Uh.... fast travel?

I think mabye is time to make a fast travel stystem on the CDDA for now, which it will make player going to some place immediately

I have a idea about this, mabye make a check point with armoured car around NPC, so you can pay travelling expenses and food cost from them, and they will take you to anywhere (not water)

or we can make a teleporting gate, which it already appear, the player can travel between two gate anytime

hope this will make available as fast as someone can.

Uh… why?

There’s nowhere to really go aside from ‘somewhere uncharted that hasn’t been picked clean of resources’ yet (and at best this is an artifact of the mapgen code not simulating the passed weeks or months of looting and damage that should have hit those areas as well.)

Besides, the game doesn’t have the dungeon crawling based dynamic that would make fast travel a feature useful for getting to the ‘real game.’ It’s part of the reason why we have an actual vehicular system after all! The overland travel through a hostile environment IS a significant part of the gameplay.

Autotravel would be useful, but not as a teleport thing, but as an AI that takes over your character and goes to a place on the map, stopping if hostiles are nearby.

For example when you want to haul a lot of stuff from one place to another and don’t want to manually go through the 5 trips there and back, but just want the game to do it automatically.

Yea, both, “walk in this direction” and “follow this road” should be doable and greatly speed up long distance travel.

Follow the road would be super useful, as would be a way to define waypoints away from the road (say, my farm) so that I could walk to it without having to do it 3 times in a row to haul loot.


It’s a bit “hackish” but a “macro concept” could work immediatly. Similarly as what some MUDs allowed in the past were known and safe routes were recorded as macros of linked movement orders.

At its essence following a road on a vehicle could be recorded as a combination of maneuver commands (INCLUDING the wait commands for the vehicle to move at a given speed). OFC, some “sanity” should be expected and incorporated to the “route” definition mainly 2:

  • Starting Location. Bringing close the vehicle to the starting point could allow it to be “hooked” into the route itself.

  • Speed. The vehicle needs to be able to keep the speeds used on the original route (min & max, mainly).

In fact, with macro recording external software, for as long as the vehicle isn’t modfied… You can achieve something similar currently if you mark the starting point with an easy to align matrix of droped items.

You would only have to create 2 new options:

  • An optional “time compression” were series of X(Num 5) “wait commands” are piled together and executed without frame updating so Real Time is less than when tracing the route for the 1st time.

  • Partial “safety” were the system offers the option to stop if a MOB is 3 turns away in the direction of movement. Players, depending on how aggresive their vehicle fronts are, may or may not choose to stop.

Alternatively you can use a player defined rail system where the recorded player-driven route do not generate maneuver commands but a trayectory described by the vehicle CoM. Later when the player wants to “drive on rails” you suspend any kind of simulation and just make the vehicle follow the rails at the average speed calculated by the distance/time spent originally creating the route.

Player created map-checkpoints would be very nice and (I presume) easy to add feature in the meantime. Just like the little red asterisk you get while you have an active mission, with symbol and color defined by the player.

How I drive: I turn the car to destination, accelerate to 49mph, and wait for 30 minutes. It gradually clears shrub on a frequently used route.

But what about random hostiles that interrupt your waiting with their yes/no messages?

But what about random hostiles that interrupt your waiting with their yes/no messages?

Well… It’s like that already. That’s why we have an specific option on the SAFE system to exclude this warning when you are on a vehicle. Personaly I use it so I only get SAFE warnings while on foot.

If autopilot is ever implemented I don’t see why it shouldn’t follow this option… There will be users that want to stop on hostile detection and others that don’t care.

That’s why I requested an extra option to stop ONLY if the system detects the MOB (regardless of its hostility) is in the trayectory of the vehicle itself (Possible because, while autopiloting, the system KNOWS were the vehicle is going to try to be BEFORE actually been there. Easier to implement on the “rails” version, ofc)