Docking Computer and Supercruise Assist - Please don't make these "cost" slots

Status
Not open for further replies.
On a slightly different note here, I remember when people were asking for an auto pilot for Super Cruise. That thread got quite heated, from both the ones who wanted it and the ones who didn't (of which I was in the latter category, mainly because it didn't seem to be in FDev's design vision). But people just finally gave up. Now 2 or 3 years later they got what they were asking for. Never hurts to ask. The answer might be no, but that could always mean, No, not right now.
 
And for those who are under average? Those who would like to have thier cup of coffee during docking? Docking computers save people time, and that is an advantage because time is the only and most precious RL resource we invest in Elite.

Does it negatively affect other CMDRs? Not if elite is a single player game. But it's not. Even if a CMDR plays exclusively solo, there's still aspects of PVEVP (affecting other CMDRs by interacting with the environment), like the BGS. Plus we have open. If you're doing competitive activities against other CMDRs (in fact anything you do could potentially provide resources for said competitive activities), saving your own resources is a negative effect for them because it means you can spend them elsewhere. DC and SCA don't save average players much time, but they do save them another resource. I call it boredom.
Let's consider all that has merit.

Now is the slot cost in question for using the DC (& SCA) worth...:-
  • deterring all the other "average" CMDRs who will simply use them periodically for QoL.
  • the powercreep and balancing issues the new free bandaid slots are going to risk causing? Ie yet more vapid tanking.
Ultimately what is so important about this slot cost that folks think it's more important than the above? Why can't just a CR cost suffice? And why needlessly inject yet more tanking into the game via the additional free slots?

Because I'm still waiting for an explanation why the proposal in the OP, which means there is no general internal slot cost and no need for more free internal slots causing yet more tanking, is problematic - Just give all ships "Software Slots" and offer a "Docking Computer Software Module" and a "Supercruise Assistant Software Module" CMDRs can purchase for CRs. Done!

And as I've also said, if you really see the slot cost as some necessary cost, let's at least just combine the DC and SCA into one module and do away the bandaid free slots FD are going dish out to help folks tank up yet more.

Ps: I'd still suggest the premise that the DC and SCA give any real gameplay advantage is questionable. Eg the DC is slower and it's likely the SCA will be to for any average CMDR.
 
Last edited:
Will you decide what you are fighting for. You started this discussion by saying they shouldnt cost slots at all and be free on everybody's ships to ensure everyone had "fun". Then it became software slots then it seems you're back to free.

Free modules I'm against I believe they only did it for exploring to get more folk going out scanning - possibly because there's secrets in the bubble noone was finding.

Remodelling the slot allocation I could live with as long as you still have hard decisions to make regarding what to "take".

Of course if software modules appeared then the number of optional modules per ship would have to be reduced.
 
Will you decide what you are fighting for. You started this discussion by saying they shouldnt cost slots at all and be free on everybody's ships to ensure everyone had "fun". Then it became software slots then it seems you're back to free.

Free modules I'm against I believe they only did it for exploring to get more folk going out scanning - possibly because there's secrets in the bubble noone was finding.

Remodelling the slot allocation I could live with as long as you still have hard decisions to make regarding what to "take".

Of course if software modules appeared then the number of optional modules per ship would have to be reduced.
The quote feature is golden, as it means we know who and what youre talking about. I'll assume it's me... if it's not you'll need to clarify...

I believe I've be consistent in my view and proposal. Just look at the OP. It's all there...

I believe the only view I've added is that combining the DC and SCA into a single module and not dishing out the proposed new free general internal slots would seem more sensible if folks really want to retain the existing slot cost. EDIT: No even that is in the OP!
 
Last edited:
Not really bothered about whether they should or should not take up slots - but last night it would have been really useful to use SC assist while I was trying to roll a cigarette - at present have to stop what I am doing in game to do it.

Which is annoying - also need to stop to go for a leak ....
 
Sorry, you can accuse me of some "negative agenda" and even being "dishonest", but that doesn't change the fact there is some merit to the points:-
  1. There are CMDRs currently, and in the past, that have said the "slot penalty" hits them as too harsh so they do not fit the DC.
  2. The SCA is likely to follow suit given [1].
  3. The additional new slots risk yet more tanking of ships.
but not everyone....and it is still a CHOICE made by the players...




So, the phone rings as CMDR X arrives near a station, and he want to enjoy be abling to kick off the docking computer, chat to his friend on the phone, and enjoying watching the spectacle of his ship docking? ie: Basically use a QoL feature, that is in truth not giving him a real advantage and not affecting a single other player in the game.

Your suggestion means he would have to dock manually. Fit a DC. Undock. Use the docking computer to dock. Remove the docking computer? Can you see how having the features in question ready to hand when actually wanted/needed once in a while doesn't work, unless they're fitted and available all the time?
And? they also have the option to exit to menu, it is an OPTION they have choosen not to install on their ship. Just like thye have choosen what eapons to carry, what engineering they have done, etc, etc.

IF we follow this logic, you shouyld be able to have a single weapon that is a combination of all existing weapons in the game, with "all" the engineering on it... because sometimes long range is better, some times short range is better, some times gimballed is better, some times fixed is better, etc, etc. There are many choices a player have to make when it comes to outfitting their ship. this is just another one.




Perhaps you should look up what choice means, you are obviouslty grasping with that simple concept of choice.
 
but not everyone....and it is still a CHOICE made by the players...
I clearly listed three things, and your response doesn't really clearly address them, so I don't understand the point(s) you're trying to make. Sorry...

And? they also have the option to exit to menu, it is an OPTION they have choosen not to install on their ship. Just like thye have choosen what eapons to carry, what engineering they have done, etc, etc.

IF we follow this logic, you shouyld be able to have a single weapon that is a combination of all existing weapons in the game, with "all" the engineering on it... because sometimes long range is better, some times short range is better, some times gimballed is better, some times fixed is better, etc, etc. There are many choices a player have to make when it comes to outfitting their ship. this is just another one.
Don't understand your point to be honest.

The question with all these sorts of "features" is their supposed importance and value in the game, offset by a sensible effective "cost" in the game.

We could get down to questions like shouldn't the planetary landings suite use up a regular internal slot given the huge gameplay benefit it gives a CMDR? Why get it for free in the game? Why not make it an all important "choice"? What about the External Camera? Shouldn't that require an "internal slot cost" for the fun and QoL it results in so it's an all important "choice"?

But ultimately, it comes down to each feature being weighed and consdired on its own merits... Simple as that. So no need to muddy the water with talk of weapons and engineers TBH. Let's keep our eye on the ball with the DC and SCA...

Perhaps you should look up what choice means, you are obviouslty grasping with that simple concept of choice.
...and you finish up with basically a petty backhanded insult... All the hallmarks of a well considered and made point ;)

As we're on the subject of considering choices, let's once again asking the same questions, which of course are talking about choice, and more importantly consequences in the game. ie:-
  • Is adding yet more general internal slots to the game (seemingly to offset the DC and SCA use of them) a productive outcome when they risk simply be used to further tank ships up. Is that a good outcome?
  • Surely deciding whether to pay the necessary CRs for a DC and/or SCA could be considered choice enough? Yes/No?
  • And you'd even be against combining the DC and SCA into a single module, if that meant no additional new (vapid tanking) slots need then be added? Yes/No?
BTW - I don't think there's anything wrong with you believing/answering "Y", "N", "Y" or the like to those questions, if you really do feel the general slot cost for the DC and SCA is that pivotal to the game mechanics. And adding new slots is not counterproductive, or very counter productive. I'm more than willing to accept people can view things in different ways, that differ to mine... I clearly might just disagree with that conclusion.

My hope with the impending update is the slots FD are giving out are infact a new slot type (eg: "Utility Slot"), which the DC and SCA can fit into, but other types of modules cannot (eg: HRPs). ie: Akin to my "Software Module" suggestion. However, I fear FD haven't throught it through, and instead they're just giving out more general internal slots, resulting in all the needless issues being discussed here.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the undocking and docking should not require a module at all and that it is instead a service provided by the station (at cost). When requesting undocking/docking permission you have an option of paying to be remotely piloted by the station. The amount might differ according to how busy the station is, how big your ship is etc. In the beginner area this service would be free.
 
Automation in a 35th century spaceship? Who’d of thunk it?

Some of you might be surprised at how little “hand flying” commercial airline pilots actually do. It’s a just few minutes at the beginning and end of each flight, with the autopilot doing the bulk of the flying. Get the plane on autopilot as soon as you can for as long as you can to save fuel. The computer is much better at climb profiles an holding course. If equipped with “autoland” it can land itself.

I’ve made most of my credits in a Type-9 doing bulk cargo runs and have an Anconda for long distance cargo hauling. Never had an issue docking. Never even thought about a docking computer. Then I bought a Beluga. Slapped one of those puppies on after the third blocking the entrance fine. Used it to sort out what I was doing wrong manually docking. Liked it so much I kept it and am looking forward to equipping an advanced docking computer on the big whale. I seem to be one of the few pilots who actually obey the station speed limits. I would also like to have real traffic control through the slot. What’s good about the docking computer is it’s aware of other traffic we human commanders don’t see and gets positive traffic control so it lines up in the cue and takes its turn through the slot. It just doesn’t pay any attention to speed limits.

And to keep on topic, I favor an “Avionics Bay” where Flight Assist is installed with multiple empty racks for adding additional functions, like docking computers and supercruise assist. I’d put it in core internals.

As always, play the game the way you want.
 
Perhaps the undocking and docking should not require a module at all and that it is instead a service provided by the station (at cost). When requesting undocking/docking permission you have an option of paying to be remotely piloted by the station. The amount might differ according to how busy the station is, how big your ship is etc. In the beginner area this service would be free.
And the SCA would follow suit? ie: You request the station to assist you supercruise to it for CRs?

It's a nice idea... And overcomes my main two concerns. (1) No more general internal slots required (risking more ship tanking). (2) Allows CMDRs to simlpy use/enjoy the features when they might want to.

But I would say, there's actual gameplay to be had at least with the FSA helping with exploration which would need the SCA module? Should FD just try and join up some of their ideas - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/supercruise-assistant-and-exploration-might-fd-be-missing-a-trick-here.508709/
 
We can discuss this to death but when it comes right down to it, it's FDev's decision. And they might, most likely will change that decision over time. But if they think there needs to be slots to hold this equipment, then that's what is going to happen no matter what I or anyone else says. Their minds won't be changed once they are set on a course. They might change their minds down the line (they have before with the SC autopilot), but that took 2 to 3 years. Just be happy that they changed it at all and pray they will follow the same precedent. Because that's just about all you can do that has any hope of making things go your way (and that's extremely iffy). You certainly won't change their minds by typing your fingers off.
 
We can discuss this to death but when it comes right down to it, it's FDev's decision. And they might, most likely will change that decision over time. But if they think there needs to be slots to hold this equipment, then that's what is going to happen no matter what I or anyone else says. Their minds won't be changed once they are set on a course. They might change their minds down the line (they have before with the SC autopilot), but that took 2 to 3 years. Just be happy that they changed it at all and pray they will follow the same precedent. Because that's just about all you can do that has any hope of making things go your way (and that's extremely iffy). You certainly won't change their minds by typing your fingers off.
Not sure what your point is? The topic as regards the DCs slot usage/cost has been brought up over and over for 3-4yrs. And the possible counter productive outcome of what appears to be the bandaid/offset free slots, since basically the day they were announced.

Discussing these things over, is a way possible issues/oversights, (a) might get pre-emptively addressed, (b) might get retroactively addressed? But not discussing potential issues, risks a third outcome... The issue fullstop :)

In the meantime if people want to discuss it, what's the problem? Surely just unsubscribe if you feel inclined?


ps: I need to go and watch last weeks livestream because someone mentioned there was talk on there of FD considering making the slots "specialised" (as is being asked for here to address issues discussed). If appropriate I'll feed back what I find... Can but hope!
 
Are they mandatory to use? Will FD delegate someone to come over to your house and look over your should to ensure you use them? Yes, they don't offer any benefit to those who don't want to use, no one is forced to use them. Those that want to use them will use a slot (or two), same as they do now with the current DC. Yes it would have been better if they were integrated into the ships computer system like the FSS was, but they weren't. Going by the comments on the main thread for the announcement, it seems a lot of Commanders don't mind using up these new slots, guess it is just a personal choice!
Mooka I think you're missing the point, it's not that alot of commanders dont mind using the slots, it's that they are FREE slots they will use for other things, namely explorers who want to dump the DSS into a slot 1 thus freein up a wasted slot 3 for something that actually fits it.

I mean I LOVE free slots, especially for my explorer build, just another slot on my space RV to pack stuff in.

What Neil is getting at is the fact that these new modules' functionality could have easily been put in the right panel, with an on/off switch rather then introduce new modules to add said functionality. And honestly, the idea of "new modules to add new functionality" is absolutely absurd depending on the function you're adding. I mean I get it if Fdev added something like a "FSD Stablizer widget" to help fend off interdiction, that's a game changer, people who have it, have an advantage over people that don't, so in that case it being a module would make sense.

but stuff like the docking computer, or "super cruise assist" which to me reads as "Cruise control" or "The beginning stages of a auto pilot", which is ironic considering Braben said they would never do that. Well they're doing it apparently, and it's functionally giving convenience to the player sure but it's not creating advantage. In fact, I can certainly dock faster then the piece of crap docking computer, and super cruise assist, I MIGHT need when I'm making a sandwich.

Point is, it doesn't justify making it a WHOLE module for that functionality. Hell, there are too many modules as is. The limpet system needs consolidation at the very least or hell a COMPLETE revamp to a full fledged DRONE system, which would give multi-crew folks a new toy. (In regard to the latter, they wouldn't even need to develop new code since it exists already in the SLF system.)

So I agree with NeilF 100% in this case (hold on let me check the temperature in hell... oh boy it's a cold one today.) These new functions should be that, FUNCTIONS (as in RIGHT PANEL) not modules. I mean look in the right panel, how many of us here actually use the pre-flight check function? I certainly as hell don't.

However since sadly, Fdev doesn't actually read these suggestion forums, I'll take my new slots and call it a day.
 
Last edited:
So I agree with NeilF 100% in this case (hold on let me check the temperature in hell... oh boy it's a cold one today.) These new functions should be that, FUNCTIONS (as in RIGHT PANEL) not modules. I mean look in the right panel, how many of us here actually use the pre-flight check function? I certainly as hell don't.

However since sadly, Fdev doesn't actually read these suggestion forums, I'll take my new slots and call it a day.
I'd be happy for them to be standard default features in all ships given the (better) outcome that would give. Eg no new slots being dished out.

But my personal preference is a middle ground one with the DC and SAC being Software Modules you fit in Software Slots in ships. So you don't get them for free but you buy them for CRs. That's my preference at least...
 
I'd be happy for them to be standard default features in all ships given the (better) outcome that would give. Eg no new slots being dished out.

But my personal preference is a middle ground one with the DC and SAC being Software Modules you fit in Software Slots in ships. So you don't get them for free but you buy them for CRs. That's my preference at least...
Considering that's not a thing, and thus requires additional dev time to design, test, implement and balance a whole new system for the game. I'm gonna have to say no.

The right panel thing is the quick and easy way to implement it (the code is already there), costing NO slots (which is your main objective), while not overburdening the devs with additional costs.

I do agree that the ship's computer, with upgrades, different stats, different purposes, engineering etc, SHOULD be a thing. In fact it should have been a thing since the beginning. And because it's such a fundamental change in how ship designs would be. Such a thing would be included in a potential Outfitting Overhaul, in which CPU, computing power becomes a stat, and modules would have an associated CPU cost along with them. But again, such a thing is a proposal for a much larger design overhaul and is out of scope for this particular thread.
 
I'd be happy for them to be standard default features in all ships given the (better) outcome that would give. Eg no new slots being dished out.

But my personal preference is a middle ground one with the DC and SAC being Software Modules you fit in Software Slots in ships. So you don't get them for free but you buy them for CRs. That's my preference at least...
Really?

Still milking this cow?

Time you went on my ignore list!!
 
On a slightly different note here, I remember when people were asking for an auto pilot for Super Cruise. That thread got quite heated, from both the ones who wanted it and the ones who didn't (of which I was in the latter category, mainly because it didn't seem to be in FDev's design vision). But people just finally gave up. Now 2 or 3 years later they got what they were asking for. Never hurts to ask. The answer might be no, but that could always mean, No, not right now.
We are not getting a Super cruise auto pilot. We still have to do all of the piloting. It will only affect the throttle and exiting of super cruise. Meaning no loop of shame unless you do something really foolish or get interdicted. Getting interdicted automatically returns full control of the ship to the pilot. Including the throttle that the super cruise assist module is actuating. These were designed to help pilots that are new to the game. When you first started to learn to play the game and adapt to how Super Cruise worked it took effort.

We still do not know if the assist module will be as fast, as a trained pilot attacking Super Cruise at their envelope.

Same goes for the advanced docking computer. New player finally sitting down into a T9 for the first time and having to lift off and fly out of a busy station. I remember it still vividly.

Some of us, have been asking for an actual system that would give players a turn rotation for exiting the station. We already have one for entering the station. Busy airports such as Heathrow in London have planes landing and leaving every 45 seconds or about 1300 planes a day.

The system is undoubtedly going to be slower than a confident pilot lifting off and boosting out. But they shouldn't collide with another npc ship. As long as the "auto pilot behaves".

I am looking forward to the stream to see how these systems fully work and implement. I already happily use the docking computer on every ship. I swap to the camera and get to enjoy my ship and paint job do its thing. I might like the SC assist. I might not. Time will tell.
 
Considering that's not a thing, and thus requires additional dev time to design, test, implement and balance a whole new system for the game. I'm gonna have to say no.

The right panel thing is the quick and easy way to implement it (the code is already there), costing NO slots (which is your main objective), while not overburdening the devs with additional costs.

I do agree that the ship's computer, with upgrades, different stats, different purposes, engineering etc, SHOULD be a thing. In fact it should have been a thing since the beginning. And because it's such a fundamental change in how ship designs would be. Such a thing would be included in a potential Outfitting Overhaul, in which CPU, computing power becomes a stat, and modules would have an associated CPU cost along with them. But again, such a thing is a proposal for a much larger design overhaul and is out of scope for this particular thread.
Maybe/Possibly.

Software Module Slots would surely very much follow suit with Military Slots in that they only allow a filtered list of modules in them? So Software Slots would only allow a filtered list of the Software Modules in the game. Ie the DC and SCA. And of course once there it can be utilised for other features to offered via software modules.

And with a cost applicable to these modules there's a choice to be made to fit them and a hurdle for noobs to achieve.

Again just my pref.
 
Really?

Still milking this cow?

Time you went on my ignore list!!
And deprive me/us of your valuable insight and input into tbe topic?

Now, please no teasing... You promise? :)

ps: Got to love it when someone comes into a thread to post, just to dramatically declare how uninterested they are in the thread. Classic...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom