We were apparently supposed to be micro-jumping in-system

[John Xenir]

The recent OA Kickstarter video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_xh8tXnAVw

... was very good, but also one of the comments caught my attention.

I was so in love with Elite that I sank $1200 CAD into that Kickstarter to get the planet naming thingie... then they stuck my planet and station in a locked system that is essentially North Korea where nobody has any reason to go. It only had 1 faction outpost giving out missions, took 4 months to get enough missions to get a permit. Fun times.It was worth being part of the DDF, their original concept for in-system travel wasn't frameshift drive, it was microjumps to pre-existing destinations. We pushed them to change it to free flight.

I find this subject very interesting, and for many different reasons.
Partly because some of Elite Dangerous' current shape of things can be partially blamed on backers, so I find it hilariously ironic. [big grin]

But jokes aside, part of me can't help but wonder how would the game look like if Frontier stuck to their original idea?

Would we be able to jump out into emptiness at any point, or navigate away from preset pockets with freedom equal to today?
Would jumping into a system mean we would find ourselves around nav buoy (hence their original existence?) in "real space" (not in SC) and only then being able to micro-jump (MJ from hereon) away?
How would exploration be affected with such system in place, and how scanning/approaching stellar objects handled?
Is that why the navigation panel is what it is - means of pre-selecting target MJ (micro-jump) pocket before free flight was instead introduced?

I can't hide that this comment made me think that the original Frontier's vision was quite different than what we have today, and wonder how many current problems are result of Frontier actually listening to the backers in the early months?
Is it also why they're not as eager in sharing their ideas with community today?

What do you think of MJing around system? Yes, experiencing the first 1,5 MLs flight clearly lets one feel the vastness of space, but in a long run - do we really need such an amount of nothingness?
How do you think engineering materials were handled if we didn't have the same amount of freedom in SC as we have now - would USS even exist then?
How many issues currently affecting the game could've been avoided if Frontier stuck to their MJing vision?

Please guys, let's explore the ocean of possibilities and discuss intriguing alternatives instead of trying to prove one's point to be pointier than someone else's.
Share your thoughts, don't judge others - they are allowed to an opinion, just as you are. Can we do that for once? I believe we can!

 

[Vasea Azure]

You might be interested in this discussion:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/423725-In-system-jumps

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Microjumps to predetermined desinations doesn't really sound very hot and exciting to me.

 

[John Xenir]

Just to straighten the record - I'm more intrigued how the game would look like should Frontier decided to go with MJ in comparison to today, rather than re-discussing why we should have MJs instead of SC today. It's been beaten to death and I don't think it needs yet another resurrection.

I've posted enough questions in OP to prove that's the intention

Microjumps to predetermined desinations doesn't really sound very hot and exciting to me.

I guess it heavily depends on perspective.
From an explorer perspective? Yeah, it may sound like it's taking away from the experience.
From player interaction perspective? Sounds like heavily focusing player action in small pockets which actually may contribute to having fun.

I'm sure we can come up with more examples but at the end of the day, it'll always be down to preference.
One thing to consider though - pre-determined destination can receive much more love than randomly generated stuff spread randomly around random empty space. That sure sounds like a plus, innit?

 

[Kaocraft]

The recent OA Kickstarter video...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_xh8tXnAVw

... was very good, but also one of the comments caught my attention.



[/FONT][/COLOR]

I find this subject very interesting, and for many different reasons.
Partly because some of Elite Dangerous' current shape of things can be partially blamed on backers, so I find it hilariously ironic. [big grin]

But jokes aside, part of me can't help but wonder how would the game look like if Frontier stuck to their original idea?

Would we be able to jump out into emptiness at any point, or navigate away from preset pockets with freedom equal to today?
Would jumping into a system mean we would find ourselves around nav buoy (hence their original existence?) in "real space" (not in SC) and only then being able to micro-jump (MJ from hereon) away?
How would exploration be affected with such system in place, and how scanning/approaching stellar objects handled?
Is that why the navigation panel is what it is - means of pre-selecting target MJ (micro-jump) pocket before free flight was instead introduced?

I can't hide that this comment made me think that the original Frontier's vision was quite different than what we have today, and wonder how many current problems are result of Frontier actually listening to the backers in the early months?
Is it also why they're not as eager in sharing their ideas with community today?

What do you think of MJing around system? Yes, experiencing the first 1,5 MLs flight clearly lets one feel the vastness of space, but in a long run - do we really need such an amount of nothingness?
How do you think engineering materials were handled if we didn't have the same amount of freedom in SC as we have now - would USS even exist then?
How many issues currently affecting the game could've been avoided if Frontier stuck to their MJing vision?

Please guys, let's explore the ocean of possibilities and discuss intriguing alternatives instead of trying to prove one's point to be pointier than someone else's.
Share your thoughts, don't judge others - they are allowed to an opinion, just as you are. Can we do that for once? I believe we can!

Sounds like Star Citizen. Does their system seem preferable to you?

 

[Stigbob]

Sounds like an extremely restrictive way to do what we can already do "on the fly".

 

[John Xenir]

Sounds like Star Citizen. Does their system seem preferable to you?

Just to straighten the record - I'm more intrigued how the game would look like should Frontier decided to go with MJ in comparison to today, rather than re-discussing why we should have MJs instead of SC today. (...)

Come on man, why would my preference be of any meaning here?
Are you not intrigued how the game would look like if they turned left instead of right? Is your imagination not running rampant on how different many things would be?
Are you not curious what their original vision was?

 

[Vasea Azure]

Micro jumps were discussed to death in at least two mega topics past week - it ended in painful circular arguments, let it go OP.

 

[EdzUp]

The system would have been very robust all explorers would have needed was a XYZ coordinate to jump to and a explorer drive which meant they could jump anywhere in system. It is one of the things I'm putting I to my game where instead of instances there are sectors of space you can choose where to go and what to do meaning systems get soooo much bigger and also allows me to hide stuff in systems without nav beacons

Explorer scanners give you a coordinate to orbit a planet etc so it gives you a jump target.

 

[John Xenir]

Micro jumps were discussed to death in at least two mega topics past week - it ended in painful circular arguments, let it go OP.

If we assume that this community if incapable of focusing on different aspect of the problem, then yes - that's a fair point.
However, I've come to expect some quality of feedback from a couple of users here, yourself included, and that small group alone is worth engaging with, IMHO.
The rest can be ignored, should they happen along and attempt at side-tracking the thread

But if you don't feel like you would like to discuss any of the questions:

(...)
But jokes aside, part of me can't help but wonder how would the game look like if Frontier stuck to their original idea?

Would we be able to jump out into emptiness at any point, or navigate away from preset pockets with freedom equal to today?
Would jumping into a system mean we would find ourselves around nav buoy (hence their original existence?) in "real space" (not in SC) and only then being able to micro-jump (MJ from hereon) away?
How would exploration be affected with such system in place, and how scanning/approaching stellar objects handled?
Is that why the navigation panel is what it is - means of pre-selecting target MJ (micro-jump) pocket before free flight was instead introduced?

I can't hide that this comment made me think that the original Frontier's vision was quite different than what we have today, and wonder how many current problems are result of Frontier actually listening to the backers in the early months?
Is it also why they're not as eager in sharing their ideas with community today?

What do you think of MJing around system? Yes, experiencing the first 1,5 MLs flight clearly lets one feel the vastness of space, but in a long run - do we really need such an amount of nothingness?
How do you think engineering materials were handled if we didn't have the same amount of freedom in SC as we have now - would USS even exist then?
How many issues currently affecting the game could've been avoided if Frontier stuck to their MJing vision?
(...)

... then I absolutely respect that.

 

[Vasea Azure]

You will find out that many forum members are very hmmm.. orthodox as far as Elite game-play goes. Myself I wouldn't mind in system jumps to stars or pre placed beacons at all. Most contr arguments are "game would feel small" - very subjective, I dont find flying 1h to any place engaging, challenging and it does not make me feel any scale. Optional micro jumps would be welcome idea in my book but I kind of see why some players would feel against this.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I would be in favor of adding MJs, but only to nav beacons near stars, which would only exist in the bubble.

 

[VR Golgot]

I'm not clear on what the objective of the thread is exactly. (Imagining ED if they'd stayed with the small-box-to-small-box system? But not referencing potential changes to the current build?)

Either way, this old post by Sandro on the subject is interesting

Hello Commanders!

First, apologies, I've only read the initial post. The suggestions made are completely reasonable, so this should be in no way taken as any kind of, "you're way wrong, man!"

For us, the problem with the suggested system (and we got a lot of really great feedback from our backers on this, that basically made us take a good look in the mirror and "man up and go for it"), is that it doesn't really feel like you travel (we had a jump system way back when during production, and it very much did dilute the feeling of scale in the game).

It also felt contrived to have most gameplay happening not too far from a starport.

Basically, we'd gone to all these lengths to create a gigantic game world and it just didn't feel right to not support and reinforce the idea that you travelled incredible distance across the vast reaches of space in it. I'll admit it was a risky choice - it's more difficult to support and perhaps not as instantly accessible, but we think it's the right choice and worth fighting for.

On the other hand, we're certainly not finished with super cruise. There's clearly room for improvement, and I'm really happy that this game has continuing ongoing development, so we can make stuff better and better!

We definitely want to add a micro jump between stars within a system (not only does this fit in with the context of how the frame shift drive uses large bodies for navigation, it also helps significantly with those systems where you currently arrive around the "wrong" star, where civilisation has set up camp around a different star in the system).

We're also going to look at getting more content directly into super cruise (e.g. having ships you're looking for in super cruise as well as at signal sources, making super cruise traffic and behaviour more supportive of system state), as well as making more of signal sources (we're looking at adding more reasons to visit signal sources and this will hopefully just grow over time).

The usual caveats apply, of course - no ETA, no guarantee (development can be difficult to predict).

Of course, this still won't be everyone's cup of tea, and I'll take no offence if you don't get excited by the direction we're taking. I hope however, that this will help explain a little how and why we make decisions for the game.

It does intrigue me that he was totally open to micro jumps to 2nd suns at that point . It would appear they're more conflicted on it these days.

The general principle of not narrowing down to tiny boxes does make sense to me. (Even if the current system could do with a revisit, IMO. Click sig, cough cough, etc )

The DDF also discussed micro jump systems at length.

Here's a bonus fun take on the decisions of the time, from another designer, Mike Evans. (His spirited defence of the flight model in a quote above is also one for the ages. Proper punchy 'n principled )[/url]

 

[Iskariot]

We were apparently supposed to be micro-jumping in-system

Yes, and I am forever grateful that we got Supercruise instead, although I would like there to be the option of a limited form of micro jumping in very large systems (See my proposal below).

I can't hide that this comment made me think that the original Frontier's vision was quite different than what we have today, and wonder how many current problems are result of Frontier actually listening to the backers in the early months?

Frontier have always proudly referred to the implementation of Supercruise as a great example of how backers and developers together found a much better travel solution than the original microjump idea.

But jokes aside, part of me can't help but wonder how would the game look like if Frontier stuck to their original idea?

I shudder at the thought of only being able to do 'fake' point-to-point travel.
I think Supercruise is a magnificent way of true travel through the star systems in the game. It shows us planets and stars in relation to each other and zooming past planets, moons and stars is simply an awesome experience.

But....
Having said all that I think it would be great if we had micro jumping as another option to travel. This should however come with rules and restrictions.

A proposal I posted in another thread:

I love supercruise. It is a magnificent addition to this spacesim.
It is the perfect balance between extremely fast spacetravel and still being awed by the enormity of the universe.
Soaring past a beautiful star or planet is still a thrill and I must have done it thousands of times by now.

As far as far away locations in a system are concerned... I simply don't travel where I do not want to go.
I won't go to Hutton because it is too far away and has nothing to offer for my troubles.

I would like changes to supercruise.

CHANGE 1. PLAYER AGENCY
I want more player agency. I want to have more influence on flying in supercruise, more piloty things to do.
This could be done via pip management for example.
We might perhaps use pips to control certain aspects of sc travel. Pips in sc travel might influence different things compared to normal space travel.

CHANGE 2. THE HUD
I also want the HUD to change its layout in supercruise with new HUD elements, just like it changes when you approach a planet.
I am sure FD could make something up to make it look cool and different and appropriate for Supercruise.
The HUD might give you an ideal travel solution by showing you a flight path to fly around a planet to accelerate and speed up travel.

I think these changes would serve to underline the differences between the different flight modes and would make us feel like real ace space pilots .

CHANGE 3. MINIJUMPS
I would like to be able to do in-system minijumps to other stars in the same system.
There could be rules for this to be possible:
0. Minijumps might only be possible when you are in supercruise (for fluffy technical reasons)
1. A second star has to be at least 50.000 ls (just an arbitrary number) removed from the main star for example.
2. You might need to fly 1000 ls away from the main star to be able to do a minijump
3. Minijumps might cause light damage to the FSD
4. Minijumps might consume a lot of fuel, because... reasons.
5. We might have to buy an expensive modification for the FSD to make minijumps possible.
6. Minijumps might not be possible to certain star types.
7. Another tool FD might use to regulate in system mini-jumps could be some kind of jump inhibitor installation that prevents ships from doing a mini-jump in certain systems. For example a far away military installation, orbiting a second star in the system might have such a device to prevent enemy ships from jumping to it directly.

 

[Vedmo]

Micro-transactions for micro-jumps.

Problem solved.

 

[Vedmo]

And then macro-transactions for macro-jumps?

Ooh. New business model: you get the game for free but when you want to leave the system you have to pay real monies per jump.

