Oh yeah. We still need personal storage space for both commodities and ships. Not want. Need! 
Opinion: Engineers is a side activity which rewards varied playing style
- Thread starter Cmdr Eagleboy
- Start date
Agreed - best thing to come out of Engineers is the potential for player markets for the "hard to find stuff"
Liqua that is a very good evaluation of the mechanics.
Unfortunately that is also why I think we will not have a decent storage option. FD will consider the possibilities for a "black" economy to large. Say you have got storage for 100 items, the possibility of third party sites doing a auktion house is simply something I dont think FD will let happen. We cant even transfer between players
This whole game is getting increasingly borked by mediaeval game concept decisions, more akin to a board game than a space sim.
I have not played Rngineers yet as I am far, far away, but the urge to return to the bubble is diminishing the more I read on forums
In a way I feel sorry for FD: All good intentions with every update, but always a dealbreaker or two thrown in.
But at least the get the game THEY want
Cheers Cmdrs
Oh yeah. We still need personal storage space for both commodities and ships. Not want. Need!
You misunderstood. I regard commodities for engineer upgrades a bad idea in the first place. The effort is enough already without them, and any solution will still make it a big hassle because you still would have to obtain the commodities, transport them to wherever that storage is located, and then go back to what you were actually doing. And this possibly in ships with abysmal jump range and all that.
Yup. Pretty much this. I've enjoyed the addition of the engineers because it adds some additional reward to all the things I normally do in the game, which is just about everything except PvP.
Keeping in mind that there really is no "endgame" to speak of, the engineers adds a little extra to the here and now, as well as micro goals for the future.
Wells said.
You could have a 'deposit only' storage system for engineer commodities on the station services, only withdraw accessible by the Engineers themselves to do their upgrade black arts. It would be all very handwavium and gamey (how do the mats get from wherever you deposited them to the engineer's base?), but you wouldn't need to keep several tonnes of cargo capacity forever tied up.
![[VR] Deggial](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/47/47252.jpg?1553527110){kind=avatar}
Pecisk, I am absolutely with you here.
The problem is: it is a mind-set. We (and others) share this approach to the game.
Others don't.
And while I personally feel, that they are missing out a beautiful long-term experience by rushing (or trying to rush) towards their desired gear, there is no power in the world to change their perception - at least not by telling them otherwise.
Eventually, they'll find out themselves...
The problem is: it is a mind-set. We (and others) share this approach to the game.
Others don't.
And while I personally feel, that they are missing out a beautiful long-term experience by rushing (or trying to rush) towards their desired gear, there is no power in the world to change their perception - at least not by telling them otherwise.
Eventually, they'll find out themselves...
If only it was a black and white situation with just two sides.
This thread shows that is not the case though - there are plenty of posts here stating that people are happy for gaining upgrades to take time, and that there is no rush. The problem is that the current game mechanics do not support that approach to the game play.
I want to take my time getting upgrades. I want to simply play Elite, and gather the commodities as I go, and not worry about which upgrades I need. However - if I find a very rare commodity but don't need it for weeks / months - where am I supposed to put it in the mean time? The current material limit means I have to pick and choose what to keep, so how do I decide which materials I keep and throw away, if I don't plan my upgrades before hand? How likely is it that I am going to find the rarest data without actually going out and looking for it? Unfortunately the game doesn't currently support the method you and Pecisk are describing. But what you guys are describing is exactly the game I would love to play!
Last edited:
Oh, I am with you here! (You personally and all the others posters demanding it)
Some sort of storage for "hard incrediences" is definitely needed to support the slow-gathering idea!
I think, FD fell into the well known "incremental development trap" again. While I am personally very confident that plans exist to implement exactly this, it is obviously not in the game right now. There is only so and so much time to program things (an obvious and not very original statement...) and FD seemed to think, that the core gameplay of the engineers works well enough without it - for now. We don't know, which additional game elements are planned alongside storage (it even might be player-owned asteroid bases!) and interim solutions might be simply too work-intensive for their time-limited benefits.
Regarding material storage: I haven't made up my mind, whether or not the current limits are sufficient. I definitely understand (and maybe even aprpove) the desire for more. Time will tell and FD stated already that they'll keep an eye on it.
On the other hand, the term 'mindless XYZ' is oftentimes used. Making up ones mind what is needed and what not could be seen as worthwhile addition to the game. Deciding what NOT to gather (instead of mindlessly hoarding everything that crosses your way) could be percepted as "intersting weighting" that adds to the overall game experience.
Yes, "planning ahead" might be necessary! But even now, one of those very rare not-planned-in lucky finds will fit into the materials limit somehow. ("Do I really need this one iron? Sure, it might be handy at times... but isn't the rare find worth the sacrifice?")
But again, this is a mind-set. I do not deny that it is difficult for me, too, to abstain from collecting a hard-earned loot or even throw away something I gathered earlier. Nevertheless, I am a fan of limitations to work with (and overcome).
Last edited:
Something I could get behind also.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Nothing to do with mind set but rather practicality of playing.
More rep for Mr. Ant.
This is exactly it.
I went into 2.1 with the "no rush", I'm just going to play and see what i get approach. But it wasn't long before the lack of storage issue became readily apparent.
Play, play, play... hmmm, I seem to have acquired quite a bit of stuff. Lets go see what I can build with it. Ok, looks like nothing yet but partial recipes. Go play more. But wait, I'm out of space. Ok, guess I'll unload some stuff first. Come back later. Crap, more partial recipes. Wait, didn't I have that one missing ingredient earlier? ugh.
You either have to plan for your upgrades, or just ignore it all together (or just get lucky).
I never realized what a flaw a loot/crafting system would be without storage. (probably because I've never seen another game to implement it this way)
We are definetly lacking material, module and commodity storage. That doesn't stop you from taking your time though. First thing I did was pinning the blueprints I am interested in, that way I know which materials are interesting for me. If I find rare loot I'll scoop it regardless of pinned blueprints. There is no reason to scoop hundreds of common materials, you'll find them anyway if you really need them.
a) So equip a cargo rack, and
b) Yes you can
(Incidentally I completely agree that we need storage facilities. I said so before this update was released, in fact I think it beggars belief that this update was released without storage being a part of it and with seeingly no grasp of how important it actually was. Saying it's 'on the list' for future updates proves that because it was essential content for this update, not an 'important' priority for a future one.)
Last edited:
Or they might contine to 'blaze their own trail'. That's the thing with sandbox games, you can't wave the personal choice aspect around as an attraction and then criticise players or suggest they're somehow doing it wrong when their choices aren't your choices, or mine come to that. There is only one valid way to play this game and it's the way the individual wants to play it.
But they can blaze as much as they like! They might have chosen the stony path, but it's a valid choice nevertheless. The problem starts, if those players demand changes to cater their decision, because of their rough time.
You can be a rock or water. You can run head-forward into an obstacle and try to destroy it - or adapt and flow around it. Both solutions might be successful. But one of them might end with a headache and I wonder, which person will be happier at the end.
As I said: it is a matter of attitude.
And before somebody claims that I am against balancing of the game or the discussion of personal tastes: I am not! This is what a forum is for after all and reasonable discussions are useful by any means.
But there is way to much demanding going on at this forum, in my opinion. There are games that were ruined due to all to much listening to the "playerbase".
Usually, game developers are quite bright people with good ideas of what is going on in their game and what is planned in the future. Not all fans - blazing their trail or not - are necessarily right in their whishes. Me neither, by the way.
Therefore, if in doubt, I tend to trust in the developer's vision and adopt my play-style accordingly.
Last edited:
Don't talk nonsense.
The developers have chosen a triple layer of RNG which frankly makes the game tedious beyond belief and I and many others are allowed to call for change.
You think it's fun when:
- RNG in finding the materials (which, fair enough, you said you could find by doing other stuff but given the limited storage space eventually you will discard something you need and be forced to farm for it)
- RNG to find the components (like mining / scanning / etc) which are activities that not everyone enjoys. Sure, force people to do other things but in that same breath so much to "blaze your own trail" as it's now "blaze FDs trail as yours is not an option if you want to enjoy Engineers"
- RNG to get a good roll on the modification. I have seen screenshots to see that not all upgrades are good and that's after FD tried to fudge the rolls. (See - that is what you get from RNG - sometimes they can be horrible rolls)
- If your previous RNG roll was good enough you might have a special .. if it's not the one you want (as I am to believe some don't stack so another is worthless) then you can burn your reputation with the engineer to select another one. In doing so you just subject yourself to more RNG to make up for it.
All in all .. Engineers has the potential to be great only if you aim to be "done" in 10 years .. anything sooner and RNGengineers be damned !
Or ... like myself you could attempt to get FD to see sense.
I don't think the intent was for it to be done in a week or two, meant to be played out over time, but folks inject their own self-imposed grind into by using the age old motto of me want now, and that makes all the more frustrating for those type of players.
Btw,,
Arjins Arsenic Market is open for business.. lol
Btw,,
Arjins Arsenic Market is open for business.. lol
Just kiddin cause you can't obviously trade it... but I do have 50 in stock...
Last edited:
Really Frontier have to act fairly sharpish and conjure up storage by whatever means, even if only as a placeholder feature or the game will become partially unplayable. I am currently flying about with 120 odd in commodities from missions and as a result I cannot trade fully, jump range is reduced, can`t use smaller ships or go to a res site without been attacked. You have to wonder do the devs play the game or how such game mechanic could pass any QA. It's impossible to think that they forgot about such a feature as its pivotal for such a crafting mechanism, therefore I can only conclude that this was excluded by Frontier on purpose and I think that is a perverse situation for players to find themselves in.
It's the old problem that Blizzard faced some time ago with Diablo 3 - they (the devs) tried to tell the players how to play D3 and what "fun" was.
It didn't work
In this case I suspect that the reason why storage was not added from the outset was either:
- Not enough resources / time, or
- The devs didn't envisage you playing the game in the manner that you are
The 1st is most likely but the 2nd one is possible based on experience. (You can't QA your own work as you know what to expect, so in the same manner you can't test your own ideas as you know what is expected)
Yes, but you should test for the obvious, and from the votes in favour of storage by 90% of the Cmdr`s taking part it seems obvious to them as well that storage should have been implemented.