My Honda Civic has a small fuel tank...

[Snarfbuckle]

Well said, changing engineering is another knee jerk reaction, the only thing wrong with engineering is the materials gathering. Shaved Squirrel Balls are only available on raxxla I heard.

@op, like everything in elite, engineering requires preparation, you should have gathered enough materials for 20 attempts, you would definitely have got an improvement and in fact close to max bonus. People tend to exaggerate both the difference between a good and bad roll as well as the number of attempts required to get something worth having.

No, the things wrong with engineering is the very CORE of how they designed it.

- Remove RNG
- Allow us to pick positive and negatives of the module we have
- The end result must be ZERO
- For every + and every - we add to the equation will increase the material cost
- Adding a special effect could cost Rank X Materials to get the special effect with the modification

It's and engineer that build stuff for people according to our specifications, not a darn one armed bandit where we hope for jackpot.

- It allows for better more specific items to be created
- It removes "waste" of materials
- The material cost will be far higher but we KNOW what we get
- You cannot get a "god" roll since you must always pick a negative for every positive effect
- It will be more player oriented module designs and less cookie cutter must have effect designs

 

[Stealthie]

One of the forthcoming improvements is that each Engineering roll will be better than the last.

"Improvements"?

Does anybody here think that FDev are going to allow the RNG to give people a good roll on their first try and allow them to keep improving on that incrementally as well?
Maybe I'm just being unduly pessimistic but I suspect that this change will adjust the RNG so your first roll is guaranteed to be mediocre and then you'll have to do more rolls to gain incrementally better results.

Mark my words; six months after this happens, we'll be seeing "I used to be happy with mod's that only took 3 or 4 rolls but now it always seems to take at least 10 rolls to get something similar" posts.

 

[Sonof Hibachi]

I appreciate some people struggle with this game, but is really that hard for some to understand the stats? The primary stat to look at is optimal mass. Am struggling to believe the Op had a roll worse than stock.

Just typical nonsense on this forum, it's annoying having to sift through all the . Guy's, take 5 mins to understand what each stat means, it's not complicated. Focus on the optimal mass, and understand the benefits and drawbacks from the secondary affects.

I'll admit I didn't fully understand the benefit of the max fuel per jump stat, 30 second search was all it took to figure it out.

Why not read the post and thread properly before coming in with your condescending opinions?

Hibachi, hates lazy readers.

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

I've never gotten a "god roll" and I don't think I've ever gone for more than five to ten G5 rolls on any one module. I've engineered every hardpoint (except for my new packhounds), shield generator, power plant, thruster, and distributor on all of my ships, and have engineered shiled boosters in storage for all of them, and In EVERY case I've found myself struggling with the decision to go for another rolll or not, because I've not been sure that I would likely get a better result.

The difference between many of these rolls and "god rolls" is a percentage point here and there, that may or may not provide any meaningful added value.

For example, I have two different FSDs for my Anaconda after wanting to go for more rolls but not at the expense of what I just got. Five minutes later, I had one FSD that gives me a 56ly range and another than gives a 58ly range.

I have two 4A MCs and four large frag caonnons with similar tales.

For those that dislike the idea of dedicating hours on end to engineer one module, just stop already. More often than not you're getting excellent results early on, and are investing the vast majority of your time and resources going after miniscule performance increases.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

One of the forthcoming improvements is that each Engineering roll will be better than the last.

That is not what Sandro said. He said that every upgrade will be better then the last. Rolling a grade 5 on top of a grade 5 is not an upgrade, but a re-roll of the current upgrade. Rolling a grade 5 on top of a grade 4 is and will alway end in a better result.

I very much doubt that rolling a grade 5 on top of a grade 5 will always result in a better roll then your current grade 5. I see it as removing your current grade 5 and applying a new one.

 

[777Driver]

Why not read the post and thread properly before coming in with your condescending opinions?

Hibachi, hates lazy readers.

Yes I did read the part about you not being bothered to do a few minutes of research.. In the time it took to write that rant you could have figured it all out.. See you in another 4 months for your next pointless rant..

 

[Stealthie]

No, the things wrong with engineering is the very CORE of how they designed it.

- Remove RNG
- Allow us to pick positive and negatives of the module we have
- The end result must be ZERO
- For every + and every - we add to the equation will increase the material cost
- Adding a special effect could cost Rank X Materials to get the special effect with the modification

Exactly.

I guess FDev are trying to avoid being too "derivative" but engineering should really work a lot like the character generation process in most RPGs, whereby you get some "base stats" and then you can swap them around to buff your character in specific ways.

The UI can pretty-much already do the job required.
We just need to be able to adjust the sliders ourselves.

You want a more powerful weapon?
You crank up the damage slider.
As you do that, the heat slider, the ROF slider and the energy slider change accordingly.

Maybe you want an efficient weapon?
You dial back the energy slider.
As you do that the other sliders change accordingly.

Maybe you're trying to create an FSD for your exploration ship?
You crank up the range slider.
As you do that, the fuel-consumption and heat sliders change accordingly.
I'd also add a "charging time" slider too, so that distant jumps would take longer to charge (thus placing your ship in jeopardy for longer) and people would have the option of building combat ships with lousy jump range but could jump out of trouble in a few seconds.

But, yeah.
They can leave things mostly as they are but just make it so the sliders are manually adjustable and I reckon it'd be a big improvement.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Exactly.

I guess FDev are trying to avoid being too "derivative" but engineering should really work a lot like the character generation process in most RPGs, whereby you get some "base stats" and then you can swap them around to buff your character in specific ways.

The UI can pretty-much already do the job required.
We just need to be able to adjust the sliders ourselves.

You want a more powerful weapon?
You crank up the damage slider.
As you do that, the heat slider, the ROF slider and the energy slider change accordingly.

Maybe you want an efficient weapon?
You dial back the energy slider.
As you do that the other sliders change accordingly.

Maybe you're trying to create an FSD for your exploration ship?
You crank up the range slider.
As you do that, the fuel-consumption and heat sliders change accordingly.
I'd also add a "charging time" slider too, so that distant jumps would take longer to charge (thus placing your ship in jeopardy for longer) and people would have the option of building combat ships with lousy jump range but could jump out of trouble in a few seconds.

But, yeah.
They can leave things mostly as they are but just make it so the sliders are manually adjustable and I reckon it'd be a big improvement.

Add the ability to "lock" a slider but then we have TWICE the negative feedback on other stats.

- Choose "Jump Range" on FSD
- "Lock" FSD mass
- Now instead of the mass of the FSD going up the fuel usage, power demand and heat generation spikes as negatives have to take up the slack of the locked attribute

For those that dislike the idea of dedicating hours on end to engineer one module, just stop already. More often than not you're getting excellent results early on, and are investing the vast majority of your time and resources going after miniscule performance increases.

Except it's not engineering, it's rolling a slot machine and hoping for an adequate result with no control whatsoever over the outcome. it's simply not any engineering involved but a madman living in a hut and I give him a kilogram of sulphur and he has no idea how he managed to create the modification he did five minutes ago.

 

[Stealthie]

That is not what Sandro said. He said that every upgrade will be better then the last. Rolling a grade 5 on top of a grade 5 is not an upgrade, but a re-roll of the current upgrade. Rolling a grade 5 on top of a grade 4 is and will alway end in a better result.

I very much doubt that rolling a grade 5 on top of a grade 5 will always result in a better roll then your current grade 5. I see it as removing your current grade 5 and applying a new one.

What makes you think that?

If somebody tells me that "every upgrade will be better than the last" I would expect that to apply to upgrades of the same class.
If I have a G5 FSD which gives my Asp a 50Ly jump-range and I do another G5 roll then, according to this idea, I will sure as hell expect that upgrade to be better than the one I already have.

If we're saying that, say, you might have a G4 FSD upgrade which gives you 47Ly and this is intended to ensure that a G5 FSD will give you >47Ly then that would seem to be just an attempt to protect people from their own stupidity.
If you have a damned good mid-tier upgrade and you choose to replace it with a mediocre G5 upgrade, that should be on you, I'm afraid.

 

[EUS]

One of the forthcoming improvements is that each Engineering roll will be better than the last.

1st roll; Crud
2nd roll; 0.5% better heat, critical stat unchanged.
3rd roll; 0.5% better power, critical stat unchanged.
4th roll; heat, and power reset, critical stat better by 0.25%

This is how "every roll will be better" is going to be implemented, just wait and see, 50 rolls still required.

 

[Sonof Hibachi]

Yes I did read the part about you not being bothered to do a few minutes of research.. In the time it took to write that rant you could have figured it all out.. See you in another 4 months for your next pointless rant..

Ooh, but you're still here?

 

[Aashenfox]

No, the things wrong with engineering is the very CORE of how they designed it.

- Remove RNG
- Allow us to pick positive and negatives of the module we have
- The end result must be ZERO
- For every + and every - we add to the equation will increase the material cost
- Adding a special effect could cost Rank X Materials to get the special effect with the modification

It's and engineer that build stuff for people according to our specifications, not a darn one armed bandit where we hope for jackpot.

- It allows for better more specific items to be created
- It removes "waste" of materials
- The material cost will be far higher but we KNOW what we get
- You cannot get a "god" roll since you must always pick a negative for every positive effect
- It will be more player oriented module designs and less cookie cutter must have effect designs

There's nothing wrong with the core of engineering as a wheel of fortune, as long as you provide people with enough spins consummate with their time invested. I'm specifically talking about this 'always better roll' stuff, as well as 'Grade 5 crap roll should be better than grade 4 god roll' (another thing I don't agree with, and by the wy, impossibele to implement now, without either gimping people's existing grade 4 god rolled modules, or shifting the ceiling of grade 5 MUCH higher, somethig I don't think anybody wants).

This better roll each time is SO fundamentally flawed as a concept I on't even know where to start. It's idiocy and anyone who really understands how game progressoin mechanics work would agree.

Our own adjustable sliders isn't a bad idea, but it isn't necessary, if they just give us more opportunities to get more rolls while doing the stuff that we enjoy doing, the fact it's a casino becomes part of its fun, because you've always got enough rolls to spin the wheel and be happy.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

What makes you think that?

If somebody tells me that "every upgrade will be better than the last" I would expect that to apply to upgrades of the same class.
If I have a G5 FSD which gives my Asp a 50Ly jump-range and I do another G5 roll then, according to this idea, I will sure as hell expect that upgrade to be better than the one I already have.

To me that means your are removing your current upgrade and re-rolling it. A G5 upgrade is not an upgrade to a G5, it's an upgrade from a G4.

If we're saying that, say, you might have a G4 FSD upgrade which gives you 47Ly and this is intended to ensure that a G5 FSD will give you >47Ly then that would seem to be just an attempt to protect people from their own stupidity.
If you have a damned good mid-tier upgrade and you choose to replace it with a mediocre G5 upgrade, that should be on you, I'm afraid.

I think that is precisely what it will be. Otherwise, you might as well get rid of the RNG and just give people a god roll on the first roll. People will hate it even more as they will now think that they have no choice but to grind out materials to get the best that there is. As it is now, it is never a guarantee that you will get one, so many won't bother and will be happy with a good roll.

It will create even more burnout then what we already have. To me that is a recipe for disaster and will make a poor system even worse. Personally I would be happy with predifined modules that you need to buy with credits for more then usual and get the required materials. Maybe have an ultra rare material that give an extra boost to certain stats.

Then have a mission system to gain their trust.

 

[777Driver]

Ooh, but you're still here?

Yes putting together a summery on what each stat does, don't want this thread to be a complete waste of time..

MASS - Any increase in the FSD drives mass reduces FSD range

INTEGRITY - Integrity change does not affect FSD range

Power Draw - Surprise surprise, no change in FSD range

Optimal MASS - Key stat, the higher this goes (upto 50%) the higher the jump range.

Secondary effect - Key Stat - MAX fuel per jump, again always look for a higher number, fairly certain 5% is the max increase.

Look at your jump range before you visit the engineer, confirm the key stats are at the very least higher than your previous stat, confirm jump range increase after the roll...



Max fuel per jump = The maximum amount of fuel you can use. If you can use more fuel you can jump much farther
Optimal Mass = The mass that the FSD is designed to jump. If this is bigger than the total mass of your ship including cargo and equipment your jump range is larger and vice versa

 

[Stealthie]

Add the ability to "lock" a slider but then we have TWICE the negative feedback on other stats.

- Choose "Jump Range" on FSD
- "Lock" FSD mass
- Now instead of the mass of the FSD going up the fuel usage, power demand and heat generation spikes as negatives have to take up the slack of the locked attribute

Yep. That seems like a decent way for things to work.

After all, if you're increasing something like FSD range then what you're doing is, effectively, adding points to the "range" attribute and deducting points from 2 or 3 others.
If you "locked" one of the other attributes then all that'd need to happen would be to deduct correspondingly more points from the attributes that weren't locked.

I guess you'd need to set up certain parameters to limit the way that worked though.
For example, let's say you want an overcharged laser.
You lock the "heat" slider in it's current position.
You crank up the "damage" slider.
The ROF sliders and the "energy" sliders would get worse but the actual power wouldn't go up a huge amount cos you simply can't have a hugely overpowered weapon which doesn't generate a lot of heat.

Similar thing with, say, an FSD.
If you lock the "fuel usage" slider in it's current position you could crank up the "range" slider and the "heat" and (hypothetical) "charging time" slider would get worse but the range wouldn't improve by a great amount because you can't travel much further without using more fuel.

It'd be up to people to set limits for what they want, lock the attribute at that level and then see what improvement it allows.
So, for example, you have a ship which has a 25Mw PP and you're currently using 21Mw.
You want to fit and upgrade a laser so you lock the "power" slider to 4Mw and then you twiddle the other sliders however you want, safe in the knowledge that you're never going to exceed the output of your PP.

 

[Aashenfox]

To me that means your are removing your current upgrade and re-rolling it. A G5 upgrade is not an upgrade to a G5, it's an upgrade from a G4.



I think that is precisely what it will be. Otherwise, you might as well get rid of the RNG and just give people a god roll on the first roll. People will hate it even more as they will now think that they have no choice but to grind out materials to get the best that there is. As it is now, it is never a guarantee that you will get one, so many won't bother and will be happy with a good roll.

It will create even more burnout then what we already have. To me that is a recipe for disaster and will make a poor system even worse.

It can never happen that a grade 5 roll is always better than a grade 4 roll without either...

Reducing the stats on people's existing high rolled G4 modules under the level of G5 'minimum' (I think we all agree this won't happen), OR, shift the minimum G2 roll UP above the maximum G1 roll, reducing the possible variation, and causing a knock on effect up the chain, which would surely require raising the ceiling of G5 at the end (I don't think many would want this either)...

So, yeh, I don't think this "G5 always better than G4" is actually doable now, that horse has already bolted (I have a G4 FSD at 41% )

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

It can never happen that a grade 5 roll is always better than a grade 4 roll without either...

Reducing the stats on people's existing high rolled G4 modules under the level of G5 'minimum' (I think we all agree this won't happen), OR, shift the minimum G2 roll UP above the maximum G1 roll, reducing the possible variation, and causing a knock on effect up the chain, which would surely require raising the ceiling of G5 at the end (I don't think many would want this either)...

So, yeh, I don't think this "G5 always better than G4" is actually doable now, that horse has already bolted (I have a G4 FSD at 41% )

We shall see. I suspect that current engineered modules will not be effected, but any new ones from then on will be. Your G4 at 41% stat obviouly will not get worse when you do a G5. It could be that it overrides the G5 minimum so that the G5 will always have the stat go over 41%.

 

[Stealthie]

1st roll; Crud
2nd roll; 0.5% better heat, critical stat unchanged.
3rd roll; 0.5% better power, critical stat unchanged.
4th roll; heat, and power reset, critical stat better by 0.25%

This is how "every roll will be better" is going to be implemented, just wait and see, 50 rolls still required.

This is exactly how I see it happening.

It doesn't have to be this way.
They could just leave the initial roll as being completely random and then it'd just be a case of things working as they currently do but you'd also be able to invest more mat's in some "bonus" improvements.

I just don't see FDev being able to resist the temptation to nerf the initial roll so that you're going to be forced to grind to improve every mod until it's acceptable though.

Yep, that's very pessimistic of me but it's the same sort of pessimism that led me to assume we'd end up with Thargoid USSs and CZs.

 

[MottiKhan]

...so I couldn't drive it very far. Whilst in the depths of deepest darkest Backofbeyondshire I popped into an out of the way garage to see if I could get more range.

A rather ugly man shambled out of the shed-like workshop and demanded a milking machine, three swan beaks and a pickled egg before he would even look at my car. With my limited range I scrabbled around and found the items, eventually delivering them to the ugly man who then introduced himself as Felicity.

He then fiddled around under my car and after much grunting told me the job was done. I thanked him and carried on my merry way only to find that my car's range had actually reduced and he'd nicked my fuel. Returning to Felicity's garage there was no possible way to remonstrate with the chap so I posted a rant on an obscure forum - something about borders/edges/maybe even frontiers - and the reply I had was "can you not read - there is soooo much stuff about this online".

My stupidity is that

a) I had tried it before and it left me outraged

b) I tried it yet again and I'm now frickin' RAGING!

c) Why the hell should I be looking online to understand what has become a major part of E : D. Surely, SURELY this should be a transparent mechanic that makes the grind worthwhile.

I've just had a four month break from E : D after my first negative experience with engineers. I had always flown in open but since I started again and re-discovered this engineer farce I've been in a PG (19,000+ members but yet to see one) because I would like a level playing field.

Stick it up yr behind Felicity, you'll never see me again.

Hibachi, disgruntled.

+1 rep. Funniest thing I've read in a long time.

I mean, who drives a Honda Civic?

 

[Stealthie]

To me that means your are removing your current upgrade and re-rolling it. A G5 upgrade is not an upgrade to a G5, it's an upgrade from a G4.

I guess it depends on your interpretation of what was said.

If a garage tells me that every upgrade they fit to my car will be an improvement on the last, I expect it to mean exactly that.
If they fit a Jetex exhaust I expect that to improve my car in some way.
If they then fit a Irmscher exhaust, I expect that to improve my car even more.

If it didn't, and they tried to tell me that the Irmscher exhaust wasn't considered an "upgrade" to the Jetex exhaust, I'd assume they were con' artists and I'd be asking for a refund.

You might be right but if that's the case then it certainly needs clarifying before it's implemented so people know they stand to lose top-tier mod's on the assumption that subsequent rolls WILL be improvements on what they currently have.