Transfer Poll Results

[WR3ND]

Fair point. Don't you think it'd be better to have risks and activities added to travel than have the travel itself removed? I don't just mean interdictions. Perhaps different types of radiation resistance on ships, dangerous gravity wells, solar flares that fry systems and require repair/reboot. Just brainstorming.

And it looks like we'll be getting a bit more of that in 2.2 with the updates to neutron stars and white dwarfs. Really looking forward to that, especially now that this transfer issue has largely been resolved, in my mind at least.

There is the risk in getting close to them and taking damage with the potential to super charge your FSD for increased jump range. An interesting risk/reward option that I think will enhance the game a bit, especially if we get more interesting interaction like this with celestial bodies in the future, provided it seems semi-plausible and not too gamey, of course.

 

[jacozilla]

I trust there is going to be sanity checking as to what ships can be delivered where.
For example, something to stop an anaconda being delivered to an outpost

given Sandro stated that the logic behind this transfer is via 'bulk carrier', why would there be sanity check condition you suggest?

An anaconda can go to an outpost right now, park nearby, and dump out cargo.
a bulk carrier could go to an outpost, park nearby, and dump out one or more carried ships.

you are equating docking at an outpost landing pad with ability to travel to the outpost and deliver cargo nearby.

i would agree with you that it would be weird and should not have feature where you dock at outpost in medium or small pad size ship, transfer anaconda and somehow start out docked on landing pad it would not have otherwise been able to land on, but similar to scenarios where you landed on planet but restart game with ship floating in orbit - you could as easily have transferred anacondas to outposts start player floating in space outside outpost.

 

[frostypaw]

Well look at it this way.

You fly 300ly to a community goal and find there's a nice combat site near by so you summon your FDL or whatever.

Only to be told you have to wait 60 mins for it.

So do you either:

Wait 60 minutes twiddling your thumbs

Refit your current ship for combat

Fly the 300 ly to get your other ship

Go do something else that you were not intending to do until you realised you had to wait 60 mins to do the thing you wanted to do

Log off for 60 mins

All the delay does is break the game, make people think about logging or it makes itself redundant because it's better to fly back and get your ship manually and stops you actually doing the thing you intended on doing.

So when you flew to the community goal and didn't know about the nice combat site what were your plans, and why couldn't you carry on with those?

 

[Shar]

Shows over folks.

 

[Cupcake]

I find this quite troubling in one respect, and that is that not everybody who plays ED frequents these boards, in fact a very small proportion of players do. SO why not ask the players directly via an email survey/poll? Is this just a bone to calm the masses, a bit of theatre before the bombs drop? OR are they bowing down to the nasty, narcissistic hoardes that throw themselves on most reasonable discussions and reduce them to slanging matches? Too little too late IMHO, fixing the door AFTER the horse has bolted......

 

[Ozram]

I find this quite troubling in one respect, and that is that not everybody who plays ED frequents, in fact a very small proportion of players do. SO why not ask the players directly via an email survey/poll? Is this just a bone to calm the masses, a bit of theatre before the bombs drop? OR are they bowing down to the nasty, narcissistic hoardes that throw themselves on most reasonable discussions and reduce them to slanging matches? Too little too late IMHO, fixing the door AFTER the horse has bolted......

They did.

 

[mossfoot]

Speaking personally as someone who prefers ship transfer delays, I believe that when your ship is destroyed you should only get the standard modules and have to fit it out with engineer mods again.
This would however probably have a rather interesting and negative effect on the PVP community. I suspect that combat logging would rise quite considerably with people not wanting to lose their unique ships.

Yeah, I'd be cool with that, but it will never happen.

Would make for a great list of toggleable "hardcore" options. Options being the key. Have a menu setup where the way things are is the default, but you can add things like:

-possible ejection seat failure (random roll when ejection, clear save, sorta like my ejection seat table--see sig)
-increase insurance costs with every death (cooldown period of a month or more as it resets to normal)
-lose all mods on ship destruction (as stated above)
-lose all materials/data on ship destruction

etc... Don't make it an all-or-nothing hardcore menu option, but a list to cherry pick your ideal experience. Kind of like how XCom works their settings.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I find this quite troubling in one respect, and that is that not everybody who plays ED frequents these boards, in fact a very small proportion of players do. SO why not ask the players directly via an email survey/poll? Is this just a bone to calm the masses, a bit of theatre before the bombs drop? OR are they bowing down to the nasty, narcissistic hoardes that throw themselves on most reasonable discussions and reduce them to slanging matches? Too little too late IMHO, fixing the door AFTER the horse has bolted......

They did.

People seem to keep forgetting this simple fact.

Emails
Facebook Groups (of many varieties)
Reddit
Steam
Twitter
Youtube (via Obsidian Ant and others)
These forums
and I'm sure there's more. You couldn't get more inclusive.

 

[Andovar]

Can FD please hurry up and screw something up so we have something else to rant about.

 

[mossfoot]

Can FD please hurry up and screw something up so we have something else to rant about.

I hear they're going to introduce Trumbles

 

[NW3]

They could be attackable like capital ships. If they're successfully attacked, the freighter will emergency jump and all ships transfers on that freighter would be delayed by a certain amount of time to get to their destination.

Yeah, I was thinking about this scenario earlier. How to best handle an attack of a transport?

It occurred to me that Frontier could reuse the existing "insurance" game mechanics: The cost of transport could include ship insurance and in the case of attack, a replacement ship with the same load-out would be delivered to the destination, perhaps with an additional delay. The insurance might even be optional, which leads to an additional game-play consideration: Do I risk ship possible ship destruction to save some credits?

Of course, the insurance should be much cheaper than the current 5% co-pay for a lost ship, since it's fairly unlikely that a transport ship would be successfully attacked. The insurance might even be variable, depending on things like war or number of anarchy systems on the route, etc.

 

[Faybs]

Slingshotting would be cool. Need an on board computer for assistance though as eyeballing it would be "difficult".

Someone would need CMDR Sarbian to write MechDave

 

[Ragamuffin1979]

Yeah, I was thinking about this scenario earlier. How to best handle an attack of a transport?

It occurred to me that Frontier could reuse the existing "insurance" game mechanics: The cost of transport could include ship insurance and in the case of attack, a replacement ship with the same load-out would be delivered to the destination, perhaps with an additional delay. The insurance might even be optional, which leads to an additional game-play consideration: Do I risk ship possible ship destruction to save some credits?

Of course, the insurance should be much cheaper than the current 5% co-pay for a lost ship, since it's fairly unlikely that a transport ship would be successfully attacked. The insurance might even be variable, depending on things like war or number of anarchy systems on the route, etc.

Any insurance should be paid in the initial cost of transportation.

 

[MuteJazz]

The argument against that (and I have to say in 500 odd pages of continual rants and postings, I rarely saw this one) this is actually a game issue you are pointing out - that the argument WOULD have validity if those circumstances had risk. So it's less about saying the Delay camp are unreasonable to argue that transfer takes away risk in favour of reward, it's saying the risk isn't there period. A whole different kettle of fish.

The basic argument is that you shouldn't be rewarded for zero risk, which is instant-transfer. That does suggest that no transfer is riskier than transfers of any kind. Which is true. How many explorers have had to hobble home, not because of an NPC, but through an error in flight/landing/scoop prox? These are all risks of Elite which transfer avoids - and that reward is fine (because it does improve QoL in moving assets) but it has to be factored with a comparable burden, because yes, it is helping you avoid long hauls and potential risks.

Not really... you can't avoid hauls, and you can't avoid crashing into a star by using instant ship transfer. You can't store a T9 full of cargo and then get into a sidy to have a low-risk flight to your destination then pop your T9 over when you get there. The cargo has to go somewhere when you swap ships, the sidy doesn't have that much storage. You also can't transfer a ship to the middle of no-where, so I don't see your point here. The ship transfer itself balances its own advantages with cost, if transferring a ship costs more than what you have or so much that you would lose the ability to rebuy the ship you are transferring, you will be either unable to or highly dis-incentivised to transfer that ship. You aren't being rewarded for using either ship transfer, using transfer really only puts you at a disadvantage through the loss the loss of currency (and now time too). Ship transfer doesn't reward the player, it conveniences them. Yes using transfer might mean you don't fall too close to that one star and gain yourself a minor damage bill or get interdicted by that one pirate and loose 5 minutes of your time in escaping/blowing them up, but that's part of the convenience you pay for.

The timer has a diminishing return on its value. Transfers that take more than 30 mins just aren't going to be worth the cost as, for the majority case, you'd probably get your ship just as fast moving it yourself, if not faster. If your argument for having a timer is to make the transfer less "convenient", then I agree with your argument, but not the solution. There are other ways to make transfer less convenient without ruining its value. I've said it before, instead of a timer for completion, make a cool-down before a ship can be transferred again. It's the best compromise as it keeps the feature valuable whilst mitigating its ability to be over-used.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I hear they're going to introduce Trumbles

Really? Oh dear....

 

[CMDR MadRaptor]

FD, what on earth were you thinking?

If design by committee is bad, design by forum vote is worse.

Take feedback on a feature after you release it, not before anyone here has actually had a chance to try it. Ridiculous is the only word I have for this.

How is this ridiculous, ship transfer is not a feature with a lot of depth that needs to be fine tuned to work correctly. It's understandable to implement other features without a poll, and, also note, that this is not the way FD normally does things and is not going to be normal here on out, this was one of those rare occasions where it made sense to come to the community. They were for instant transfer and through dev. talks they began to lean towards delayed. Aware of the arguments about it going on in the forums it seems to make sense that before they worked or changed something that could potential delay the beta, or delay the feature itself they would go to a community who already had the talk and make it official. I think it was a smart move and in the case def okay to do before releasing the feature considering the work it might take to rework the feature after already implemented in the game as instant.

 

[CMDR MadRaptor]

It's a one way trip. It's 8x longer than the one way trip would take me to do it myself.

Why not just do it yourself then. If you can do it much better than delayed transfer then okay do it. And you aren't going to quit, if so just close your account today cause the delay is not going to change again. You must have enjoyed the game enough to buy it and the horizons expansion and if the whole season has been a joke to you was ship transfer really going to erase the bad taste of the rest of the season, seeing as it really is such a small part of the next update. Anyways, just annoyed at long time players all of the sudden ready to quit over this one feature when they've happily played the game for so long without it. And if it really is the one feature they were waiting for and is the one feature that makes or breaks the game, then wow, don't know why you'd buy a game where so much rides on so little. I admit, i was for instant transfer but when I think of the possibilities that come with delayed in future seasons, it's all worth it to me. It may seem like a time sink now but imagine in the future arriving at station, calling for ship and then going off to explore what the stations holds for us. I'm sure exploring the ins and outs of stations or planets will be a great distraction to ship wait times.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Can FD please hurry up and screw something up so we have something else to rant about.

Surprised there hasn't been more ranting about 3D printing of ship launched fighters.

 

[Ozram]

Surprised there hasn't been more ranting about 3D printing of ship launched fighters.

And why do they have cockpits with pilots in them? And why are they limited in range, unlike the SRVs? Why do the SRVs have cockpits when you instantly teleport back to your ship if they are destroyed?

Pitchforks are sexy [where is it]

 

[Patrick_68000]

Can FD please hurry up and screw something up so we have something else to rant about.

Perhaps, require the instant transfer, now ?

 

[Susanna]

Sending is Really Useful between Bubbles

I understand that instant transfers would cause major PvP havoc.

That said, from a PvE perspective, they would be harmless, really.

BTW, can we only transfer ships to where we (currently) are? If a delay is implemented, then wouldn't it also make sense to be able to "send" a ship to a remote location? You still need to get there to fly it (or wait to retrieve it). But the biggest bonus of being able to send ships would be planning ahead.

Example: I know I'll be able to play the game in an hour or two, while at the moment I only have enough time to log in. If I can send ships I could log in, send a combat ship ahead of time to a CG or a rendezvous point (if I want to play with a friend), then go offline and do RL stuff. Later I come back, take the long-range ship to where I sent my combat ship and I'm ready to play.

If sending isn't available then the timing problem becomes really awkward.

Also, I feel the poll could have used a third option. Something along the lines of "yes, have a delay, but make it 10 minutes at most". An hour sounds like a long time to wait.

If we could Send ships, I could send my Conda or Vulture to Jacques / Bubble2 but travel myself in my Asp! And my other ships, even if not there yet, wouldn't be too far behind me... So this would be a really useful feature! I get to go in my highest jump range ship while my other ships are also en-route as well! Liking this a lot!