Elite Dangerous | System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback

First: Only 20 Systems can be claimed per User , a Squadron can claim 100-200, but this squadron requires at least 10-20 Members,
because I think that too many claimed Systems and claimed too fast have a negative Impact on Power Play 2.0


Second: I would like to see with a small symbol when this system has been claimed by a user/Squadron or is part of the "old" Bubble
I didn’t know there was a cap on systems. Is that factual?
 
Last edited:
Yup, its kind of like when they first added the FC, they hoped that middling game design and worse implementation would be made up with player emergent gameplay, completly forgetting that this ain't EVE online and we dont even have a send player money system.

really ought to have baked colonisation for a quarter more, maybe even see if they can find those pp2 designers again after they fired them or whatever they must have done for caring about gameplay a slight bit.
 
Heh. After losing 50% of my shieldless Cutter's hull numerous times at orbital construction sites due to crazy auto-dock I'm now docking her manually. Those repairs were becoming expensive! The screens there are a pain though.
I have been building orbital facilities using a shieldless cutter without any significant issues. I learned very quickly not to engage autodock from a big distance: bad. And very slow. I simply manually fly the ship close to the pad without concern of ship orientation, then set thrust to zero and let autodock take over. Its great. Np.

When I built a surface outpost port a week or two ago I did have to use shields. The autodock would slam my ship down on the pad, regularly losing +10% of my 6A engineered prismatic shields. Frontier might have fixed that by now. I have been noticing big improvements with autodock over the weeks.
 
1. They need to come up with a system that slows down the most dedicated players, while not hurting casual players. Maybe a cool down timer, or something, or so many a month or whatever you can do to slow them down at the top end.

2. There needs to be some incentive for these dedicated players to build up systems in their tendrils. Something more than exists now. Maybe forcing an upgrade level on a nearby system to push forward. Some kind of ratio of outpost only systems to properly built up ones. When the US made the interstate system, places had to be built up to support it. Gas stations, food, supplies, etc. Whole towns popped up. We need to emulate this somehow in game. Hundreds of single outposts in a row is not entertaining from an external perspective. Not only that but the goal is to press forward, so no thought it put into the system itself. Single star systems have outposts just because it's the most convenient system for their tendril to a POI. It makes no sense to have an outpost there, but here we are. Rules need to exist in the game to force players to emulate something that makes sense.

3. POIs need to be protected. Think something like national parks system or something.
1 - The current design already slows dedicated players. Seems a bit unfair to handicap people who actually want to DO something, so it should apply across the board. Systems must be fully built before expanding? Cool, affects everyone.

2 - Incentive? Massively increased colonization range! I know 500 Ly would certainly make me fill out my systems.

3 - They already are. Seems like it's a disagreement in what needs protecting. No one will be built to any nebula in the northeast corner any time soon, fly out to those, I guess.
 
Okay there's a problem with the claiming process, while it's all fun and all to have this Gold rush situation, it generates a lot of zombie systems like others said. Even worse is that some people are just waiting for people to complete their system to snipe and claim the next one.

Guys, if you want the system, at least help with the resources instead of just waiting for the others to make the efforts. This does not promote collaborative work and just make people more selfish than before.

The penalty construction points is useless, I'm fine with the idea of having to build T1 for T2 and T2 for T3 but don't start to ask for 18 T2 points because the big systems are not that common near the bubble. The time limit is a bad idea, and forcing players to join groups will just share the same burn out experience.

Right now the beta feels like a massive grind fest with lots of days of work and hauling to have such a small reward. If I wanted to be rich I would do exobiology, right now the colonization system does not feel rewarding and does not seem appealing with the Wild West situation.
 
Non-English versions of the game have had this problem all this time.
If it's t2 or t3, check if your build points have been taken away from you. If they took it, then the system has accepted your request.
And it will take several hours for construction sites to appear. (each time we waited for a different time, the biggest is about 12 hours)
English version here (I actually live 20 minutes from FDev HQ 🙂). It is a Tier 1 Commercial Outpost that I was trying to build, so no points needed. I have just logged into game, and none of the three slots have anything in, so it's not like it took a few hours to appear.

I'll try again later, and see if it works tonight.
 
English version here (I actually live 20 minutes from FDev HQ 🙂). It is a Tier 1 Commercial Outpost that I was trying to build, so no points needed. I have just logged into game, and none of the three slots have anything in, so it's not like it took a few hours to appear.

I'll try again later, and see if it works tonight.
We have been playing in this mode since the very first day of this patch. Therefore, I assumed such a probability
Perhaps this is another bug, which has already accumulated so much during this time in all areas of the game that it is impossible to count.
 
Exactly, and the solution to this cannot be a suggestion. Players will simply ignore it. It needs to be a rule, one enforced via in-game systems. The zombie systems have to stop. As I said in my post, any kind of requirement to continue on that forces them to invest in these systems would dramatically improve the situation. I disagree with the other poster about increasing the distance because then people will just do the math on the cost of upgrading a system to get increased range vs brute forcing zombie systems. It can't be a choice. It has to be a hard wall, a requirement. You MUST, upgrade some systems to move forward, it is non-negotiable.

I'm totally fine not putting that requirement on each player. Something akin to needing a certain level of system within such a distance to colonize planets around it. This could mean any player could have the responsibility and people could work as a team. They could still chain outposts, but at least in this system they would occasionally stop to upgrade one so they could continue. It would make them think more about the path they take to their ultimate destination rather than shortest distance and dropping an outpost wherever. It would also incentivize other players to help certain systems that are upgrading so they can also move forward faster. People would be more likely to pool resources to get to an end goal, or to expand. If they couldn't move forward until a system needed to be upgraded, and a local system was at 50% of the requirement or something, that player would probably help so they could make the outpost they want. Currently there is ZERO reason to help randoms, so this kills two birds with one stone.

If they aren't going to fix this then I would honestly rather have them remove the distance restriction so there aren't zombie systems littering the galaxy. The entire point is to be an architect. To take pride in it. To make a system worth going to.

Whatever they do, they need to do it fast because players are moving at a ridiculous pace leaving these zombie systems in their wake.
No enforced rule for improving "zombie" systems can be considered unless the distance requirement for colonization is removed, or at least significantly upgraded to something like 500 LY. The primary reason so many systems away from the bubble are not developed is that going through those systems is the only way CMDRs can reach the systems they want. If FDev doesn't want thousands of systems with only outposts, the solution is to drastically increase the colonization range. However, even on the Unlocked where they described colonization, FDev explained how players would make multiple chained systems to reach those places they wanted to reach out in the black. To me, that means FDev actually wants the colonization to work this way, and they don't have an issue with undeveloped systems.

The other primary reason many systems are underdeveloped is that many players are waiting for bugs to be fixed or for the beta to end, so that the systems for colonization are known. Some players are fine spending hundreds of hours building while using trial and error to discover the best combinations. Many more players, myself included, won't build anything beyond the initial starport until we understand the consequences of what each build means. I've claimed 8 systems so far. I plan to build them all up eventually. But I'm not going to add even a satellite to any of them until either FDev publishes a guide or the player community reverse engineers all the rules.
 
Hi :)

Yesterday I was so focused on book that I have started to make silly mistakes in game like arriving at station, forgetting where in cargo loop I was (meaning arriving at my FC without required cargo few times), all due immersion in the world generated by my mind.

:LOL:...I've done a similar sort of thing once or twice ferrying commodity build stuff from my player carrier to the colonisation carrier, getting bored with the repetitive trucking and forgetting momentarily where I am in the loop.
As soon as this started to happen I mentally stood back, realised what was causing this and exited the game...Edit...or did something completely different in the game.
"All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy" 🤪

Jack :)
 
The zombie systems have to stop.
Why? Why does it matter? Before they were "zombie" systems they were uninhabited systems with no station at all. What's wrong with a system with a single outpost in it?
With current jump ranges its not like your jumping 15LY from one of these systems to the next when travelling anywhere.
Increasing the range just means people will reach further away and still have zombie systems just more spread out.
 
I've been using a shieldless Cutter myself, 792 tons cargo capacity (albeit with 2x hull reinforcements in the military slots), and this has been going pretty well despite the docking computer sometimes having a moment around orbital construction facilities.
This is why my T9 has shields...

Bolding mine.
 
Yup, and is why I never leave the docking computer unattended. Some course corrections may be necessary around said orbital construction facilities, but I have never lost a ship to that so far.
I found that removing the ship kit helped. Less to get stuck on.
 
I have no problem with single outpost systems. I have an issue with large groups of players chaining them just to circumvent a gameplay restriction. If some player wants to make that kind of system with some kind of intentionality, I have no issue with it. Nothing I said in my post would prevent that. The issue I have is with single outpost systems that only serve one goal... to make the next single outpost system. Don't confuse "zombie system" with single outpost system. I don't want to come off as being against undeveloped colonies. Not at all. I just want the decision to be more intentional, which is what the solution in my post would result in.

To be clear, the narrative in game behind this is bubble expansion and colonizing. The label of architect I can only assume as intentional. Everything points to this feature asking the player to make a system and develop it in the way they envision it. Dropping an outpost just so you can make the next one does none of this and it against the intended design IMO. We'll find out eventually though if FDEV does something or not.

Another thing to be clear about. Nothing presented here prevents moving out into space. It just makes it more intentional and thoughtful. That's it.

I don't like the current look of tendrils either, my only hope is that other commanders will come along and "fill in the blanks" along the way by populating systems just off the tendrils (surely some plum systems have opened up). Hopefully then the initial ugly tendrils wont be as obvious and fade over time
 
This is absolutely outrageous!

My squadron and I spent days coordinating, planning, and building stations to expand into a specific systems as part of our long-term colonization effort. We strategized, worked hard and followed your new Trailblazer colonization mechanics as intended.

Then what happens?

Some rat in Solo Mode was lurking and waiting for the moment to snipe the system from us at the last second.

No PvP. No diplomacy. No challenge. Just an invisible exploit that allows a single player to invalidate the work of dozens of others—all while being 100% unaccountable and untouchable.

This is not "shared gameplay." This is an illusion.
You're trying to sell us the idea of a living, breathing galaxy while simultaneously allowing this kind of solo-mode abuse to ruin everything meaningful in player-driven efforts.

If I wanted to play a colony builder by myself, I’d launch a different game.
Instead, we're stuck in a “multiplayer” game where our biggest threat isn't pirates or enemy factions—it’s ghost players hiding in solo mode, waiting to steal the results of our real work.

This system is broken.
It’s demoralizing.
And unless you fix it or introduce real limits to solo mode in shared BGS and colonization mechanics, this will continue to drive away dedicated players who are trying to actually play the damn game as a community.

Fix your game. Or stop pretending it’s a multiplayer galaxy!!!

– A very ed-off commander on behalf of an entire betrayed squadron.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom