Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 02:41:56 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  Gaming  |  Topic: Elite: Dangerous 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 70 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Elite: Dangerous  (Read 662278 times)
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23611


Reply #1715 on: May 05, 2017, 10:53:22 PM

Its logging out in the middle of a fight before the PKer orgasms all over your ass destroys your ship. Probably bullshit if it's in the middle of a duel, completely understandable if you're in a cobra getting shot at by an Anaconda.
I thought that was a solved problem since, uh, EverQuest*? Head scratch Facepalm


* Which kept your character in-game for a few minutes after being disconnected so you could still die from mobs, etc.
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #1716 on: May 05, 2017, 11:51:55 PM

Probably what the "killing the ED Process" circumvents, as Pennilenko said.

Hic sunt dracones.
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 23611


Reply #1717 on: May 06, 2017, 12:24:57 AM

Isn't there a central server keeping state in MP?
satael
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2431


Reply #1718 on: May 06, 2017, 01:29:27 AM

Isn't there a central server keeping state in MP?


A lot of the work in Elite is done P2P instead of being centralized to servers since there's quite a bit of it compared to more traditional MMOs (or so they've said). I'm also sure that the fact that E:D is a buy to play game with a relatively modest budget isn't a small factor when it comes to trying to keep the infrastructure light.  why so serious?
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #1719 on: May 06, 2017, 01:54:40 AM

I need to get into combat more now.  I hate combat.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #1720 on: May 06, 2017, 05:04:33 AM

What's combat logging?


Killing the game's process so you just go poof when a ganker or NPC is about to destroy your ship.

Not just that. What I hate about combat logging is that it's used by the griefers themselves whenever they finally meet someone who can fight back.

Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1721 on: May 06, 2017, 05:34:03 AM

Everything else seems to be your well known hate for a behaviour that as despising as it would be in actual life, *in a game* can be pretty cool to the point that yes it can be considered content. Again, the main issue is that at the moment the system is broken and does not punish nor discourages griefers in any way, and neither rewards players who oppose them.

Obsessed? Maybe. I'd call it "weirdly fascinated" myself. I don't really suffer from it because I generally stick to Solo or Private Groups and don't really need or miss interacting with other players. Especially since the game doesn't offer you all that much on that front anyway. The one-off encounter in Open with such dicks doesn't put me on tilt enough to be obsessed, I think. It reinforces my belief that you should avoid Open like the plague and stick to Solo or PGs and let the inhabitants of the little island called Open duke it out amongst themselves Lord of the Flies style though.

It's just that we're 20 years post UO and EverQuest and yet companies designing massive multiplayer games still make the exact same mistakes and try to fix them with the same exact mechanics that proved to not be working two decades ago.

I've never seen a game that has PvE and PvP elements that not devolved into a dysfunctional "survival of the people with the most in game hours" anarchy of people out-cunting each other. PvP eventually bleeds over into all other aspects of the game and eventually affects all players on a server, even those who really don't want to engage in it. You have the 1% of dicks to thank for that because that's all it takes to fuck up the experience of everyone else. It's such a problem that most games tend to segregate PvE and PvP systems and players from each other from the get go because it seems to be the only solution that seems to be working.

If I had to take a guess then I'd reckon that the people we're talking about are probably making up less than 1% of the actual player base and that we're talking about a few hundred people at most. Yet they fucked it up so completely for everyone else that the standing recommendation for new players is to avoid Open entirely and that people playing in private groups probably outnumber the playerbase in Open by a significant amount.

This brings me to the core of the issue I have with the current direction of the game. The experience is hostile to new players because people set up shop in the starting area to gank new players and no one is stopping them. This is bad. Secondly the hardcore PvP crowd is actively lobbying for the abolishing of Solo and Private Group features because the only players that seem to be left in Open are them and other Gankers and they have no one else to harrass anymore. Their solution to the fact that most people have long since fucked off to Solo and PGs is to make FDev force them into Open by limiting the choices players have when not playing Open or preferably by ending both options completely. Also by giving players even less choices to not engage them. This is also bad. Thirdly the lead design team seems to be listening to them and seems to find nothing odd about the fact that most people playing their massive online game tend to not want to play it in online mode. This is especially bad.

It's as if the WoW PvP crowd demanded from Blizzard to end PvE servers and - even though PvE players outnumber PvP players by quite a significant margin - Blizzard actively contemplating that move.

I really like E:D but with the way things are moving this game has no future to speak of because it actively discourages new players, alienates mostz of the existing playerbase and doesn't seem to progress in a significant way.

TL;DR: The PvP crowd can do whatever they want but when they try to fuck with Solo and PG play options I get angry.
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1722 on: May 06, 2017, 05:51:14 AM

I'm now on my way back to the bubble.

When I get back I will have travelled about 14,000 ly and probably visited more than 600 systems.

So far I have found not one system that hasn't been visited by another player previously. Sure most of the planets may lack the "First discovered by x" tag but as soon as there is a water or earth like world or anything else that's interesting or is worth something as exploration data you see that it has already been tagged by another player.

This is fascinating yet also weirdly off putting. I get honestly excited every time I find a system with an interesting feature or a cool earth like or water world and literally every time I saw a "CMDR x was here" tag. That swing from being overly excited to being somewhat disappointed is harsh.
satael
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2431


Reply #1723 on: May 06, 2017, 06:04:29 AM

I'm now on my way back to the bubble.

When I get back I will have travelled about 14,000 ly and probably visited more than 600 systems.

So far I have found not one system that hasn't been visited by another player previously. Sure most of the planets may lack the "First discovered by x" tag but as soon as there is a water or earth like world or anything else that's interesting or is worth something as exploration data you see that it has already been tagged by another player.

This is fascinating yet also weirdly off putting. I get honestly excited every time I find a system with an interesting feature or a cool earth like or water world and literally every time I saw a "CMDR x was here" tag. That swing from being overly excited to being somewhat disappointed is harsh.

If you go to a fixed point of interest that's a long way from the bubble I'd recommend taking a few hundred lightyear detour "up or down" before starting to actually plot the course to the destination. This will put you off the beaten path in most cases (at least in my experience).
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1724 on: May 06, 2017, 09:31:17 AM

Scott Manley showed an external player driven (scrubs data from players) map add on during his last ED stream he uses to plot the course through the Formaldine Rift. The map highlights systems players have already visited and it's actually a lot.

I get that it is a bit deceptive because there's probably still millions of systems that are unexplored but I was surprised by just how much of the galaxy in game has already been covered by players.
cironian
Terracotta Army
Posts: 605

play his game!: solarwar.net


Reply #1725 on: May 06, 2017, 10:58:08 AM

Scott Manley showed an external player driven (scrubs data from players) map add on during his last ED stream he uses to plot the course through the Formaldine Rift. The map highlights systems players have already visited and it's actually a lot.

I get that it is a bit deceptive because there's probably still millions of systems that are unexplored but I was surprised by just how much of the galaxy in game has already been covered by players.

Check the exploration heat map at http://en.ed-board.net/?m=explore

There's tons of unexplored space, but the direct routes between the hot spots are high traffic.
Tale
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8558

sıɥʇ ǝʞıן sʞןɐʇ


Reply #1726 on: May 06, 2017, 02:20:05 PM

Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1727 on: May 06, 2017, 04:12:59 PM

Sounds about right
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1728 on: May 06, 2017, 07:40:06 PM

Holy hell, that exploration trip was enough to pay for an Anaconda.
Tale
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8558

sıɥʇ ǝʞıן sʞןɐʇ


Reply #1729 on: May 06, 2017, 09:24:31 PM

Scott Manley showed an external player driven (scrubs data from players) map add on during his last ED stream he uses to plot the course through the Formaldine Rift. The map highlights systems players have already visited and it's actually a lot.

I get that it is a bit deceptive because there's probably still millions of systems that are unexplored but I was surprised by just how much of the galaxy in game has already been covered by players.

In 2015, Elite Dangerous's playerbase was visiting 17,585 new systems every day (732 per hour, 12 per minute). At that rate it was going to take players 150,895 years to explore the entire galaxy. I imagine that with the engineers and Colonia and passenger missions and so on, this has exponentially increased, but there is still a massive amount unexplored.

In the original Elite, there were eight galaxies. The lore in Elite Dangerous may be leading towards the discovery of Raxxla, a planet in the Milky Way with a gateway to other universes (mentioned in the lore of the original game).

Either way, I can't see the game running out of exploration to do.

P.S. Each to their own, but I can't bring myself to watch Scott Manley. Too irritating. I regularly watch Obsidian Ant (best radio voice in the universe) and The Yamiks (3 dick jokes per second).

« Last Edit: May 06, 2017, 09:29:23 PM by Tale »
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1730 on: May 07, 2017, 07:06:50 AM

Obsidian Ant's radio voice is too relaxing for me to listen to when I need to not plunge into fiery balls of hydrogen plasma. I also watch Manley for Kerbal Space Program and he has an Euro friendly streaming schedule.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #1731 on: May 07, 2017, 11:36:32 AM

Holy hell, that exploration trip was enough to pay for an Anaconda.

Whut ?

Fuck me.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1732 on: May 07, 2017, 12:45:46 PM

10 Million for the passenger mission and 75 Million from exploration data for 500+ systems. (14,000ly in total) If I trade in my Asp or my Python I have enough for a Conda. Best system was 4.9 Million in value.

The revamp of the exploration data payouts in 2.3 has made it much more lucrative.

A run to the core and back could potentially net you enough to pay for a conda without trading in your existing ship.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #1733 on: May 08, 2017, 02:10:44 AM

I know I probably don't have to tell you :  DO NOT TRADE IN.

Just wait until you can actually purchase.  I made that mistake far too often 'levelling up'.

Also, that's some scary ass money making shit.  I will admit that recently stamping my name on a whole system got me 2.5, so I should have figured it out.


"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1734 on: May 08, 2017, 03:44:06 AM

I won't. Trading in is always a stupid idea. It is not that hard to make money anyway.

I sold about 10 to 12 pages of data. A 1000 ly plot was between 55 and 78 jumps depending on density (the Python I used had a max. jump range of 19.8 ly) and my itinary was about 14,000 ly in total (took a little detour on my way back). So something between 500 and 600 scanned systems seems about right. The biggest payout was one system with 4.5 million credits + exploration bonus for previously undiscovered stuff and that was probably only one or maybe two planets I actually bothered to scan. The rebalancing of exploration payouts in 2.3 has pushed earnings by quite a lot. I'd expected about 1/3 to 1/2 of the payout I actually got. Most systems I just "honked" at. I only ever bothered to scan a planet if it looked like a water world or an earth like world and only ever scanned one star. (A Wolf-Rayes type)

At the end I had a module integrity of 97%, a hull integrity of 98% and had run out of all of my heatsinks. I also had worked through most of my Youtube and Netflix backlog. The trip took me probably 1 1/2 to 2 hours per 1,000 ly chunk. You do the math.

After I returned home I went and bought a DBX and kitted it out for exploration (because I'm clearly insane). Both scanners. everything D-rated except A-rated FSD, A-rated power plant (because of better heat management) and a 4-A fuel scoop, vehicle bay and AFMU. No space for a cargo rack or passenger cabin though. In total this cost me about 12 million with a 400,000 rebuy.

That thing has an unengineered jump range of 35.6 ly or about 8 ly more than the Asp Explorer. With engineering you could potentially push it to 55 or maybe even 60 ly (FSD range and everything else optimized for weight). If you forego the shield generator probably even more. After the changes made to the DBX in 2.2 or 2.3 it's probably much better value for exploration than the Asp which will run you almost twice that amount for less jump range.

Only downside is the fuel scoop. The maximum size you can fit on a DBX is a level 4 scoop, you could fit a Level 6 scoop on an AspX though.

So galaxy round trip next. Far side of the galaxy and return via Sag A* and Colonia. I've got a lot of Netflix to catch up on.

[edit: typos]
« Last Edit: May 08, 2017, 03:51:59 AM by Jeff Kelly »
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #1735 on: May 08, 2017, 03:50:52 AM

That's interesting about the DBX, I did not know that and I should have.

I may spend some moolah on one tonight.

I have a lot of Quince Moolah just hanging around unspent. 

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1736 on: May 08, 2017, 04:04:09 AM

Downside: No cargo space or space for a passenger compartment if you go with an AFMU. Also scooping will take longer because of the 4-A scoop vs. the 6-A scoop you could fit on the Asp (but it's also a lot of money just for that). The DBX also can't fit first class passenger cabins (maximum compartment level is 4)

So for long range passenger or cargo hauling or as multi role the Asp is better. You can A-rate everything on the DBX though and still hit 50+ ly of jump range so the DBX is probably the better pure exploration ship.

That's interesting about the DBX, I did not know that and I should have.

In 2.3 they changed the DBX to include one additional size 2 slot and they made it lighter
Sir T
Terracotta Army
Posts: 14223


Reply #1737 on: May 08, 2017, 02:22:25 PM

They really REALLY amped the payouts for exploration a few weeks ago, about a week after I finished my 20,000 trip and got 30 mill for it, including a slew of Neutron and Black hole first discoveries. I was ever so slightly pissed off about that.

But congratulations nonetheless.

Hic sunt dracones.
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1738 on: May 08, 2017, 04:52:40 PM

Data collected before 2.3 wasn't upgraded to the new rates so you sadly wouldn't have profited from it even if you had waited. You would have needed to start your trip after 2.3 had hit servers.

On another note. I should have sold the data at Felicity Farseers place. Unlocking engineers seems to be a huge pain.
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1739 on: May 09, 2017, 08:07:28 AM

Passenger mission payouts are weird.

On the one hand you have missions where you travel thousands of light years one way that pay out 1 or 2 million or "go 22,000 ly for 10 mil" and on the other you have a 3 stop tourist trip of about 100 ly each to three different tourist beacons in the bubble for 8 million.

So a week of travel vs an hour of travel for basically the same payout.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #1740 on: May 09, 2017, 08:28:37 AM

Yes.  My highest thus far was 10 million for a 55ly hop.  She was a Criminal, but a smooth one.  So Annie ended up OK.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1741 on: May 09, 2017, 08:52:24 AM

Goddamn
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1742 on: May 10, 2017, 04:01:57 PM

My thrusters are able to push me to 300 m/s in a couple of seconds and let me turn my ship quickly enough to probably pull above 10 g. They are somehow ineffective against earth level gravity.

A rated thrusters couldn't pull me out of a dive 2 km above ground level. Lost my shields and half of my hull integrity when I hit the ground and another 5% or so trying to land.

That seems a bit silly actually.
Pennilenko
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3472


Reply #1743 on: May 10, 2017, 05:16:23 PM

My thrusters are able to push me to 300 m/s in a couple of seconds and let me turn my ship quickly enough to probably pull above 10 g. They are somehow ineffective against earth level gravity.

A rated thrusters couldn't pull me out of a dive 2 km above ground level. Lost my shields and half of my hull integrity when I hit the ground and another 5% or so trying to land.

That seems a bit silly actually.
Flying Anacondas and T9s has not given me any trouble in a wide range of gravity. You have to keep in mind your descent speed, don't be afraid to turn off flight assist and coast ass down and feather right at the end. Also four pips to engines in higher gravity makes a huge difference.

"See?  All of you are unique.  And special.  Like fucking snowflakes."  -- Signe
01101010
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12002

You call it an accident. I call it justice.


Reply #1744 on: May 10, 2017, 05:26:54 PM

My thrusters are able to push me to 300 m/s in a couple of seconds and let me turn my ship quickly enough to probably pull above 10 g. They are somehow ineffective against earth level gravity.

A rated thrusters couldn't pull me out of a dive 2 km above ground level. Lost my shields and half of my hull integrity when I hit the ground and another 5% or so trying to land.

That seems a bit silly actually.
Flying Anacondas and T9s has not given me any trouble in a wide range of gravity. You have to keep in mind your descent speed, don't be afraid to turn off flight assist and coast ass down and feather right at the end. Also four pips to engines in higher gravity makes a huge difference.

Docking.
Computer.

Does any one know where the love of God goes...When the waves turn the minutes to hours? -G. Lightfoot
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1745 on: May 11, 2017, 03:13:56 AM

Im not talking about docking or landing at outposts.

I was coming out of a glide path at full speed and reversed direction (basically pointing up) at about 2 km above the surface. Full throttle, with 4 pips in engines and a rated thrusters I still hit the ground so hard that I lost my fully charged shields and 55 % of my hull integrity. This doesn't seem right. It's no issue on worlds with lower gravity. It's usually not even a close call. Somehow though 1.2g is so much gravity that I can't land my ship from hovering (forward thrust 0) by using the "F" key for thrusting downward, without taking damage or hitting the ground so hard to bounce off again.

Minor gripe, though.

I'm no astronaut but E:D ships put out such insane levels of thrust that you can barrel roll an 800 ton ship and that you can pull off insane bank and dodge maneouvers inside a tightly packed asteroid field with the weight and size equivalent of an aircraft carrier. Gravity - being the cruel mistress she's known for - somehow trumps that though.

The way ships handle under gravity seems and feels odd. Those ships should be suited to handle landing at planetary bodies up to earth gravity without hassle.
Ironwood
Terracotta Army
Posts: 28240


Reply #1746 on: May 11, 2017, 04:25:52 AM

That doesn't sound right.

"Mr Soft Owl has Seen Some Shit." - Sun Tzu
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1747 on: May 11, 2017, 05:24:25 AM

"High G" worlds are generally wonky in Elite Dangerous. Everything above 1 g is weird. Most ships can't even land on worlds above 1.5 or 2 g or take severe damage trying to land. There are even threads about "what's the highest gravity world you could still land on" and generally 2.3 g is difficult and risky.
Tale
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8558

sıɥʇ ǝʞıן sʞןɐʇ


Reply #1748 on: May 11, 2017, 09:33:32 PM

Game is 33% off at Humble. Commander Deluxe Edition is base game and Horizons, with 18 paint jobs for various ships, for $40.

Frontier is apparently fine with multiboxing (which can even be done on the same PC if powerful enough). Multicrew gives you an extra pip, so there's something to think about. Or complain about 'pay to win' about.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2017, 10:00:54 PM by Tale »
Jeff Kelly
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6920

I'm an apathetic, hedonistic, utilitarian, nihilistic existentialist.


Reply #1749 on: May 12, 2017, 12:36:01 AM

Pages: 1 ... 48 49 [50] 51 52 ... 70 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  Gaming  |  Topic: Elite: Dangerous  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC