So let me get this straight...

kofeyh

kofeyh
I find it hilarious that folks who mostly have admitted they haven’t really engineered anything, think the new system is great and surely it can’t be worse, and surely this is better now.

It isn’t. It’s just different. It’s still massively labour intensive, enshrines broken modules, will create an entire new generation of broken modules; and tells people their effort is meaningless when it’s overhauled again.

Because it will be. And we’ll be back to discussing things half the respondents haven’t even done, let alone understand, all happily nodding that yes this time it shall be grand.

Spare me.

Anyone who has spent appreciable time on this, already understands what the outcomes are going to be. We will have highly variable and extreme outcomes. No less so than existing.

I look forward to the endless shock and dismay over all the milk spilled everywhere and Frontier must simply do something, when the next crop of stupendously broken modules appear. Because of course they will.
 
Last edited:

Cmdr Eagleboy

Cmdr Eagleboy
kofeyh said:
Anyone who has spent appreciable time on this, already understands what the outcomes are going to be.
Click to expand...

Well, here's a thing. I hate grind. Therefore I don't engage in it. Whatever I feel I start to treat game like grind, I quit.

Same people who describe other parts of the game as grind says Engineers are grind. Maybe they are right, that's why I didn't engage in them.

New changes a) give me guaranteed positive result b) allows better flow of materials and data. Now, some time consuming parts are still there and I am not here to say it will be awesome...

but it is more streamlined process with less emphasis on G5 humping which was my biggest complain. With progression focus is on getting upgrades.

I want to get some upgrades. That's all I want.
 

Ragnar Drake

Ragnar Drake
I think the new system makes some significant improvements while introducing some critical issues, but on the bright side I think it's fixable.

Good points include that it's much more predictable, and the top results do seem to be better than the old system's normal range based on the limited numbers I've seen in the stream. For example, at 27m16s in the stream you can see the G5 Overcharged multicannon mod values, compared to the blueprint range on Inara: https://inara.cz/galaxy-blueprint/57/

DPS/Damage: +55% (Old: 35-45%)
Ammo clip size: -14.44% (Old: -16-25%)
Distributor draw: +35% (Old: +25-50%)
Thermal load: +13% (Old: None?)

(Edit: In case you're worried about the higher distributor draw, compare to the G4 new mod at 27:15 in the video. That has damage +48% which is better than the high end of the old G5 range (ignoring secondaries for now, but see below for that), with distributor draw +30%.)

My main worry is the extra grind that's involved in upgrading multiple modules. Based on an estimate I did in the feedback thread, the cost of engineering a FAS would increase from approximately 72 data+materials in the old system (if I take an average of 1.5 rolls at G5) to 675 data+materials in the new system. That's kind of a worst case, it looks better if you're doing lots of G5 rolls, but it's clearly a significant increase.

I'm not fundamentally opposed to this approach, and I don't know how much the material broker will help, but I think it would be worth considering alternatives here. For example, an easy fix would be allowing people to start building new modules at one grade below the max unlocked level or similar.

The other major issue is the grandfathered modules, specifically where the old system made it possible to get results that are far better than what's possible in the new system. See for example Alexander the Grape's post earlier in this thread. A railgun with 40% less thermal load is vastly better than a standard railgun, and this was a secondary effect that could be applied in addition to an experimental effect.

There's also possible solutions here, for example:

  • Consider allowing two experimental effects to be combined on a single module, at a high material cost. This could be a way to replicate the "great secondary + experimental effect" results from the old system. (To avoid abuse, some combinations could be restricted, i.e. divide into primary and secondary effects with a limit of one primary.)
  • Give limited lifetime to grandfathered module, i.e. announce that they'll be force converted to the new system in six months. I don't have a personal stake at this since I don't really own any impressively god-rolled modules, and would be curious how the people who do would feel about it. Maybe add some incentives such as providing bonus materials?
  • Add a "Has grandfathered engineered modules" indicator that's visible when scanning ships. While this wouldn't fix the underlying issues, it would at least help against accusation of unfair advantages and make it possible to enforce consistent rules for in-game competitions.

What do you think? I'm trying to be constructive here, and while I'm disappointed that the previous feedback seems to have been ignored, I hope that this is still salvageable.
 
Last edited:

kofeyh

kofeyh
Cmdr Eagleboy said:
Well, here's a thing. I hate grind. Therefore I don't engage in it. Whatever I feel I start to treat game like grind, I quit.

Same people who describe other parts of the game as grind says Engineers are grind. Maybe they are right, that's why I didn't engage in them.

New changes a) give me guaranteed positive result b) allows better flow of materials and data. Now, some time consuming parts are still there and I am not here to say it will be awesome...

but it is more streamlined process with less emphasis on G5 humping which was my biggest complain. With progression focus is on getting upgrades.

I want to get some upgrades. That's all I want.
Click to expand...

No offence, you are just as likely to find it no less of a chore than the existing outcome. There is actually more potential for more time spent for less overall gain. I know people want to believe this will be a less extreme more rewarding outcome, because surely it will be.

I am sorry. It just isn’t. The new blueprints will encourage uptake of grade 5 no less than it does now. The chore to get there will be greater, and if folks believe the net outcome is more consistency and predictablity? Well I guess you will find out soon enough.

Frontier doesn’t want people to spend less time with engineers. This seems to be a common misconception (up there with surely the differences will only be a few percent). It’s not a good one. Because it’s ignorant of reality.

Believe what you will. All good. I’m just going into to this eyes open. I’d recommend folks take a step back and have a bit of a think.

Fly safe.
 

Red Anders

Red Anders
CMDR Arguendo said:
Remember that you can only store 100 at a time with the new system. That means you can get 2-two-Grade 3 materials between each time you go to the materials trader. Now calculate how many times you have to visit that materials trader to get one Grade 5 material. It's not all sunshine and roses ;)
Click to expand...

I didn't see the stream but you know what? I knew that the material broker requirements for trading upwards would be utterly insane because it's abundantly clear that the very first golden unbreakable rule for engineering is 'it must take a lot of time'. If anybody is now going to say 'oh wait to see if it's more reasonable in the beta' lol OK - bookmark this post.

I mean given that you're still at the total mercy of RNG when collecting any materials, you'd think that the requirements for trading up would be sensible, say 3 x grade 1 mats for a grade 2, 4 x grade 2 mats for a grade 3, 5 x grade 3 for a grade 4 and 5 x grade 4 mats for a grade 5. Hell, go crazy and make it 10 x grade 4s for a grade 5 if the new grade 5 will be really epic. From the above though, I assume the stream showed 50 of something for a trade-up, if we're talking about getting 2 of them for a full storage allocation under the 100-per-material system?

And then Sandy said something about respecting our time, right? :x :D

subhouse07 said:
The progress is guaranteed, however the size of the increments is not. WIth this new system the RNG aspect is superfluous. Getting from G1 to G5 may take you 30 rolls or it may take 10, and you still end up with the same module at the end.
Click to expand...

Oh my days. Literally howling here. I'm not mad at all by the way, simply because I expected this. Not this specific thing, but the general enshrined concepts of 'make it take ages'. This is Elite Dangerous, it's what we do.
 
Last edited:

Kaocraft

Kaocraft
Alien said:
Wrong. Or do you not listen to Devs? (while accusing them of not listening to us)
Click to expand...
Yeah they said they wouldn't do that. They'll do it anyway, or they'll do something functionally identical, and give some kind of weasel-word explanation for how this is totally not the same thing and/or it's necessary for the continued development of the game, and YOU will be OK with that, cheer it on in fact. And you'll tell anyone who complains (or even points out the contradiction), that they are entitled idiots for ever having expected anything different. And then you'll post a screenshot of the checkout screen at the Frontier Store, showing that you're buying 3 not-exactly-loot-boxes just to Show Your Support and stick it to the haters.
 

Old Duck

Old Duck
It is almost entertaining to watch Ed realize during the livestream that about half of the player base hates the changes. It does make you wonder if they have a handle on the feedback, not just what's being said, but also how many are saying it.
 

Kaocraft

Kaocraft
Cmdr Eagleboy said:
I post a lot, because I love argue a lot. Doesn't mean I am always at home where I can play ED. Most of time, I am off somewhere else waiting for something to compile.

Horrible or not, it is there to stay.



Sure. Same thing people said with original Engineers.

Ohhh, wait still no MT or loot boxes around. Must be they just disagree with min maxers. But how could they, min maxers are those who usually win devs.

:D
Click to expand...

Be patient. Game Development Is Hard. These things take time. Just because it's not here yet, and no announcement has been made doesn't mean it's not coming. It'll come around the same time as Space Legs.
 

babelfisch

babelfisch
Kaocraft said:
Yeah they said they wouldn't do that. They'll do it anyway, or they'll do something functionally identical, and give some kind of weasel-word explanation for how this is totally not the same thing and/or it's necessary for the continued development of the game, and YOU will be OK with that, cheer it on in fact. And you'll tell anyone who complains (or even points out the contradiction), that they are entitled idiots for ever having expected anything different. And then you'll post a screenshot of the checkout screen at the Frontier Store, showing that you're buying 3 not-exactly-loot-boxes just to Show Your Support and stick it to the haters.
Click to expand...

What happens when it turns out that you are wrong? Are you going to eat your socks?

Old Duck said:
It is almost entertaining to watch Ed realize during the livestream that about half of the player base hates the changes. It does make you wonder if they have a handle on the feedback, not just what's being said, but also how many are saying it.
Click to expand...

By many, you mean the 5 people who complained about it so far?
 

mamsa

M
I haven't read the whole thread so sorry if I repeat something.

So, with the new system, it takes 5 rolls to go from G1 to G2. With the old one it takes 3 if I'm not mistaken. How is that better?
So you take away RNG from the results but tack them on the number of rolls instead?
What you are doing is possibly (most likely) shifting the grind from engineer rolls to material gathering.
How are the people who haven't tried Engineers going to benefit from that? Why would they try the new system when it's even more grindy than the current?

Do materials drop more often and in more abundance?

The way I see it, the bottomline is, the new system will be easier on the top-tier PVPers who don't have to roll 14000 times for a God roll but everyone else looses.
Because everyone else will have to gather tons more mats and roll tons more.
Not only that, the way the experimental effects works now, you can use a favour and pay for the mat requirement to grind it back up to G5 later. You don't have to do it instantly. But with the new system, not only do you pay for it instantly, you pay for it with additional mats, which you don't now.
 

Knightshark

Knightshark
mamsa said:
I haven't read the whole thread so sorry if I repeat something.

So, with the new system, it takes 5 rolls to go from G1 to G2. With the old one it takes 3 if I'm not mistaken. How is that better?
So you take away RNG from the results but tack them on the number of rolls instead?
What you are doing is possibly (most likely) shifting the grind from engineer rolls to material gathering.
How are the people who haven't tried Engineers going to benefit from that? Why would they try the new system when it's even more grindy than the current?

Do materials drop more often and in more abundance?

The way I see it, the bottomline is, the new system will be easier on the top-tier PVPers who don't have to roll 14000 times for a God roll but everyone else looses.
Because everyone else will have to gather tons more mats and roll tons more.
Not only that, the way the experimental effects works now, you can use a favour and pay for the mat requirement to grind it back up to G5 later. You don't have to do it instantly. But with the new system, not only do you pay for it instantly, you pay for it with additional mats, which you don't now.
Click to expand...

This is the rational conclusion you arive at when you do the math. People did the math, showed it, and discussed it. 1000++ posts read like yours (see the feedback forum) - clear and obvious. This has been pointed out for two months, yet here we are.
 

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
Arguendo
Red Anders said:
I didn't see the stream but you know what? I knew that the material broker requirements for trading upwards would be utterly insane because it's abundantly clear that the very first golden unbreakable rule for engineering is 'it must take a lot of time'. If anybody is now going to say 'oh wait to see if it's more reasonable in the beta' lol OK - bookmark this post.

I mean given that you're still at the total mercy of RNG when collecting any materials, you'd think that the requirements for trading up would be sensible, say 3 x grade 1 mats for a grade 2, 4 x grade 2 mats for a grade 3, 5 x grade 3 for a grade 4 and 5 x grade 4 mats for a grade 5. Hell, go crazy and make it 10 x grade 4s for a grade 5 if the new grade 5 will be really epic. From the above though, I assume the stream showed 50 of something for a trade-up, if we're talking about getting 2 of them for a full storage allocation under the 100-per-material system?

And then Sandy said something about respecting our time, right? :x :D
Click to expand...
To clarify, the stream shows that it will cost 6 of one material to buy 1 of the grade above. Going from Grade 1 to Grade 3 will therefore take 36 materials. With a limit of 100 mats per type, that means you will only have enough to make 2 Grade3 materials at a time, before you gotta restock on G1 materials. Then comes the conversion from G3 to G4 and finally G5.
It will take 1296 G1 mats to make 1 G5 mat, so converting from G1 to G5 is pretty hefty. It's pretty clear that the Mats Trader wasn't meant for that in its current iteration.

Sorry if the G1 - G3 wasn't clear.
 

CMDR Carbo

CMDR Carbo
Old Duck said:
It is almost entertaining to watch Ed realize during the livestream that about half of the player base hates the changes. It does make you wonder if they have a handle on the feedback, not just what's being said, but also how many are saying it.
Click to expand...

Lol, I even think he realized that he hates the new system too.

Was funny to see his disappointment when he rolled that G2 mod and the bar moved for hardly 1% :D
 
Last edited:

sb413197

S
As long as the dirty drives and distributors don't fall into this, I'll be ok. If "god rolled" drives and distributors are stronger BEFORE the update (i.e. no longer obtainable), I will be really really mad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom