But like I said: Ship and FPS should be considered separately. While I already struggle with ceaselessly mashing one button to rule them all to get any place - I certainly wouldn't want to mash that button to join some shootout somewhere.
I agree with a lot of that. Long range travel does need to be more hands on. Point and click for hrs on end something that the simplest bit can do IS poor gameplay imo.... But the answer I will never feel is fast travel. Indeed imo one of the ever dwindling highlights of ED is imo the feeling of being out in deep spaceBut in both games you can change your kart/car, and in both the tweaks are instant. You don't have to wait a few days for the mechanics to order the parts, install them and test them. Because that isn't niche gameplay, it isn't elite, it isnt hardcore, it isn't interesting. ED doesnt have that either, because it would be stupid. iRacing sets itself apart with its driving model and such. All the parts that set it apart have direct gameplay consequences. Some like it, some don't. Same with ED's flight model, module damage system, power management and so forth. Far more convoluted than, say, NMS, but that is fine.
The issue with ED is that some of the 'realistic' bits are neither realistic nor lead to any sort of gameplay. There is nothing wrong with going for a less casual approach, but at any point the question should always be:"what is the intended fun here?". That fun may only appeal to a minority, that itself is not a problem. But if you go back to the DDF, what we currently have was not what anyone envisioned or wanted. Because what we currently have is daft. Tons of interesting, niche, dangerous, challenging et cetera ideas were pitched for long-distance travel. I'm all for that.
But we have none of that. And anyone who has a reasonable normal set of brains would readily concede that what we have now is not 'quintessential Elite', not what the original discssions were about, not what anyone at the time pitched as interesting or fun, not challenging, not realistic. It is just not fun in any way you look at it.
Personally I would be all for some loading and unloading times as well as repairs. It would add extra risk reward considerations when playing. Do I risk going for. 300k bonus pirate bounty a d risk having to repair ship for 10 mins thus making me lose an early delivery bonus on my cargo.....No, but sometimes there is a good reason for certain mechanics, because they just work well for the flow of the game. Save games, for example. Simplified maintenance, loading, unloading - anything that would realistically take quite some time. And, of course, travelling and fast-travelling. These aren't tropes but mechanics to make games accessible. Or would you want to sit in the cinema for days just to see how the action unfolds in a movie in real time?
Even though I personally dislike the idea of teleportation very much, I wouldn't be too bothered by one of these solutions that might address the OP's point of view:
1 - Players could login to any station where they have a ship parked. So if you have a ship in Colonia you could login at Colonia, and then login in the bubble if you had a ship in the bubble. But the ships themselves remain where they are unless the played flies them or orders a transfer. In practice, this is mostly the same as the OP proposes but in slightly different wording, except the player needs to have a ship in the intended login destination, instead of just having been there once.
For example. Going from Colonia to the Bubble is pretty much hands-down no-contest the most boring experience in gaming, in the history of gaming.
For the obvious reasons that pretty much every other game has them. It can be implemented easily; when docket at a station you can teleport to any other station with a shipyard you have previously visited.
How about no. There is no teleportation technology in Elite. If you want to play with teleportation try Star Trek.
You have hundreds of fully engineered Corvettes and fdls scattered all over the galaxy? If not, making those four jumps in your example would still be faster.
Oh, ask me how many times I was attacked by PvP players on my journey to Colonia. Or how often in Colonia in general, given I am based in scary Robardin Rock?
Let's be real, this won't have any of the impact you pretend it does.![]()
players could teleport there to get involved in the war, if they had been to Colonia before. Something they could not do today
Except that they take time and effort, from some players, to fuel and move. Teleport would take no time or player effort at all (other than visiting a location once, per this proposal).Fleet Carriers mate. You can log off in the Bubble and log back on in Colonia the following day.
FCs are a slow-motion teleport.
Except that they take time and effort, from some players, to fuel and move. Teleport would take no time or player effort at all (other than visiting a location once, per this proposal).
I totally agree.Fleet Carriers mate. You can log off in the Bubble and log back on in Colonia the following day.
FCs are a slow-motion teleport.
Instead of this, they should add multiple commander slots on same the account. With shared credits and engineering unlocks.
That way if you get tired of the lone wanderer exploration commander out in the black, you can just log over to your other commander in the bubble.
One takes time and requires preparation and commits the player to the journey itself and the specific destination. The other requires neither - and would allow the player to location hop near instantly around as much of the galaxy as they had visited (all it would require is to relog).I'm not seeing a huge difference, to be honest. If I get passively transported to Colonia by FC or by teleporter I'm still in Colonia without any personal effort.
Fleet Carriers mate. You can log off in the Bubble and log back on in Colonia the following day.
FCs are a slow-motion teleport.