An idea: Difficulty Settings At Start

[mossfoot]

Obviously we can't have Easy, Medium, Hard, Hardcore settings in the game because we all play in the same universe. You can't have it set up to have weapons do less damage against some players and more damage against others. There's a degree of unfairness in all that, so we can never have it.
Or can we?
Consider an alternative that still keeps everyone in the same universe, but provides some leniency or challenge for players.

For example: Hard might increase insurance costs by 10% and raise up NPCs that actively spawn against you (ie pirates and bounty hunters) by one or two levels. (so if you usually have only enemies up to Competent after you based on your combat ranking, then it would get bumped up to Expert or Master). Perhaps as compensation you get a bonus to things like navy ranking (or thresholds locking ships are lowered). But everything in terms of game mechanics stays as it is. No change.

Likewise, Easy would decrease insurance costs and lower NPCs that actively spawn against you.

These would be persistent settings, and once locked in can't be changed without a clear save.

 

[Caramel Clown]

Difficulty can easily be applied to missions. How about you having a choice of how fast you agree to complete it. Or 'promise' not to be scanned. For extra pay and rep of course. I can see this being next logical step in improving missions.

 

[mossfoot]

Difficulty can easily be applied to missions. How about you having a choice of how fast you agree to complete it. Or 'promise' not to be scanned. For extra pay and rep of course. I can see this being next logical step in improving missions.

Oh damn, I like that!

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Yeah, there has to be some bonus for the increased difficulty. I mean theres obvious bragging rights but most games have either increased score, loot, payouts etc.
Elite has the issue that it isn't zone levelled or xp levelled like most MMOs or RPG's in general. You can go anywhere, fight anyone/thing right from the off.

I quite like Caramel Clown's idea. Tie in difficulty with missions. I also think maybe time in game but then again time doesn't equal skill. Left 4 Dead 2 did an interesting thing with an AI director that basically threw our supplies when you most needed them and adjusted enemy number/frequency/type depending on your health, ammo, team-mates alive etc. Always kept it challenging but never impossible. Not saying thats the way for Elite but it's an interesting idea.

 

[Conch]

this is not hello kitty adventure island...

 

[mossfoot]

Diffiiculty on missions would be cool, but should perhaps have a logical reason behind it. Already the ranking of the mission is supposed to reflect difficulty (though it doesn't limit whether you can take it or not) but I don't really feel it in game.

In some ways a higher difficulty becomes its own reward - those ships that intercept you, if they're a higher rank than yours, are worth more in terms of your Pilots Federation combat rank. So if you're upping the challenge of ships attacking you, you will rank up faster. Likewise if you're toning it down, you won't advance as fast (but will earn more money over time before you rank you so you'll be better prepared for better NPCs). It's kind of self-adjusting that way.

- - - Updated - - -

this is not hello kitty adventure island...

Not sure how this is relevant. I'm talking about increasing difficulty for those who want it. And given the people who complained about the 2.1 NPC buff (despite many of us loving it) and therefore got it nerfed back to crap, being able to adjust what levels you encounter (but not changing the rules they follow or weapons they use at those levels) is a logical thing to look at. Some of us want NPC challenge, more risk, and more consequence, and we probably won't get it any other way.

 

[Conch]

Diffiiculty on missions would be cool, but should perhaps have a logical reason behind it. Already the ranking of the mission is supposed to reflect difficulty (though it doesn't limit whether you can take it or not) but I don't really feel it in game.

In some ways a higher difficulty becomes its own reward - those ships that intercept you, if they're a higher rank than yours, are worth more in terms of your Pilots Federation combat rank. So if you're upping the challenge of ships attacking you, you will rank up faster. Likewise if you're toning it down, you won't advance as fast (but will earn more money over time before you rank you so you'll be better prepared for better NPCs). It's kind of self-adjusting that way.

- - - Updated - - -



Not sure how this is relevant. I'm talking about increasing difficulty for those who want it. And given the people who complained about the 2.1 NPC buff (despite many of us loving it) and therefore got it nerfed back to crap, being able to adjust what levels you encounter (but not changing the rules they follow or weapons they use at those levels) is a logical thing to look at. Some of us want NPC challenge, more risk, and more consequence, and we probably won't get it any other way.

im sorry about that one, didnt read it.. my exuse is that its friday, but its myself to blame.

 

[mossfoot]

im sorry about that one, didnt read it.. my exuse is that its friday, but its myself to blame.

No worries. I understand where the sentiment comes from

 

[Riverside]

I like the idea of variable insurance percentage, but I'm not sure variable NPC spawns could work in the multiplayer environment.

For challenging NPCs I'd favour super-hard missions, instances & even systems, the regular activity that all players encounter needs to remain at a comfortable level though. I'm optimistic that 'Winter' will provide this content for those that seek it out.

 

[mossfoot]

I like the idea of variable insurance percentage, but I'm not sure variable NPC spawns could work in the multiplayer environment.

For challenging NPCs I'd favour super-hard missions, instances & even systems, the regular activity that all players encounter needs to remain at a comfortable level though. I'm optimistic that 'Winter' will provide this content for those that seek it out.

Variable NPC spawns could definitely happen when it comes to mission specific interceptions. There are certain NPCs that are spawned just for you (all that tasty cargo...). Obviously it can't do anything about RES and CZ areas, for example. But USSs you drop into could be scaled.

 

[Riverside]

Variable NPC spawns could definitely happen when it comes to mission specific interceptions. There are certain NPCs that are spawned just for you (all that tasty cargo...). Obviously it can't do anything about RES and CZ areas, for example. But USSs you drop into could be scaled.

Yes I see what you mean. The Custom psycho NPCs in supercruise can (I believe) select other Cmdrs though. In a mission or numerically high USS instance there could be any level of challenge up to Kobayashi Maru, but this doesn't require a difficulty level set at the beginning, it could be added now.

 

[Querty Out]

No, thank you. Difficulty levels are already built into the game. For example, NPCs that attack you match your combat rank and missions have a recommended combat level.

If given the choice then PVPers would most likely always use easy mode because they are not really interested in NPC fights unless it helps them make credits... and that's best done when NPCs drop like flies. More things to complain about.

What I would like to see is an improved C&P system and high / mid / low sec areas with mission rewards adjusted according to risk. Then you can choose your difficulty level by operating in one of these areas.

 

[mossfoot]

No, thank you. Difficulty levels are already built into the game. For example, NPCs that attack you match your combat rank and missions have a recommended combat level.

If given the choice then PVPers would most likely always use easy mode because they are not really interested in NPC fights unless it helps them make credits... and that's best done when NPCs drop like flies. More things to complain about.

What I would like to see is an improved C&P system and high / mid / low sec areas with mission rewards adjusted according to risk. Then you can choose your difficulty level by operating in one of these areas.

Not sure if you caught the jist of what I was saying there.

First off, it's not like it would affect you if you wanted to play the same difficulty you already are. But some players find the NPCs too hard at the rank they're playing, and others find them too easy. Why not have a means that lets you increase your challenge level.

PvPers choosing easy mode would only be hurting themselves because easier enemies aren't worth as much in credits or in terms of increasing rank, so they'd be stuck at lower pilot federation ranks longer. So it's their own damn fault for choosing that mode. But they'd probably chose more a more difficult level for the same reason - rank up faster and earn more money faster. It's a self-balancing situation.

Of course I'd like to see better C&P but that's not an issue of challenge per se, especially if the combat levels stay matched to your combat rating. I doubt we'll ever see high/med/low sectors - star systems, yes, but not large regions of space.

 

[Jaiotu]

I like the idea of being able to opt-in on making Elite: Dangerous more pain-inducing for those of us who actually enjoy the challenge. I want my "Iron Man" mode. I also want an actual escape capsule that requires a coordinated rescue.

 

[mossfoot]

I like the idea of being able to opt-in on making Elite: Dangerous more pain-inducing for those of us who actually enjoy the challenge. I want my "Iron Man" mode. I also want an actual escape capsule that requires a coordinated rescue.

Would be nice, but any solution basically has to stay consistent with in-game mechanics, so I don't see that happening.

As I said at the start of the thread, if ED were to ever have some kind of scaleable challenge, it couldn't actually change anything about the game itself. Enemy ships couldn't get more hitpoints or do more damage, and your ships couldn't do less damage or have a reduced gimble range over others (for example). It would have to be that if you encounter another player in game your experiences are still the same.

Changing the type of enemies you encounter wouldn't break with that (its another PC's bad luck for joining you in that instance) because everyone involved, PC or NPC, still obeys all the same rules.

Increasing the insurance rate might help increase the sense of risk.

The best I could imagine that wouldn't affect game mechanics would be having it that you have to manually eject to get to the rebuy screen. Failing to do so sends you back to Sidewinder, no exceptions.

 

[Querty Out]

Not sure if you caught the jist of what I was saying there.
...

I'm not sure either

...
First off, it's not like it would affect you if you wanted to play the same difficulty you already are. But some players find the NPCs too hard at the rank they're playing, and others find them too easy. Why not have a means that lets you increase your challenge level.
...

Hmmmh... You can't easily change it if you needed to clear the save. I'd rather move from one area to another or take on more challenging mission along with gaining more experience instead of having some arcade game style setting.

...
PvPers choosing easy mode would only be hurting themselves because easier enemies aren't worth as much in credits or in terms of increasing rank, so they'd be stuck at lower pilot federation ranks longer. So it's their own damn fault for choosing that mode. But they'd probably chose more a more difficult level for the same reason - rank up faster and earn more money faster. It's a self-balancing situation.
...

If you say it's all balanced then I have no counter argument. But take for example the current massacre missions. Are mission payouts adjusted to reflect the chosen difficulty level? Are massacre mission targets also easy or hard to kill depending on chosen difficulty level? There'd be lots of things to consider for balancing.

...
Of course I'd like to see better C&P but that's not an issue of challenge per se, especially if the combat levels stay matched to your combat rating. I doubt we'll ever see high/med/low sectors - star systems, yes, but not large regions of space.

I suspect that areas of security levels or at least missions that keep you in systems of the same security level (= difficulty level) are more likely to be implemented than a preset difficulty level. I may be wrong, of course.

 

[mossfoot]

Hmmmh... You can't easily change it if you needed to clear the save. I'd rather move from one area to another or take on more challenging mission along with gaining more experience instead of having some arcade game style setting.

If you say it's all balanced then I have no counter argument. But take for example the current massacre missions. Are mission payouts adjusted to reflect the chosen difficulty level? Are massacre mission targets also easy or hard to kill depending on chosen difficulty level? There'd be lots of things to consider for balancing.

There are a number of things that wouldn't be affected by this - stuff that is common to everyone. For example, RES and CZ areas - you can't have them scaled. They'll be the same mix for a Harmless as an Elite and always have been. I'm only talking about the NPCs that spawn specifically for you. So, jumping into a USS, or a pirate or BH that spawns specifically to interdict you. Those are all specifically for you, and can be scaled.

As for mission payouts - massacre missions have problems that have nothing to do with scaling difficulty. It's a whole other problem. If you're thinking of scaling difficulty as an exploit, then consider that sure someone who decides to play on "Easy" sure, they could exploit that to get their massacre kills easier and make lots of money, but if they're saving up for that Federal Corvette? It's going to take a LOT longer be allowed to even buy one. They're increasing their own grind.

That's also why I talked about only starting from a clear save, to keep people from switching from Easy to Hard at will just for what they feel like. Most players will know what difficulty they want to stay at. Easily changing it would just become a new exploit. (though I suppose a cooldown period might be better, being allowed to switch once a month or something, so that those who get better and more confident can up their game, or those who have had enough of seeing the rebuy screen can calm it down).

 

[S3B4ST13N]

I don't particularly like the idea of a difficulty setting that the player decides upon, it's too "gamey" (yes, I know it's a game but I hope you know what I mean when I say that).

I can understand how some might like it, but my personal preference would be varying difficulty in systems based on current events.
For example, you could have a low-threat Anarchy system where the average NPC is on or below your rank because it's adjacent to a high-sec system that has taken an interest in that system, or
you could have a high-threat Anarchy system in which NPC ships are always within the top 3 or 4 ranks, regardless of your level, and they spawn in wings. The reason for this being that, for example, a pirate lord controls that system. Basically, it would be suicide to go into these high-threat systems without a wing.
This could then create new mission content for players to invade the system in groups searching for this pirate lord to "liberate" the system. The danger would be high, but the payout would be worth it (not just credits and materials, but perhaps modified rare modules?)
If you enter a high-threat anarchy system alone and die, you've nobody to blame but yourself. Your HUD fully warned you that it was dangerous, you ignored it.

I'd also prefer it if the game spawned the occasional Elite NPC (or thereabouts) just to keep things interesting. I dislike the idea of a galaxy whose difficulty is centered around the players rank. If the Elite is far above your rank, then you need to get out, or take it on if you're feeling ballsy.

I'd much prefer an "adapt or die" system to one that just makes it easy.

 

[NW3]

I understand where you're coming from. I'd recommend having the difficulty setting be adjustable, so that you can change it later, if needed (once you get better at combat, for example).

It's possible to make changes that only affect the player and not the NPCs, to adjust the difficulty without changing the game for others in Open. To increase the difficulty, adjustments could be made on a percentage basis: shields could be reduced, number of shots or damage per shot could be reduced, time for shields to reboot could be increased, etc. The real question is: Would an Easy mode be available? (Somehow, I doubt it, but it might be OK to do in Solo mode.)

I'm not keen to change the rebuy, though. It's steep enough already. If there is an Easy mode, perhaps the rebuy cost could be lowered (and leave most of the other settings as-is).

I doubt players would want their jump-range or max speed reduced, so I'd recommend leaving those sorts of settings untouched.

It might be a good idea to display this info in-game: CMDR John Doe [Ironman] or CMDR John Doe [Hard Mode], etc. On the other hand, that info might encourage griefer attacks, so maybe it should be optionally displayed (like Report crimes against me).

Also, there are many other issues in ED which I'd rather see fixed/improved (like missions, net connections, framerate drops near stations and planets, etc.) before implementing something like difficulty settings.

 

[SirOleg]

Obviously we can't have Easy, Medium, Hard, Hardcore settings

THT'S WHY WE CAN GET ONLY HARCORE, IMPOSSIBLE, NIGHTMARE AND GODLIKE settings. YAY!!

But I think that's not what the game needs. It'd be too complicated. I can think of some reasons, but I'm too lazy. And probably unfair to other players.