-What would you like to see future system design focus more on, and why?: Environmental story telling and story in general. Freelancer does not like being overloaded with visuals and we dont seem to have the access to the hacks other mods had. spend some time cruising through vanilla systems and find the beauty in some simplicity again.
-What do you think current systems, on average, suffer from the most?: i dont really think about this much. visual bloat? stars/planets blocking direct routes to holes?
-Would you rather the Systems team focused more on reworking existing systems, adding new systems, removing obsolete ones, or a balance of everything?: Rework/balancing. Removal hasn't done anything but piss people off. Restoration/rework of some deleted systems.
-Where and how do you think existing systems could be enhanced with environmental storytelling and worldbuilding?: Man I'm not an artist or designer. wrecks and rumors do a pretty good job
Travel times:
-Would you like to see travel times between two regions' hubs increase, decrease, or be kept the same?: dont care
-Would you like to see travel times between two regions' most distant points increase, decrease, or be kept the same?: dont care
-Would you like to see travel times without using trade lanes decrease? How would you do it?: Decrease. Allow cruise engines to slowly accelerate beyond their usual speeds the longer they're in cruise.
System connectivity:
-Do you think systems, on average, have too few, or too many connections? Do you think the concept of having defined activity hub systems per region is good or bad?: Too few. Defining activity hubs is bad and contrived. Trying to force something will just leave people annoyed you're stepping on their hubs to focus on something that might never take off.
-Do you think all systems should have an equal number of connections, instead of sacrificing some over the other?: Dead end systems or systems with just one or two connections is fine, but the noose currently put around travel is bad.
-How much value do you put on connections of a system? Would you be satisfied with a system being sidelined connections-wise, but having importance in another aspect instead such as interesting gameplay or story asset relevance, and why?: Alternative routes simply just to change things up is more important to me than just relevance in the story. As long as the connection makes sense its relevant enough.
-Would you like to see a) fewer systems with more connections, or b) more systems with fewer connections? Example image: More systems more connections.
5.0 feedback:
-Give us your brief 5.0 feedback: I have no interest in traversing mazes for some sort of reward of something visually appealing or some material used in pob equipment. All a giant wall of mines/cruise disruptors tells me is to leave, since it's not going to be worth my time. Explorers might be into that, but it feels like it's wasted effort to me. Dedicating entire systems to it (Especially after removing a bunch) is a waste. The removal of many systems was also rather unwelcome, not limited to but including Omicron Xi (one of the most popular hubs, but we were told systems were being culled to focus activity. Why cull a system thats always active?) and Virginia. Markam told me these systems were meant to be tweaked and released for the Earhart gimmick of connecting to random uncharted systems but that seems like a waste of time. Why couldnt any of these have been tweaked to better fit the story?
-What did you like the most?: not much. alaska is too annoying to navigate to bother going on my lawfuls and i have no interest fighting over things i dont want/wont use in earhart/earhart adjacent content
-What didn't you like at all?: system and connections cull. considering people still only generally group for content during events, you wont ever force activity to move where you "desire" without removing every system. activity moves organically, not to where the roads lead to.
