[Dev Feedback] - Independent Worlds routing

[Skorak]

The beginning of this test happened with Bering and Hudson, making one route longer and safer while the other is shorter but more dangerous. This will be further enhanced soon.

In general though I/we'd like to gouge interest on how you feel about this. Is that split good? Would you rather it be done differently? Would you like the differences between speed and danger be even wider? Please let me know.

No poll this time as this can't really be well answered in one line.

---

[Toaster]

Right now the "speed" difference between Hudson and Bering is just a single trade lane. If the bomber encounters in Hudson really are dangerous to AFK traders, they'll just AFK through Bering instead. That single extra lane won't deter them.

Bering should be even larger / take longer to traverse and Hudson should be made even more dangerous to compensate. Maybe that will make AFK traders make a choice that actually matters. And having a few IWs that actually offer some real room to move around in would be a nice touch, too.

---

Olivia Sable

[Skorak]

some real room to move around in would be a nice touch, too.

What exactly do you mean by the last comment?

---

[Toaster]

Make the system bigger so that folks have room to roam around a bit. 15K/square for a system with lanes is honestly just tiny.

Related note: Don't shrink house systems.

---

Olivia Sable

[Darius]

Absolutely disagreed. Please do not revert back House systems nor IWs. There is nothing fun or challenging in flying through 60k of empty space.

[Groshyr]

Make the system bigger so that folks have room to roam around a bit. 15K/square for a system with lanes is honestly just tiny.

Related note: Don't shrink house systems.

Ah, the glorious 200k+ of Honshu/Frankfurt/Dresden/Stuttgart/other-vanilla-system-that-got-shrink emptiness, such a masterpiece of vanilla design, such an enjoyable experience of flying through nothing for good 10+ minutes

[Toaster]

Fill the non-lane space with interesting things. Risk using the lanes if the trek is too long.

Edit: Heck, more traffic on the lanes would even give police factions more to do.

---

Olivia Sable

[Darius]

You can only spam so many things before it gets boring. I'd much rather systems keep their current approach and size down systems. Again, there is absolutely nothing fun flying through 150k of nothingness.

[LuckyOne]

I think it's a good idea, everywhere where 2 routes are available. Also, maybe Bering was better off with less lanes.

I find laneless systems more interesting to pirate in because you need to move around and search for the traders, not just sit on the lane or camp the gate. It also goes nicely with freighters / interceptors and makes transports less susceptible to getting pirated by cruisers (if the cruisers don't log off at the gate, that is).

An experiment could also be conducted with in-system dangerous and less dangerous route, where parallel lanes are available. Doesn't even have to be dangerous. Maybe one route (that looks shorter at the first glance) has a chance to spawn a lane disruption with NPCs that have CDs so you end up with roughly the same time to travel, averaged over multiple attempts.

[SeaFalcon]

Bering should be just as dangerous if not more if you look at the bases. It had one lane exit that has no base. While Hudson had a bounty hunter base meant for protection. In return Bering has a base that doesn't mind unlawfuls. Not to mention the massive unioner base.

I would say add patrols to both systems and also to both lawful and unlawful. This so pirates don't camp certain parts and thing they can afk until something comes on scanners. Traders might also be lucky to pass through while the pirate has to deal with the NPCs.

Play around with the frequency as well since Hudson sees these patrols very rarely. It's also so small that a lot of traders like using the jumpholes. If they do get caught they are basically within running distance to dock on a friendly base.

---

Freelancer discovery videos