request: mission board update

[CyberGrim]

I know there is a lot of work going on with new ships and new features. However I would love to see some of the core game play mechanics revisited again. one of them, the mission board is getting, lets say, a bit stale. New missions we be nice, but a rework of current ones too. (some new weapons and modules would be nice too - but perhaps thats pushing it too much)
For example, the two types I am doing (for powerplay merits) kill x amount or kill x pirate(s). The kill x amount spawns an instance of ships that just fly around waiting for you to kill them. And when you shoot one, the rest just take bets on whos going to win, very chivalrous but does not make much sense that the rest dont come to their buddies aid. And they are not much of challenge.
X pirate, if it is the top level, will spawn for a wing mission, a fer-de-lance and a couple of heavy fighters and for a single, a poorly armed corvette. Could we not have some RNG and have some variety in ships and load out? And finally does no one care when you kill them? No consequences? No family member to come out of the blue in a heavily armed ship to take revenge?

 

[Rat Catcher]

Everything in the game is 'balanced' to ensure that nothing is too powerful, challenging, or useful.
No matter how hard a combat mission should be, it has to be possible by using anything from a terrifying murder boat to a stock FDL... (or something equally bland)

The game has to be very vanilla, even with something new & potentially dynamic as PP2, so that everyone from a veteran to a 3 weeks of playing newbie can participate on a very, very, level playing field.

 

[Walter2]

There's nothing more depressing than opening the mission board and finding:

• all missions are aimed solely at teams, when you're a solo player (does any team actually fetch/deliver 5000 units of anything? How many are in an average team?);
• only missions for a ship build that you're not currently flying;
• missions taking 196 units of biowaste 325 Ly (because nobody round here needs it and they don't make it over there);
• two missions to carry 196 units to the same system, which totals 2 more units than your ship can carry (and only medium pads are available so you can't fetch your bigger ship);
• missions that benefit the recipient faction that your faction is currently at war with;
• missions that have absolutely no appeal;
• missions that you've never managed to carry off successfully.

 

[Rat Catcher]

(does any team actually fetch/deliver 5000 units of anything? How many are in an average team?);

I frequently deliver 6k team missions straight into Secure Storage on my FC by myself... which is why I was campaigning for 6k capacity on the PCII

 

[Jmanis]

Everything in the game is 'balanced' to ensure that nothing is too powerful, challenging, or useful.

Yeah.... but missions aren't that They're the most horribly imbalanced part of the game.

 

[Walter2]

I frequently deliver 6k team missions straight into Secure Storage on my FC by myself... which is why I was campaigning for 6k capacity on the PCII

I've built several installations, but never thought of that.
Transfer of learning fail.

 

[Jmanis]

but never thought of that.

Probably coz it's an exploit FD will never do anything about

But hey, missions have been busted like this for years now... don't let that get in your way!

 

[aRJay]

I sometimes wonder if missions are suboptimal to encourage us to actually think of things to do for ourselves rather than just follow a script.

Probably not though.

 

[metatheurgist]

That 196 cargo thing is weird. There used to be missions for smaller lots of cargo. I used to enjoy playing the role of armed courier in the FAS.

 

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

I know there is a lot of work going on with new ships and new features. However I would love to see some of the core game play mechanics revisited again. one of them, the mission board is getting, lets say, a bit stale. New missions we be nice, but a rework of current ones too. (some new weapons and modules would be nice too - but perhaps thats pushing it too much)
For example, the two types I am doing (for powerplay merits) kill x amount or kill x pirate(s). The kill x amount spawns an instance of ships that just fly around waiting for you to kill them. And when you shoot one, the rest just take bets on whos going to win, very chivalrous but does not make much sense that the rest dont come to their buddies aid. And they are not much of challenge.
X pirate, if it is the top level, will spawn for a wing mission, a fer-de-lance and a couple of heavy fighters and for a single, a poorly armed corvette. Could we not have some RNG and have some variety in ships and load out? And finally does no one care when you kill them? No consequences? No family member to come out of the blue in a heavily armed ship to take revenge?

Just our of curiosity, what do you think of the ground missions' boards?

 

[Jmanis]

I sometimes wonder if missions are suboptimal to encourage us to actually think of things to do for ourselves rather than just follow a script.

Probably not though.

Theoretically, missions should be the "general purpose" activity... the thing you do when "all I want to do is log on and blow some ships up/trade some goods" and serve two purposes towards that end.

• Teach you the basics of a particular career; and
• Be "fine" rewards but certainly not "peak"

Unfortunately, between things like massacre stacking, broken delivery missions and the general unrewarding nature of more organic analogs of missions by-contrast, they don't work to get people "off script".

I'd love for USS, Surface POI, Scenarios and Megaship/Orbital interactions to be worth a damn. I'd love space organic tissue sampling to be something you want to go do because it's more rewarding and more interesting to dive into a Lagrange Storm Cloud to find that rare space organic and get a tissue sample from it, than it is to grind out 20 black box missions.

But it's not. A subset of missions are too rewarding, and the core activities are completely unrewarding/pointless.

 

[Jmanis]

Just our of curiosity, what do you think of the ground missions' boards?

I know you didn't ask me, but I can sum this up.

Ground missions are some of the game's best activities and mechanics that the game doesn't want me to do.

 

[Tyres O'Flaherty]

I know you didn't ask me, but I can sum this up.

Ground missions are some of the game's best activities and mechanics that the game doesn't want me to do.

I agree - personally, I think the ground missions are my favourite thing in-game. Especially the CZ's.

But there's always room for more - involve actual 'Goids to fight, for example.

 

[Walter2]

Probably coz it's an exploit FD will never do anything about

But hey, missions have been busted like this for years now... don't let that get in your way!

Usually, I'm after Influence gains, no need of the cash - bulk carrying is mostly not a good return on the time investment.

 

[Jmanis]

I agree - personally, I think the ground missions are my favourite thing in-game. Especially the CZ's.

But there's always room for more - involve actual 'Goids to fight, for example.

For me, it's all about repeat value.

Why did I do Odyssey things? Because the mechanics and game loops and systems are great and interesting.

Why do I keep doing Odyssey things?
Credits? lol.
Materials? That lets me engineer my on-foot equipment to allow me to do... the things I can already... do.... oh.
BGS? A single on-foot mission can take 15-30m, depending on the type. In that time I can clear a stack of at least 10 missions.
Ground missions also have unique anti-stacking mechanics that simply don't exist for ship-based missions.

All the long-term goals I could set myself are better achieved doing other things.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Yeah.... but missions aren't that They're the most horribly imbalanced part of the game.

I'd have thought they were all of that!
But then, as the measure is the lowest of the average player skill, it sounds about right.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Probably coz it's an exploit FD will never do anything about

It was broken for a while, and FD fixed it when it was pointed out - so is that an exploit, or intended gameplay?

If it didn't exist, there would be no real purpose to Secure Storage as normal stolen goods do not get laundered by using it.

 

[Jmanis]

It was broken for a while, and FD fixed it when it was pointed out - so is that an exploit, or intended gameplay?

If it didn't exist, there would be no real purpose to Secure Storage as normal stolen goods do not get laundered by using it.

It's an exploit in Wing Delivery Missions, not in FCs.

 

[Rat Catcher]

It's an exploit in Wing Delivery Missions, not in FCs.

Well, they were informed of the mechanics of the issue, including it was WD missions in particular (well, exclusively) and it was fixed. what more is there to say apart from it doesn't appear to be an exploit in their consideration. You are free to disagree, of course.

 

[Jmanis]

Well, they were informed of the mechanics of the issue, including it was WD missions in particular (well, exclusively) and it was fixed. what more is there to say apart from it doesn't appear to be an exploit in their consideration. You are free to disagree, of course.

Edit: when you say 'it was fixed', what was fixed?

Do you now get fined for every tonne of goods you withdraw but fail to deliver?

If not, the exploit is still well and truly alive.