People keep going on about how valuable their time is, sounds like a logical conclusion.

 

[Lestat]

And then macro-transactions for macro-jumps?

Ooh. New business model: you get the game for free but when you want to leave the system you have to pay real monies per jump.

Sounds good for me. It put some lazy players in their place.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Would we be able to jump out into emptiness at any point, or navigate away from preset pockets with freedom equal to today?

The difficulty in making an "arbitrary XYZ point" interface I think was one of the big deciding factors to add supercruise - and then perhaps to drop microjumps entirely and just have supercruise.

Would jumping into a system mean we would find ourselves around nav buoy (hence their original existence?) in "real space" (not in SC) and only then being able to micro-jump (MJ from hereon) away?
How would exploration be affected with such system in place, and how scanning/approaching stellar objects handled?
Is that why the navigation panel is what it is - means of pre-selecting target MJ (micro-jump) pocket before free flight was instead introduced?

Yes, a lot of the design seems to be remnants of microjumps. USSes would make *far* more sense if you honked your scanner, and they showed up as possible microjump targets ... even if underneath the generation mechanism was much the same "randomly cause some to appear near you". A lot of the combat-entirely-optional gameplay would have been less optional (like the previous three games) with microjumps too.

Supercruise is in my opinion much better than microjumps in most cases as a travel mechanism *but* it's taking a while for Frontier to catch up the rest of the design to it, and other things have happened in the meantime that may make that practically impossible in some cases, and that does contribute to some of the problems with the "disconnectedness" of the game.

I can't hide that this comment made me think that the original Frontier's vision was quite different than what we have today, and wonder how many current problems are result of Frontier actually listening to the backers in the early months?
Is it also why they're not as eager in sharing their ideas with community today?

Oh, no, they keep listening to the community and then implementing what the community has asked for. One day, perhaps, the community will learn and start asking for what it actually wants...

Case in point: community has been asking for C&P reform to make it 'tougher and more consequency on criminals' for years. So Frontier implemented that. And it stopped most of the requests for tougher C&P! Success!


The rest of the original design vision as shown in the DDF is very interesting and very different to what we have today - well worth reading if you have time. Some fun highlights:
- much shorter jump ranges and longer travel times between systems (even jumping to an uncharted system would be a significant piece of work, the route you took between systems would be important, and knowing hyperspace routes others didn't know by discovering rogue planets in deep space would be important)
- much more differentiation in-system. Rather than single stations with the majority of services all in one place, you might have a trade station where you handed in your goods to make money, and then a separate shipyard station you travelled to for outfitting, a separate hangar station you then stored your ship in [1] (at a cost!), and then perhaps some secret station somewhere to do your black market trading. No doubt nowadays this would be considered a massive "time sink" flying between all these separate stations.
- more specific outfitting and more scope for things to go wrong - your galactic map could malfunction, your fuel tank could burst into flames, you needed different types of mining laser to mine for different minerals.
- you could trade basically anything with another player - cash, cargo, even things like bounty vouchers or exploration data
- exploration would be more dangerous - NPCs could try to kill explorers who were surveying systems with things they'd rather keep hidden, and wear-and-tear would provide substantial limitations on endurance, so no staying out for months on end without resupply.
- shooting someone slows drive charge (for low- or high- wake) so you can't just jump out of a hostile situation instantly
(There are also some ideas in the "not yet implemented" section which I think would get rather more support than these, of course, but let's just say that the sometimes-seen call that "Frontier should just implement the DDF rather than messing around with <other feature>" would involve some major and not necessarily popular changes!)

[1] 25% of DDF members suggested that multiple ship ownership was either a low priority or shouldn't be in the game at all, when polled. They weren't necessarily representative of the average Elite Dangerous player...

 

[Schmack]

We're micro-jumping any time we go between systems. Imagine you had to supercruise to anywhere, and that the galaxy loaded as you moved at your max speed of 2000c- 4000c. Explorers would be out there having never turned around, but they'd still be really close in hyperspace terms. Instead, we micro-jump between systems. I know the term is reserved for in system jumps, but if you consider a 5 system region as a single system, getting back and forth between them when the station is >25Ls from the stars, you're spending more time in supercruise than traveling between stars.

I think it would be great, if it was optional and didn't override existing distances. Example: You can jump to station X instead of travelling 250K Ls, but you cannot jump to station Y which is still 8KLs from station X.

I don't think it would make the game any more interesting, it would just mean we could do more actual gameplay in the amount of time we have to play, and that we'd be more likely to visit systems with stations that are absurdly far from the nav beacon.

 

[askavir]

Without free flight the game would lose more than half the appeal.