Maybe just "maxers" now, depends on how the negative effects develop as the grade go up.
New upgrade System - "Your time is valueable"- is a pure grind and waste of everyones time
Because it still sort of railroads people into doing things they don’t like to get upgrades relevant to their profession, and wastes their time with the amount of button presses, calculations for mats needed, etc.
They usually even don't know what G5 means. Turns out they don't know how board works either.
Are they just there to be your PvP chums? You decide, but that's really not about it either.
"Play the game and experience your own creation firsthand" = "strawman"
Good to know.
And that you can straight out buy if you're even slightly selective in what you scoop, what you scan, or what missions you run...
What doesn't make sense about your statement is that people who do not min max (like me) am happy to slowly go up the grades as it doesn't bother me if I haven't got the best grade. Saying that a top G3 or mid range G4 in the new system sounds like it will be as good as an average G5 for a lot of modules making it even easier. I already have a G5 FSD extended range module that when I convert it to a top range g4 will get a massive boost.
Any way I don't mind the new system with the materials broker. To me it will be more fun.
Last edited:
Mats trader lessens issues with profession more or less, and getting upgrade which makes your ship considerably superior taking play time - not sure how it is bad.
OK, very slowly from the top.
You. Are. Not. Supposed. To. Go. From. Sidewinder. To. Fully. Engineered. Cutter. In. A. Day.
People (and the word is used loosely around here) will whine about these changes to engineers but the new Materials Trader mechanic balances that out as getting materials for engineering is going to be a lot more diverse and, by the looks of what was actually said in the live stream, a lot easier.
As usual around here "people" invoke attribution bias; find the first thing they that can whine about and then attach to that before actually looking at the whole picture.
It's time "people" realised that this has never been a game for casual players (or idiots with short attention spans).
As usual around here "people" invoke attribution bias; find the first thing they that can whine about and then attach to that before actually looking at the whole picture.
It's time "people" realised that this has never been a game for casual players (or idiots with short attention spans).
Last edited:
It depends how much work is involved in a roll. If the first one takes 2-5 iron, that means you need to find 1-2 lumps of iron ore. That is probably just one thingy on a surface, and you can store 100. It takes five clicks. Lets be generous, it'll take you ten seconds. The G2 rolls will take you another thirty or so. So from those 30, the first ten are pretty meaningless, beyond giving players who are new and/or clueless some cheap stuff to start with.
I already have to re-do G3->G5 every time I buy a special effect. I couldnt care less about five more iron.
You claim that, a priori, we cannot make any reasonable analysis of the new system. I would ask in that case why Frontier asked for feedback.
You are correct - the current system gives no guarantees. But 5 G5 rolls will probably give you something pretty good. Not certainly, but in any case a great improvement over a stock module. Your standards are evidently very high - I don't think I have more than a handful of modules with 50 rolls in them. Most people wouldn't make anywhere near that many, and for them it will be worse because now they have to make all those G1-4 rolls before they can even have a try at G5.
I'll suspect I'll continue playing the game, doing diverse activities and then visiting an engineer to see what I can get. If I need to Ill hunt materials down occasionally, or trade them with the new materials trader.
Edit: Or to increase rep I'll sell *insert stuff here* at an engineers base.
Am I doing this wrong?
Edit: Or to increase rep I'll sell *insert stuff here* at an engineers base.
Am I doing this wrong?
Last edited:
I think the new changes are awesome. But yeah we need to test them in beta and get a more complete picture before passing judgement.
I always worked with at least (3) modules per upgrade per session. I keep a potentially good roll result, swap in a stock module via outfitting and keep going. I keep working that one until it exceeds the one I just stored as a possible keeper. Do the same with the 3rd stock module and eventually choose the best one and perhaps the next best one for later use.
With the new system, there will be no risk of falling backwards, so the likely need for multiple modules like that will no longer be the case.
Its called working smart, not hard.
I will definitely be testing all this in the Beta, and comparing to the dozens of God Rolled modules I own now on my ships or in storage.Based on some of the comments I am reading in here, I don't think some of these self proclaimed engineering experts have a clue what they are talking about.
Last edited:
If you're talking about rolling 5 rolls of the next grade up, for example going from a G4 to a G5, I'm finding it increasingly hard to believe that you can actually read the engineering screen and understand what the changes being made are because that statement is utterly nonsensical. It might happen once in a blue moon, with mods where there is a significant overlap between two grades but there is no way in hell that the usual outcome of doing five rolls of the next grade up is to end up with a mod worse than the one you started with. There isn't even any way in hell that the usual outcome of doing one roll of the next grade up is ending up with a worse mod.
If you're talking about re-rolling the same grade as you already have five times, the chance of getting a worse mod than the one you already have is partly dependent on how good the one you already have is. If you're within 2% of the maximum for the positive changes, yeah of course you don't have much chance of improving it. But y'know... that's because it's already almost as good as it's possible to get it.
I would say though that the impression I have from your comments is that you have a very different definition of 'decent' or 'acceptable' than a lot of players. Top third of the possible range of improvement would be what I'd consider 'decent'. I have literally never had to roll more than five times to get that and I've engineered multiple modules on 19 ships including a Corvette and Cutter with every single piece of gear engineered to G5. The vast majority of those are a lot better than 'just' in the top third of the possible improvement range too.
With the new system, there will be no risk of falling backwards, so the likely need for multiple modules like that will no longer be the case.
Its called working smart, not hard.
Errr... unless you actually apply the changes, which you would be able to see from the screen were worse than the mod you started off with, there is no chance of falling backwards anyway. So yeah, tell me more about working smart.
Last edited:
Well, there are a few issues with that, but I get your sentiment - I myself actually like the gradual increase in power for my favourite ships as well.
However, I do feel you need to be a bit more critical of the system than that.
1) Engineers are mandatory to not die in interdictions when your combat rank is elite is based, etc., so for your ship to effectively be flyable in most situations you’d need a fairly highly engineered ship nowadays.
2) I doubt people wanted to max every build for every ship. For instance, my main ‘do anything’ ship, the anconda, would simply need a few spare modules for trading, exploration, etc., most of which I would only ever engineer once or twice. However, under the new system, I’d need to engineer them at least 3 times to get an acceptable-ish result, probably closer to 9-12. That is a major step down in that regard.
I'm not sure anymore :S
Deleted member 110222
D
Totally agree with your post, and your signature!