Elite Dangerous | System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback

[Zador]

It makes building a 2nd t2 or t3 port take twice as many lower tier settlements and hubs to build. This makes it so that a lot of systems will never be able to have more than 1 large port unless you started the colonization with one of the larger ports since it bypasses the point requirement.

Responding to this although each of my answers here just gets swallowed into oblivion by the number of new posts.
This is based on my own actual experience in combination with CMDR Mechan's observations.

It makes building a t3 space or ground port cost 12 tier 2 points. That's double
It makes building a t2 space port cost 5 tier 1 points. That's not quite double
It does not increase the cost of anything else

It does not start when you get to 10 constructions.
The initial port/outpost you build is not included in the calculations.

The increase starts after you have started your second additional port - tier 2 or 3 space (orbis, ocellus, coriolis, asteroid) port or tier 3 ground port.

I have 10+ constructions, started with Coriolis, built 11 other things and then another Coriolis, at that point there was no increase. once I started my T3 ground port the costs increased.

I don't have data for 2 x tier 3 ports, but given the above its possible you could have 3 tier 2 or 3 ports before the cost increase, or 2 if you started with an outpost.

 

[CMDR Vhi]

Beyond the Hauling and Building we have plenty more we currently don't fully understand. Such as what Does Tech Level Influence, Wealth change, Standard of living, Development, Security change. How does Certain buildings in a single system combine. How to get a System to produce CMM composites, or other material. How can the Player Influence the state of the system, Anarchy, Food scarcity, Boom etc. There is some depth in those systems that we currently don't understand fully.

In time we are gonna learn those

It's a weird thing that we need to "learn" how the game works. Presumably, someone at FDev already knows how it works, and they could just... tell us.

The fact that it wasn't in any screen affected multiple players in planning their system. What measures are going to be in place for those affected.

Also. After probably seeing that large parts of communities feel like it has now been deemed an unnecessary punishment and should be removed. How or what has the Dev team been considering about this point cost metric? Is it considered in the balancing process or won't be touched at all? If not what are you looking for in balancing the Trailblazer update so we can help you better with the testing.

I've seen very negative reactions to the point cost increase when it was found out from those that are against it. Along with discussions of it leaving as is or changing how much it increases from those for it.

It's bad game design-- it's a pure negative consequence without an associated positive to balance it out. If they want to keep the systems from getting too filled with only T2 and T3 facilities, that's fine, but when the points double, the materials costs should reduce by 50%, as well.

 

[CMDR Vhi]

Maybe I'm missing it, but there doesn't seem to be a way to tell what installations have already been built. Selecting the installations on the system map just shows some generic flavor text about installations in general.

 

[Greasetrap42]

It's a weird thing that we need to "learn" how the game works. Presumably, someone at FDev already knows how it works, and they could just... tell us.

Agreed.

Its fun to have in-game puzzles and mysteries. Absolutely. But the game mechanics, how the game works... no! Especially if/when there are arbitrary rules (game mechanics) put in place that a player can't determine until it is much too late.

 

[Kzak]

Maybe I'm missing it, but there doesn't seem to be a way to tell what installations have already been built. Selecting the installations on the system map just shows some generic flavor text about installations in general.

You are entirely correct, there's no real way to tell what has been built. A sorta-way to find out is to click on an installation and then select the 'rename' option, that gives you a symbol indicating what class the facility is, but I'd much prefer actual text describing what sort of facility it is, yes.

 

[Jane T Kirk]

The problem is - we don't know how it's intended to work. And you keep silence even for simple question - whether construction cost increase after building a few stations is a bug or a feature? And if it's a feature - what was the intention, the purpose of this cost increase? And then we can report it as a bug, or discuss whether there is a better way to achieve the same goal.

Well, turned out that the info i gave you was correct...and now it's official.

 

[photomankc]

Per Paul's comments I'll try to sum up my input in a more friendly format:

1.) Good Stuff:

• Really good addition to the game. Between this and PP2, I actually feel engaged in the game.
• The hauling requirements seem about right although far far below what used to be required for station repairs. I understand that though as one is an effort meant to be able to solo and one was a full community event. I think there is room for some increase on the large orbitals and maybe a little decrease on the settlements but it's not terrible as is.
• I do enjoy planning and scouting the locations to build and working out what to build as well as looking for potential next systems
• Delivery progress is easy to locate with the construction shortcuts in the maps.
• The claim process was pretty cool.
• The under-construction interiors are cool as well, a nice touch for stations waiting to activate.
• Some decent interconnectedness on constructions: Needing X to get to Y. It's not over complicated but means some thought needs to go into things.
• The construction site placeholders are well done. I'd love to see some animated activity at them and maybe an NPC or two but still pretty neat to see.

2.) Things That Could Be Better:

• Information on commodities needed for a certain construction needs a better way to access it. Perhaps something like the mission panel in-ship where you have a list of active constructions you have and the needed commodities. Having to keep checking through the gal-map is VERY cumbersome and means we really have to pen-and-paper it.
• Allow us to sink more credits in to sweeten the deal for our construction. If I want to drop 500M to speed up the construction and offer better prices, let me do so. Right now it won't mean much, but once the land-rush is over it may help get extra loads delivered.
• Let construction sites show up as markets for the above reason, and possibly make them appear in the 'also consumes' screen at station markets. This would allow people to note there is a place to make a profit on station goods and make construction less of buddy-to-buddy communication.
• Let us decide where the primary station will go. I was a bit shocked to see that it simply is chosen at seemingly random. If impossible, make it far more clear where it will go. It's hard to enjoy grinding so hard for something though if you can't even decide where to put it.
• Make claims a bit more expensive. 25M is sofa-change anymore.
• I like instant gratification but I think some brakes on the process would be wise. Time to deploy sites, time between construction completing and stations being online, time or requirements before another claim can be made from this system.
• A bit more prominant indication of the system architect in the GalMap and System map.
• Some personalization to things once built. IE some voice lines that are specific to you as the owner or less rudeness from the settlement NPCs.
• Some way to back out of an uncompleted asset. Once placed, we are stuck with it forever.

3.) The Bad Stuff:

• >>> DOCUMENTATION <<< This is BADLY lacking. There is a lot of detail that is simply left to a person to trial-and-error their way through. You hop part way through something only to find you need something else for that then over to that thing to find it requires something else. There needs to be a much more thorough set of documentation on how to guide your development and what various stats mean and do. I do not appreciate just try and see when it takes days of effort to build things and doing them out of order might be permanently problematic.
• The bugs around facilties being placed as one type and coming online as something else are serious problems. I'm a bit standoffish about building installations because I don't know which are right and which are wrong. Hearing that sometimes you have to build one specific varient to fullfill a requirement when that is not explained is bad.
• Point doubling - I really hate this mechanic. I understand that the intent is prevent people from loading systems up with T3 stations and not much else but please look for another way to do this and at the bare minimum explain >> in detail << exactly what criteria will cause it. Right now I refuse to start anything else that is T2 because I have no idea what types of T2 assets will invoke that. Hauling goes from about right, to absolutely intollerable if I have to build an addtional 24 settlements to reach the goal of one starport that also requires 100K plus of hauling.
• Lack of any insight into the stats the system currently has. We get lots of stats that can be modified one way or the other by building something but have no idea where the numbers are in our system. I've not seen many builder sims that take this approach. It's difficult to plan when you have only the vaguest notion of how to reach a goal. We need some knowledge of what the numbers are in our system, not just how this or that changes them.
• The daisy-chain requirement - I know you have said the features are fixed but I really think this is a mistake. Some other resource limitation should be used here. Watching the bubble fill up with unmaintained or developed outposts is going to kind of suck I think.
• Let Colonia participate. The folks that have made their homes out there deserve the oppertunity to participate.
  

I hope that doesn't convey I have a negative attitude on the addition because I don't. Overall I think you guys added something great and deserve a lot of credit for that. I do however hope that you will consider iteratting on it which has been something lacking in the past. There is a great structure here to work with and building on this would do a lot to maintain player engagement.

 

[photomankc]

Just curious, what did you build?

I've seen a similar jump.

I have an outpost and just completed an industrial 'hub' I think they call it. My system went from 5,450 to 15,550 after that.

 

[Jane T Kirk]

Is there a more advantageous order to build the different types of stations (thinking in terms of construction points) in the same system?

 

[Eldr Reign]

It's a weird thing that we need to "learn" how the game works. Presumably, someone at FDev already knows how it works, and they could just... tell us.

All Games require the players to Learn the game. To me it's part of the fun. it also adds levels of skill. Take Zelda: Breath of the wild. Each "Dungeon" creates a puzzle for players to overcome. The game doesn't Tell you how to overcome it. But you as a player Learn mechanics until you do. Much like this the Game is giving us a Breif look at systems but asking the players to figure it out. EDIT: When we do figure something out We feel a lot better. "I DID A THING." It's Exhilarating. it's fun.

In Zelda we aren't Exactly being told How bombs interact with every object in the game. We get to play around and See what it does. What i Feel is currently missing with colonization is the "See" part. I can't see what Increasing my Security does. I can't see what Increasing my Wealth does. That's the menu, or information, I am missing.

I don't want to be told in some Tooltip or massive Dictionary that "Increasing Security spawns more & Stronger NPC Police Spacecrafts. and increases their response time if players are ever indicted". I want to see more spawn. I want to Experience the change. Which isn't exactly possible. We have no menu showing "Current Security Space crafts in sector: ### " or similar. a sort of Overview to see what my Structures are influencing.

UI/UX should help lead players, help teach. Not outright Tell you every aspect. Not only because it isn't fun. But also because of information overload is a bad thing. I hope that makes sense.

 

[CMDR WhiteWolf06]

The daisy-chain requirement - I know you have said the features are fixed but I really think this is a mistake. Some other resource limitation should be used here. Watching the bubble fill up with unmaintained or developed outposts is going to kind of suck I think.

This for sure needs fixed. I'm looking at the gal map now, and it looks as though my squadron isn't going to have an avenue for further colonization unless we start trying to BGS our way through systems. We either need a much longer range or do away with the daisy chain requirement.

Update: Yep. If we get the next system, no guarantees there, it will be the last one we can get to with the current distance limitation.

 

[Greasetrap42]

All Games require the players to Learn the game. To me it's part of the fun. it also adds levels of skill. Take Zelda: Breath of the wild. Each "Dungeon" creates a puzzle for players to overcome. The game doesn't Tell you how to overcome it. But you as a player Learn mechanics until you do. Much like this the Game is giving us a Breif look at systems but asking the players to figure it out.

There is a huge difference between ingame puzzles and mysteries, and developing skills and learning stuff as you go... to knowing what the fundamental rules of the game are.

We are told we are a System Architect. But we don't know the rules. And it appears the game mechanic rules change as we progress. That is not fun. That is just frustrating.

 

[Nowski]

we don't know the rules.

Very immersive and true to life, if you think about it!

 

[CMDR Vhi]

All Games require the players to Learn the game. To me it's part of the fun. it also adds levels of skill. Take Zelda: Breath of the wild. Each "Dungeon" creates a puzzle for players to overcome. The game doesn't Tell you how to overcome it. But you as a player Learn mechanics until you do. Much like this the Game is giving us a Breif look at systems but asking the players to figure it out. EDIT: When we do figure something out We feel a lot better. "I DID A THING." It's Exhilarating. it's fun.

In Zelda we aren't Exactly being told How bombs interact with every object in the game. We get to play around and See what it does. What i Feel is currently missing with colonization is the "See" part. I can't see what Increasing my Security does. I can't see what Increasing my Wealth does. That's the menu, or information, I am missing.

I don't want to be told in some Tooltip or massive Dictionary that "Increasing Security spawns more & Stronger NPC Police Spacecrafts. and increases their response time if players are ever indicted". I want to see more spawn. I want to Experience the change. Which isn't exactly possible. We have no menu showing "Current Security Space crafts in sector: ### " or similar. a sort of Overview to see what my Structures are influencing.

UI/UX should help lead players, help teach. Not outright Tell you every aspect. Not only because it isn't fun. But also because of information overload is a bad thing. I hope that makes sense.

I strongly disagree. It's a sign of a poorly supported game when the paying customer has to figure out the game mechanics because the developer doesn't bother writing it down. It's not "fun" to do their work for them. It doesn't have to be in a tooltip, but it should be in the documentation somewhere.

Think of it practically: how are we supposed to know if something is working as expected if we don't know what expected is? Just look at the snafu with the construction points: everyone was playing the "is it a bug or intentional" game, because Fdev never told anyone how it was supposed to work.

If raising the tech level doesn't have any apparent effect, is it just because we haven't "discovered" (lol) it yet, or is it broken?

At the end of the day, this is just a game, and we need to know the rules. They shouldn't obfuscate it, and we shouldn't applaud them when they do so.

 

[Redan]

This system (Costs increasing) is an intended process. This was planned to be made clear in the System Colonisaton help screen, however thanks to feedback we have been made aware that the screen highlighting this wasn't displaying as intended on the live version of the game. We are looking to get this resolved in a future update.

Resolved...in the sense that it would just be documented in the tutorials?

How about a change of the rule sets or a complete removal of the system? Is there a technical limitation that necessitates this type of artificial limit? Can we push it out further?
Are there tiers of this cost increase? If so, when do they kick in, exactly?

 

[Xenia_K]

...We are told we are a System Architect. But we don't know the rules. And it appears the game mechanic rules change as we progress. That is not fun. That is just frustrating.

Sounds like German buerocracy

 

[Eldr Reign]

We are told we are a System Architect. But we don't know the rules.

I think we are talking about 2 different things. Could you elaborate on what you mean with "The Rules" you feel are missing?

 

[mkizub]

Very immersive and true to life, if you think about it!

Imagine that you get a job and are offered money, loyalty points and team bonuses as a salary. You will wonder - what can you do with these points and bonuses? You will be offered to find out for yourself, after a month of work. Well, let's admit it, this is always the case in life. And then, a month later, you will be told that you earned too many bonuses, so your salary in money will be cut in half.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Very immersive and true to life, if you think about it!

No. IRL if I built something yesterday I know what the building requirements are for the identical thing today. I know what the rules and regulations are. They aren't a mystery. They are readily available. If they are going to change there is reasonable time and notice. At the very least the updated regulations are made available prior to construction. Bringing real life into this is not a good example.

 

[Ydiss]

They should make the minimum distance between settlements only a few km, because some players want to build cities by placing them together.

This would not work well with settlement game play though. It'd be like throwing a exploration beacon in the middle of a CZ, only worse because it'd run like a pig. Funny. But not very sensible.