I think the folks that run EDSM were going to list ships in DSSA as POI's.
The Deep Space Support Array (DSSA) | A FleetComm Initiative
- Thread starter Qohen Leth
- Start date
I think the folks that run EDSM were going to list ships in DSSA as POI's.
Yeah, but only the first one per region iirc.
Post #2 has the stipulations for GMP POI recognition.
The Deep Space Support Array (DSSA) | A FleetComm Initiative
Click the DSSA logo to open the DSSA Network tracker For questions or issues, contact one of the following current DSSA Managers on FleetComm: SpaceTrash67 (DSSA#13 CMDR Scopelx (DSSA#1 SKidathor (DSSA#5 LethalMoustache (DSSA#140) [XB] Greetings Cmdrs, The DSSA is a project to deploy a...
Ah, did you update the post? Anyways nice.Post #2 has the stipulations for GMP POI recognition.
The Deep Space Support Array (DSSA) | A FleetComm Initiative
Click the DSSA logo to open the DSSA Network tracker For questions or issues, contact one of the following current DSSA Managers on FleetComm: SpaceTrash67 (DSSA#13 CMDR Scopelx (DSSA#1 SKidathor (DSSA#5 LethalMoustache (DSSA#140) [XB] Greetings Cmdrs, The DSSA is a project to deploy a...forums.frontier.co.uk
The wording can be a bit ambiguous in that post, so I'd like to ask a question to clear this up. When you listed the "future benefits for supporting the DSSA", you talk about "these POIs". Now, this comes after the "GMP POIs" part, where it's talked about in detail how only some carriers will be GMP POIs, and the "Additional DSSA Carriers in a particular region that do not receive a POI marker on the maps, will instead be fully referenced (inc. system location) in the POI description text of the primary DSSA Carrier POI for that region."
Does this mean the other (non-primary) carriers will not be eligible for the future benefits of the DSSA?
Normally, I'd say that since you wrote these benefits are "for supporting the DSSA", which all carriers listed will do, they'd apply to all carriers, but since it's immediately followed by "these POIs", which apparently not all DSSA carriers will be, it becomes unclear.
So, how exactly will this work?
"These POIs" has been replaced by "All DSSA Carriers". Hope that clears it up. Basically, the GMP is offering some DSSA Carriers POI status on the map (this may change to all - depending on the spread as we don't want the maps to be cluttered with close proximity Carriers).
When the original plan to mark Carriers on the GMP was set up there was only supposed to be one Carrier in each region, and they were to be spread far and wide. After the original GMP statement, the number of Carriers being deployed has almost tripled. As a consequence the GMP will look at how it pans out and decide if all, or just some, Carriers are marked on the maps (and if its just some, it'll be done in chronological order of sign up).
The potential benefits as outlined in the second part of that post apply to all DSSA Carriers, and its speculative; based on game content, player activity, and expedition organisers and Carrier owners themselves creating and promoting events.
@marx
Marx, your planned destination is too close to another carrier (#51)
@admiralmeep @NullCharacter You guys are too close
@Hell-Androm Your system (Bubble Sector ZE-A E16) is in Elysian Shores (red zone), not Errant MArches as stated.
@Steyla @ProgramRAM You guys are too close
MAPS UPDATED
Also added a new one from @Orvidius 's amazing EDAstro.com resources.
Marx, your planned destination is too close to another carrier (#51)
@admiralmeep @NullCharacter You guys are too close
@Hell-Androm Your system (Bubble Sector ZE-A E16) is in Elysian Shores (red zone), not Errant MArches as stated.
@Steyla @ProgramRAM You guys are too close
MAPS UPDATED
Also added a new one from @Orvidius 's amazing EDAstro.com resources.
Thanks @Qohen Leth.
I've changed my location to Byae Aowsy GR-N d6-52. I'll park it there unless we end up finding something nicer in the area when we deploy.
I've changed my location to Byae Aowsy GR-N d6-52. I'll park it there unless we end up finding something nicer in the area when we deploy.
You forgot to include @Guesswhat92 in there
But there's no need to try and figure out which one of us should move, as I decided yesterday to likely leave the DSSA anyway.I just didn't want to make it final yet, since we're still well away from the update's launch date, and things might change again. Well, with this, it's decided: remove me from the roster please.
Although I'm not fully comfortable with how the general direction and tone of the initiative has changed, my main reason is the two-year rule (for being promoted on the GMP; there were no distinctions between carriers before), which wasn't in place yet when I signed up. Now, in case I wanted to use my carrier after the expansion came, I'd rather not be in a position where I'd have to choose between breaking my promise and moving the carrier away, or keeping it and not being able to use the carrier. (The original one year would have been fine, as it would have put the end date roughly where I expect the expansion to be anyway.) So, I'm out of the DSSA, another spot is open now. I wish you all well with your endeavours!
Last edited:
You forgot to include @Guesswhat92 in there
I just didn't want to make it final yet, since we're still well away from the update's launch date, and things might change again. Well, with this, it's decided: remove me from the roster please.
Although I'm not fully comfortable with how the general direction and tone of the initiative has changed, my main reason is the two-year rule, which wasn't in place yet when I signed up. Now, in case I wanted to use my carrier after the expansion came, I'd rather not be in a position where I'd have to choose between breaking my promise and moving the carrier away, or keeping it and not being able to use the carrier. (The original one year would have been fine, as it would have put the end date roughly where I expect the expansion to be anyway.) So, I'm out of the DSSA, another spot is open now. I wish you well with your endeavours!
Guesswhat has locked his location for a while and had already moved because of someone else.
I don't know what 2-year rule you're referring to (the GMP one?), or the change in tone even, but I'll remove you for the roster. Hope you make good use of your carrier!
Deleted member 240115
D
I would like some clarification on what, if any changes have been made to DSSA requirements.
Based on what I'm hearing there's information on fleetcomm Discord, here on the forums, and has been changing rapidly, with some inconsistency.
As for the changes in tone, I'm not going to get into disputes between others and you, Qohen, as it's not my place.
I have however seen several prominent explorers be handled, shall we say.... roughly.
This "two year" thing is the latest change I'm hearing about. Is that for DSSA participation, or being listed as a GMP POI?
I have no problem "lending" IGAU fleet carriers to DSSA, however the word I'm getting is that the "goal posts" for membership are shifting on an almost daily basis.
With all this control DSSA seems to want to exert over participating FC's, what do the owners of the FC's get from it? "Exposure"?
In summary, what's the road-map, and the long-term plan for DSSA? What are the methods you plan to use to sort out territory conflicts?
How are you ensuring the process is fair to all members, non-exclusive, not prone to preferential treatment, or the tyranny of the minority?
Based on what I'm hearing there's information on fleetcomm Discord, here on the forums, and has been changing rapidly, with some inconsistency.
As for the changes in tone, I'm not going to get into disputes between others and you, Qohen, as it's not my place.
I have however seen several prominent explorers be handled, shall we say.... roughly.
This "two year" thing is the latest change I'm hearing about. Is that for DSSA participation, or being listed as a GMP POI?
I have no problem "lending" IGAU fleet carriers to DSSA, however the word I'm getting is that the "goal posts" for membership are shifting on an almost daily basis.
With all this control DSSA seems to want to exert over participating FC's, what do the owners of the FC's get from it? "Exposure"?
In summary, what's the road-map, and the long-term plan for DSSA? What are the methods you plan to use to sort out territory conflicts?
How are you ensuring the process is fair to all members, non-exclusive, not prone to preferential treatment, or the tyranny of the minority?
Clearly I missed something because I honestly have no idea what you are referring to.
The original commitment was and still is one year.
I'm not sure what you call "goal posts".
As for control, I designed this project with the explicit wish of me being as much hands-off as possible.
As for what they get out of this, I don't even know how to answer this.
As for conflit solving, I've simply asked (when possible) the person if they'd be willing to move.
I suspect a lot of misinformation and poor reading being spread around for whatever reason.
The original commitment was and still is one year.
I'm not sure what you call "goal posts".
As for control, I designed this project with the explicit wish of me being as much hands-off as possible.
As for what they get out of this, I don't even know how to answer this.
As for conflit solving, I've simply asked (when possible) the person if they'd be willing to move.
I suspect a lot of misinformation and poor reading being spread around for whatever reason.
Deleted member 240115
D
I appreciate the clarification. Thank you for the prompt reply!
Goal posts meaning - requirements, qualifications, etc. I understand the response to this has been way more than originally expected, so there's some level of understanding.
Right, when the DSSA was first announced, it did seem like a loose confederation of fleet carriers, which was certainly attractive to different squadrons, including IGAU.
As for benefits, let me clarify somewhat. If the requirements from DSSA to participate are minimal, then I would expect (quite fairly) that DSSA's involvement with said FC's would be minimal. If DSSA wants to have 100% control over the FC's (which doesn't seem to be the case), I'd expect there would be some assistance with fuel and upkeep.
Goal posts meaning - requirements, qualifications, etc. I understand the response to this has been way more than originally expected, so there's some level of understanding.
Right, when the DSSA was first announced, it did seem like a loose confederation of fleet carriers, which was certainly attractive to different squadrons, including IGAU.
As for benefits, let me clarify somewhat. If the requirements from DSSA to participate are minimal, then I would expect (quite fairly) that DSSA's involvement with said FC's would be minimal. If DSSA wants to have 100% control over the FC's (which doesn't seem to be the case), I'd expect there would be some assistance with fuel and upkeep.
I still don't see what the problem about goal posts is. The requirement is staying at least one year in a fixed location, having at least repair service aboard (not that I would have to "require" it, really) and having the full upkeep sum in the carrier's bank from day one — this for a quite simple matter of stability and reliability. All these have been on the OP and unchanged since day one.
And same thing, I repeatedly said on Fleetcomm (and to you via PM) that I want this to be hands off and loose, as you said, because I don't have the time or stamina to be involved all the time like on DW2. My involvement is simply ensuring as much as possible that the volunteered carriers will reliably remain in location, and that the network is vaguely evenly spread out. Other than that, tarriff, services, expeditions and the rest, as stated in the OP and on the early draft from last october, is at the owner's discretion. Thus, there is no official assistance, partly because eveyone's free to deploy as they wish, partly because there is no official "DSSA team" but me.
Hope this clears things out, though I'm quite surprised that the OP isn't straightforward enough, apparently.
Hey, I respect the hell out of you for organising this, and thank you for doing so. It's a selfless act and somewhat sacrificial of your time and energy and I just want to take a moment to convey my appreiate you doing this for strangers
Just to clarify. The GMP and the DSSA are two different projects. The decisions the GMP makes have no bearing on anything the DSSA does. GMP POI recognition was offered to the DSSA as a 'perk' to help promote the event and to give players who pledge their support some recognition for their dedication - albeit on the community-created map. DSSA locations are also the very kind of content the GMP will embrace, as they're adding to the map content (be it via historical POIs, deep space outposts, and possible future colony POI locations - depending on how the project evolves over time). So the two projects are independent of one another, but do complement each other.
The 2-year thing is for GMP POI recognition only. 2 years commitment gains you 'permanent POI recognition'. Even if you leave the project after that 2 years and move on, your POI will be marked as a historic location, with reference to your service to the DSSA. If you leave the project before those two years are up, then your POI will be removed too. Again - this has nothing to do with DSSA rules, this is purely a GMP stipulation. We'll only permanently mark Carrier locations that become important or well known, or stay on the maps for 2 years.
What the GMP doesn't want to do is to mark hundreds of Carriers all over the map, as that would be a nightmare to keep track of since many players would likely get bored and move their Carriers - making their POIs obsolete and meaningless. Since DSSA commanders have pledged to keep their Carriers in place, its natural the GMP will trust that pledge and recognise them. First with POI status, then permanent POI status if they commit to holding that location for two years.
To be part of the DSSA you need to have enough upkeep in the bank to cover whatever length of time you have pledged to support the initiative with, as the whole concept is for explorers to be able to trust that a Carrier listed on the DSSA tracker is always where it says it'll be.
Last edited:
Deleted member 240115
D
Awesome, well, then since Deep Space 12, and Deep Space 27 were the first pledged to the Veils, and Outer Arm, and are pledged to be there for likely, the rest of the game's shelf life , there's no problem with the two year commitment on my end. Thanks for clarifying.
I don't get everyone's problem, the areas involved are huge, if it turns out someone plants a carrier near mine I will happily move.
I've committed to 3 years, most likely it will be for the life of the game. It's the kind of emergent gameplay I really enjoy.
I've committed to 3 years, most likely it will be for the life of the game. It's the kind of emergent gameplay I really enjoy.