulation game.

 

[Lestat]

At least Its easier to talk about the idea than. Going on a topic that has 5 or 6 ideas and gets each one confused on the topic.

 

[MK Regular]

This is probably one of the better in-system fast-travel proposals I've seen. You said that the values would likely need to be tweaked, to which I agree for 2 reasons:

• Most (if not all) ships do not go above 20-30% heat when supercruising, so increasing heat generation by 50% (giving 25-37% heat as per Frenotx's heat equation) would not be enough to make hypercruising as dangerous as you may want it to be.
• The relative risk/reward for lower hyperspace factors is heavily skewed in favour of a large reward for very little risk, with relatively large increases to speed for very small increases to heat and fuel consumption.

It seems to me that the easy way to fix both of these problems would be to make some form of exponential scaling with hyperspace factor. For example:

Hyperspace Factor​	Speed (c)​	Heat Generation​	Effect on Ship Heat​
0​	1​	*1.00​	*1.00​
1​	2​	*1.30​	*1.14​
2​	5​	*1.70​	*1.30​
3​	10​	*2.20​	*1.48​
4​	20​	*2.85​	*1.69​
5​	50​	*3.70​	*1.92​
6​	100​	*4.80​	*2.19​
7​	200​	*6.25​	*2.50​
8​	500​	*8.10​	*2.85​
9​	1000​	*10.50​	*3.24​
10​	2000​	*13.65​	*3.70​

Using this table as an example, let's say that a ship that can supercruise at 20% heat jumps into hypercruise at a hypercruise factor of 7. The ship's reactor will generate 6.25 times more heat, meaning that it will sit at 50% heat while hypercruising (using Frenotx's heat equation). However, if the ship decides to use a hyperspace factor of 10, the ship will generate 13.65 times more heat and would sit at 74% heat (agian using Frenotx's heat equation) if not for the fact that ships do not cool any faster once they exceed 66.7% heat (meaning that the ship will eventually overheat). If we were to run this same test with a ship that supercruises at 30% heat, we should find that the ship would overheat when using hyperspace factor 7, as the heat equation gives the point of equilibrium at 75% heat.

It is worth noting that these numbers are approximations only, and I would to actually look to see how hot/cool ships generally run in SC in order to give something that has a better risk/reward balance (I suspect I may need to increase the heat generation curve). As for fuel consumption, you could use either the heat generation multiplier or the ship heat multiplier, which ever you think would work better.

Edit: Before someone starts saying that "this wouldn't work with interdiction" nowhere in my post (or OP's for that matter) did I (or OP) state that interdiction would not work in hypercruise. If anything, interdiction would be easier to do in hypercruise since your target is travelling at a set speed(s) and cannot maneuver. The way I see interdiction evasion working with hypercruise is either increasing your hyperspace factor in the hopes of outrunning or "burning off" your attacker or dropping back to supercruise to maneuver.

 

[Chaparral]

I completely support any game modification that eliminates sitting and doing nothing for extended periods of time. Real people with real lives look at a 30 minute supercruise run and say what, what anus thought this would be good GAME design? You want to ding someone for a long supercruise run, fine use up a bunch of fuel, charge extra for gas at the end, damage modules, whatever - but real-life stealing is empty headed nonsense.

 

[mp4x]

Real people with real lives do that, eh?

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

This is probably one of the better in-system fast-travel proposals I've seen. You said that the values would likely need to be tweaked, to which I agree for 2 reasons:

• Most (if not all) ships do not go above 20-30% heat when supercruising, so increasing heat generation by 50% (giving 25-37% heat as per Frenotx's heat equation) would not be enough to make hypercruising as dangerous as you may want it to be.
• The relative risk/reward for lower hyperspace factors is heavily skewed in favour of a large reward for very little risk, with relatively large increases to speed for very small increases to heat and fuel consumption.

It seems to me that the easy way to fix both of these problems would be to make some form of exponential scaling with hyperspace factor. For example:

Hyperspace Factor​	Speed (c)​	Heat Generation​	Effect on Ship Heat​
0​	1​	*1.00​	*1.00​
1​	2​	*1.30​	*1.14​
2​	5​	*1.70​	*1.30​
3​	10​	*2.20​	*1.48​
4​	20​	*2.85​	*1.69​
5​	50​	*3.70​	*1.92​
6​	100​	*4.80​	*2.19​
7​	200​	*6.25​	*2.50​
8​	500​	*8.10​	*2.85​
9​	1000​	*10.50​	*3.24​
10​	2000​	*13.65​	*3.70​

Using this table as an example, let's say that a ship that can supercruise at 20% heat jumps into hypercruise at a hypercruise factor of 7. The ship's reactor will generate 6.25 times more heat, meaning that it will sit at 50% heat while hypercruising (using Frenotx's heat equation). However, if the ship decides to use a hyperspace factor of 10, the ship will generate 13.65 times more heat and would sit at 74% heat (agian using Frenotx's heat equation) if not for the fact that ships do not cool any faster once they exceed 66.7% heat (meaning that the ship will eventually overheat). If we were to run this same test with a ship that supercruises at 30% heat, we should find that the ship would overheat when using hyperspace factor 7, as the heat equation gives the point of equilibrium at 75% heat.

It is worth noting that these numbers are approximations only, and I would to actually look to see how hot/cool ships generally run in SC in order to give something that has a better risk/reward balance (I suspect I may need to increase the heat generation curve). As for fuel consumption, you could use either the heat generation multiplier or the ship heat multiplier, which ever you think would work better.

Edit: Before someone starts saying that "this wouldn't work with interdiction" nowhere in my post (or OP's for that matter) did I (or OP) state that interdiction would not work in hypercruise. If anything, interdiction would be easier to do in hypercruise since your target is travelling at a set speed(s) and cannot maneuver. The way I see interdiction evasion working with hypercruise is either increasing your hyperspace factor in the hopes of outrunning or "burning off" your attacker or dropping back to supercruise to maneuver.

This would be incredible! Great post! I love the math re-work, and the interdiction point you raised!

 

[Lestat]

I completely support any game modification that eliminates sitting and doing nothing for extended periods of time. Real people with real lives look at a 30 minute supercruise run and say what, what anus thought this would be good GAME design? You want to ding someone for a long supercruise run, fine use up a bunch of fuel, charge extra for gas at the end, damage modules, whatever - but real-life stealing is empty headed nonsense.

Well, if you use some of the game mechanics and common sense You would not have to deal with empty-headed nonsense. But you have to complain about it because you don't use other game mechanics.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

I just want a boost button to get me out of gravity wells ... Lol
Out of all the things I don't like about supercruise, bring stuck in gravity is the most annoying.

A press and hold function, instantly causes heat to accumulate, and fuel consumption to drastically increase.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

I just want a boost button to get me out of gravity wells ... Lol
Out of all the things I don't like about supercruise, bring stuck in gravity is the most annoying.

A press and hold function, instantly causes heat to accumulate, and fuel consumption to drastically increase.

That could be great too! Perhaps the longer you hold it, the factor rises, your speed drastically increases, aswell as heat and fuel consumption - that would work a treat

Because of the potential heat damage generated, it would make the AFMUs even more relevant to carry with you on your ship, especially for exploring

 

[Chaparral]

Well, if you use some of the game mechanics and common sense You would not have to deal with empty-headed nonsense. But you have to complain about it because you don't use other game mechanics.

What game mechanics prevent you from sitting and doing nothing during a 100kls SC journey? I've listened to all of the codex entries, I'm near triple elite on three toons, g5 full engineered on three fleets. If you're claiming I'm ignorant about how to shorten such an SC waste of time I'd love to hear it.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

I like this idea. I would suggest though that the ship be made to drop out of hypercruise into supercruise at least 1000ls away from the destination, travelling at around 10c, and it would be better if this was a gradual slowdown over a period of around 10 seconds.

 

[Lestat]

What game mechanics prevent you from sitting and doing nothing during a 100kls SC journey? I've listened to all of the codex entries, I'm near triple elite on three toons, g5 full engineered on three fleets. If you're claiming I'm ignorant about how to shorten such an SC waste of time I'd love to hear it.

Here what ignorant. A player who complains because they Op out ON features they do not use. Like using the Galaxy map/System map and buy system data. Then they get to that destination and them Whine because of it too far for them. Who Fault is it again?

You might try the Well the Mission does not give you that information. Then you either have to decide if the mission worth it for you or not and if you find it too far. Then Discard the mission.

Here other ideas for people who complain about distance. Find a Clusters of systems that all the Station are near the Main star. We have 1,000 systems with Stations and I know There areas that have Stations very close to the Main Star. So instead of Complaining Why not find an area that suite your needs.

So instead of asking for an Easy mode why not use some good old fashion common Sense.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

Here what ignorant. A player who complains because they Op out ON features they do not use. Like using the Galaxy map/System map and buy system data. Then they get to that destination and them Whine because of it too far for them. Who Fault is it again?

You might try the Well the Mission does not give you that information. Then you either have to decide if the mission worth it for you or not and if you find it too far. Then Discard the mission.

Here other ideas for people who complain about distance. Find a Clusters of systems that all the Station are near the Main star. We have 1,000 systems with Stations and I know There areas that have Stations very close to the Main Star. So instead of Complaining Why not find an area that suite your needs.

So instead of asking for an Easy mode why not use some good old fashion common Sense.

There is no degree of difficulty associated with staring at a screen for an hour, so in this case you don't get to decry the dreaded "Easy mode" in objection.

I think it's a little condescending to assume that everyone complaining about supercruise travel time just doesn't know how to check the distance first, or how to reject a mission. It's not difficult.

You need to accept that some people simply want to be able to travel to any location in a system, no matter how far, without having to stare at a wallpaper for over an hour. If we had EVA and there were enough engaging on board activities, then the travel time would be acceptable. But as it stands, once you've exhausted Galnet resources, which doesn't take long, you have nothing to do in the game but stare at the screen.

It's completely reasonable for players to point out the ridiculousness of a game requiring you to do literally nothing for over an hour just to get from point A to point B. The time should either be shortened, or else filled with a variety of things to do.

 

[Lestat]

There is no degree of difficulty associated with staring at a screen for an hour, so in this case you don't get to decry the dreaded "Easy mode" in objection.

So you assumed their degree of difficulty associated with the Mission board and Navagation Map and ignoring Open Galaxy map?

I think it's a little condescending to assume that everyone complaining about supercruise travel time just doesn't know how to check the distance first, or how to reject a mission. It's not difficult.

Yawn how do you know if it, everyone? It could be a Minority. Also, the manual even if it somewhat outdated does talk about the Transaction Panel and explain review info of a current mission. Don't you think These 3 Options would stick out like a sore Thumb? BACK, ABANDON, OPEN GALAXY MAP? Also when you View a mission you do see OPEN GALAXY MAP at the bottom when you click it sent to that destination. With a option listed.

You need to accept that some people simply want to be able to travel to any location in a system, no matter how far, without having to stare at a wallpaper for over an hour. If we had EVA and there were enough engaging on board activities, then the travel time would be acceptable. But as it stands, once you've exhausted Galnet resources, which doesn't take long, you have nothing to do in the game but stare at the screen.

And you need to accept some areas to take time to visit so you have to sacrifice time for players like me can enjoy the vastness of a large system. We have 1,000+ systems with Stations. Some far some at the main star It suited for both our needs.

It's completely reasonable for players to point out the ridiculousness of a game requiring you to do literally nothing for over an hour

So you are whining about Hutton Orbital? You know there a Discord Channel and the Facebook page also and URL and let not forget Twitter. So There a strong following for Hutton orbital over 1,000 + players Strong. Do you want to upset this group?

just to get from point A to point B. The time should either be shortened, or else filled with a variety of things to do.

I would rather have Walking around ship than shorten the distance. I would also players like you to start using common sense gameplay than click an accept missions.

 

[VR CMDR Novindus]

So you assumed their degree of difficulty associated with the Mission board and Navagation Map and ignoring Open Galaxy map?

Also not difficult. The task is on a knowledge and effort basis, not a skill basis.

Yawn how do you know if it, everyone? It could be a Minority. Also, the manual even if it somewhat outdated does talk about the Transaction Panel and explain review info of a current mission. Don't you think These 3 Options would stick out like a sore Thumb? BACK, ABANDON, OPEN GALAXY MAP? Also when you View a mission you do see OPEN GALAXY MAP at the bottom when you click it sent to that destination. With a option listed.

It doesn't matter if it's everyone or a minority, because my comment related only to how you always address the issue. You never consider that the people complaining about the distance are well aware of how to check distances before beginning to travel, or how to reject missions, so you frequently make posts in which you mistakenly assume that using these "common sense" features will solve the problem. It won't, because that's not how the people who raise this issue are defining the problem.

And you need to accept some areas to take time to visit so you have to sacrifice time for players like me can enjoy the vastness of a large system. We have 1,000+ systems with Stations. Some far some at the main star It suited for both our needs.

No one needs a game feature that forces you to do nothing for long stretches of play if you want to visit somewhere further. That's not playing a game, that's staring at wallpaper.

So you are whining about Hutton Orbital? You know there a Discord Channel and the Facebook page also and URL and let not forget Twitter. So There a strong following for Hutton orbital over 1,000 + players Strong. Do you want to upset this group?

Firstly, pointing out an issue with gameplay is not the same as whining. Secondly, despite what you may think, I don't want the game world to lose its feeling of vastness. Having said that, the scale is too close to 1:1 for a reasonable game world galaxy, and so it could stand to have travel times in supercruise reduced somewhat. This could be done with an additional faster travel mode that has its own skill requirement and risk, so that even using it to travel to Hutton Orbital, you could still be proud of the achievement, and probably have more right to be pleased with yourself than if you just pointed your ship at a distant dot and did nothing for 90 minutes, and then created a group to celebrate your self-harming tendencies.

As for upsetting that group, even though I think they're promoting sadomasochism, no I don't want to ruin their gameplay, which is why I'd suggest an alternate optional but challenging travel mode. Even so, I don't think it's worth sparing the feelings of any subgroup when there's something this wrong with a game mechanic, as far more players stand to benefit if it's improved.

I would rather have Walking around ship than shorten the distance. I would also players like you to start using common sense gameplay than click an accept missions.

See, you're doing it again. Condescendingly assuming that other people don't know what to do, or don't make the effort. The problem is not with checking the distance first. The problem is that there's a game mechanic that leaves you with absolutely nothing to do while you wait and stare at the screen for over an hour. The problem is that this game mechanic is an exploration deterrent for most players, and cuts off large parts of the system map from regular traffic.

Walking around a ship would not be enough to fill the time it takes to get to a far distant location within a system. There would need to be a decent variety of things you could do on board while you wait. As I said, if that were the case, I wouldn't mind the travel time. In fact, I'd begin to like the fact that you could make such long trips, because you get more opportunity to engage in EVA stuff.

Skill requirement, knowledge requirement, risk, and cost should be considered together when designing a game mechanic. Supercruise to Hutton Orbital requires little to no skill, little to no knowledge, and has little to no risk, but costs a very hefty chunk of time spent doing nothing. These values can be shifted to retain balance whilst making gameplay more interesting. So for example, they could increase the skill and risk factors so that the time factor could be decreased, and they could have that as an optional form of travel, so players can still use standard supercruise to distant locations if they really enjoy pain and humiliation so much.

 

[Chaparral]

Here what ignorant. A player who complains because they Op out ON features they do not use. Like using the Galaxy map/System map and buy system data. Then they get to that destination and them Whine because of it too far for them. Who Fault is it again?

You might try the Well the Mission does not give you that information. Then you either have to decide if the mission worth it for you or not and if you find it too far. Then Discard the mission.

Here other ideas for people who complain about distance. Find a Clusters of systems that all the Station are near the Main star. We have 1,000 systems with Stations and I know There areas that have Stations very close to the Main Star. So instead of Complaining Why not find an area that suite your needs.

So instead of asking for an Easy mode why not use some good old fashion common Sense.

What are you even talking about? The game setting dictates the ls distances, and has a poorly contrived mechanic to traverse those distances.

Selene Jean and Marco Quent both essential engineers have 10kls + required distances.

Many CGs require rare goods from locations that reflect longer distances.

Vast numbers of missions require traversing those distances.

There is an extremely limited relationship between time on task for 100+kls distances and commensurate gained benefits (credits) for missions. It certainly is not consistent with other means for making credits or materials in the game. Suggesting that "you don't have to do it" sidesteps the issue at hand which is "why would anyone do it?".

A game designer that has any concept of what is "fun" would never create a mechanic where the player would minimize the game screen, go have a sandwich, go watch some youtube, go play a different game, while SC cooks in the background. It is patently foolish on its face.

 

[Lestat]

What are you even talking about? The game setting dictates the ls distances, and has a poorly contrived mechanic to traverse those distances.

Let me guess. you are the type that want everything handed to your on a silver spoon.

Selene Jean and Marco Quent both essential engineers have 10kls + required distances.

You are complaining about 10kls? That only a few minutes unless you are not using max throttle Oh note they are engineers. You know you have that option to Pin your Blueprint so you can update them at most stations.

Many CGs require rare goods from locations that reflect longer distances.

Note CG Caters to Both our groups. Players that love long travel time while others hate them. So sometimes you win some sometimes you lose some.

Vast numbers of missions require traversing those distances.

There is an extremely limited relationship between time on task for 100+kls distances and commensurate gained benefits (credits) for missions. It certainly is not consistent with other means for making credits or materials in the game. Suggesting that "you don't have to do it" sidesteps the issue at hand which is "why would anyone do it?".

A game designer that has any concept of what is "fun" would never create a mechanic where the player would minimize the game screen, go have a sandwich, go watch some youtube, go play a different game, while SC cooks in the background. It is patently foolish on its face.

So are you telling us you are the type of player that accepts all the mission and only focus on the credit you could earn and you don't bother doing any research before accepting the mission? Yes, You are foolish to do that. Now complaining about it because you did not do that research.

 

[Misty_Dark]

I completely support any game modification that eliminates sitting and doing nothing for extended periods of time. Real people with real lives look at a 30 minute supercruise run and say what, what anus thought this would be good GAME design? You want to ding someone for a long supercruise run, fine use up a bunch of fuel, charge extra for gas at the end, damage modules, whatever - but real-life stealing is empty headed nonsense.

So who is forcing you do those 30+ minutes super cruise travels?

If you accepted a mission, to deliver cargo/data/passengers to a remote location, it is stated in the mission information where you accept the mission. So if you do not pay attention, then of course you are in for a surprise... But it was YOU who accepted the mission in the first place. These missions are very EASY avoid.
So why do people tend to take these mission? because they pay BETTER, and why do they pay better? because that long journey in super cruise.

But no one is forcing you to go there. you can at any time choose, F this and abandon the mission. That is still an option.


Then we have those missions that will have you go to a system and then you scan and they will tell you where to go... Once again, the game give you the option to check out the system BEFORE accepting, so once again, you have the tools to avoid taking these kind of mission to systems that could end up with a long super cruise journey. And if you want to gamble, you can still abandon the mission!


There are a few cases where you will be re-routed to another system and meet a contact, that will tell you what system the target is, and these can bring you to systems that will give you long super cruise journeys. And these we cannot detect before hand, as the mission accepted is go to system X, and then randomly your target is not in that system.... So in that case, you always have the option to abandon the mission. This is not a common chain of events for this kind of missions.



So with a FEW exceptions, you as a player have all the tools needed to avoid accepting missions that will take you on long super cruise journeys. And if you as a player repeatedly refuses to use these mechanics available to avoid this, you are obviously not paying attention to this kind of things.

So who is forcing you todo these things? why do you accept these kind of missions? why do you not own up to your own choices?