Engineering : A compromise to prevent having to "grind" G1 --> G5 on every new module?

[PiLhEaD]

The minimum compromise that I think should be implemented is that if you have for example leveled up a powerplant with a particular engineer X to level 3, then you should be able to start from level 3 with other powerplants for other ships at that same engineer X.
If you want to level an fsd at that same engineer X, and never have done that before, then you start of course at level 1.

This is the absolute minimum imho.

Access to higher grades should be based on your reputation with engineer X. So once I've endured the pain to get to a level 5 reputation with X, then all modules for all ships should start at 5, for engineer X.

Having to start from 1 for the same module you got to 5 with previously with X is not logical, nor is it any semblance of fun. Quite how this idea passed the design approval board beggars belief.

Sorry, I hate to moan, but the new instantiation of engineers seems worse than the original.

 

[NeilF]

This is the absolute minimum imho.

Access to higher grades should be based on your reputation with engineered X. So once I've endured the pain to get to a level 5 reputation with X, then all modules for all ships should start at 5.

Having to start from 1 for the same module you got to 5 with previously with X is not logical, nor is it any semblance of fun. Quite how this idea passed the design approval board beggars belief.

Sorry, I hate to moan, but the new instantiation of engineers seems worsen than the original.

I agree, which was my super streamlined, super accessible, super friendly Engineering suggestion from year(s) ago - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...axed-not-a-contrived-quot-accounting-job-quot

But given where we are now, even on attempt two, I think if FD could at least give a compromise to at least remove some of this new painful G1->G4 grind wall (along with all the spreadsheet and micro management that entails) then that would be good. And I feel the proposal in the OP of this thread would achieve that! (ie: Simply "Cloning" any existing module you have using the "Grand Father" mechanic).

 

[PiLhEaD]

I hate to grumble on, but what worries me is that this new instantiation was considered, reviewed and approved. It makes me wonder how FDev think people (want to) enjoy their game, and it'd be interesting to hear the 'private' thoughts of the ED players in their company about this change to engineering. My worry here is that, if I worked on the game day-to-day, I'm not sure I'd play it once I got home.

Whilst I know it's impossible to please all of the people anywhere near all of the time, this isn't the first idea that FDev have come up with that has been met with a rather luke-warm reception.

To put my moan into context - I've racked up 800 hours playing ED since original beta, and broadly love how it makes me feel like some insignificant mote afloat in a galaxy, the size of which I really can't comprehend - so I say all this as a big fan and LEP'r.

 

[Redomus]

I like the new system, it means that instead of wasting 10 hours searching high grade USS and getting nothing or 10 hours and then getting a roll which is horrible I now get something better.

Plus I can swap effects on without having to re-roll a whole new weapon and play craps with engineers all over again.

Some may complain, but you already have your modules. I have some but I have given up trying to roll them to the 9th degree. This will make life a lot easier imo. So much drama on these forums - I feel like i'm turning into a bad person because I look forward to seeing the drama filled postings on here.

 

[PiLhEaD]

I like the new system... Plus I can swap effects on without having to re-roll a whole new weapon and play craps with engineers all over again...

That's a very fair point about the new system.

...I feel like i'm turning into a bad person because I look forward to seeing the drama filled postings on here...

Made me chuckle, and I'll join you on that naughty-step! [yesnod]

 

[Winterwalker]

For my part, the OP idea has merit but there would be a couple of different code issues that mean it's a refinement to the new system. Better to bed in the code changes we have and not fret too much I think because the idea of engineering being a process, rather as a pure unlock to G5, has a lot of merit I think for longevity (of interest) in the game. i would look at a 'cloning' system, possibly limited to weapons only.

I recognise people want all the stuff right away but that does not a game make. Standard modules are "unlocked" with cash, the new system is likely to be more effective in maintaining variation between ship builds that the original engineering system did not maintain. Reaching a stage where I always know that I can beat every sidewinder I meet but will lose to every eagle, is extremely boring.

 

[maboleth]

You know when you've been Sandroed.

 

[NeilF]

I hate to grumble on, but what worries me is that this new instantiation was considered, reviewed and approved. It makes me wonder how FDev think people (want to) enjoy their game, and it'd be interesting to hear the 'private' thoughts of the ED players in their company about this change to engineering. My worry here is that, if I worked on the game day-to-day, I'm not sure I'd play it once I got home.

Whilst I know it's impossible to please all of the people anywhere near all of the time, this isn't the first idea that FDev have come up with that has been met with a rather luke-warm reception.

To put my moan into context - I've racked up 800 hours playing ED since original beta, and broadly love how it makes me feel like some insignificant mote afloat in a galaxy, the size of which I really can't comprehend - so I say all this as a big fan and LEP'r.

But surely it's the same people/process that gave Powerplay (as it is) the green light? CQC (development time not even spent on the core game) the green light? Generation Ships the green light? Multi-crew the greenlight? etc...

Why is Engineering V2 as it stands a surprise?


Personally? I like the alteration so the upgrades are more predictable/reasonable, but that's about it...

 

[StiTch]

Sandro made it pretty obvious that he's committed to the idea of people gradually carrying out upgrades as and when they locate the required mat's.

Frankly, I think there's more chance of convincing my dog to guard a plate of sausages than there is of convincing players to upgrade their ships gradually.

...

Complete waste of time and effort developing this, I'm afraid. [sad]

When Sandy said that on the livestream, I 100% legit dropped my drink.

It's like they don't know gamers at all.

Repped for possibly the most relevant post regarding engineering changes lol.

 

[NeilF]

For my part, the OP idea has merit but there would be a couple of different code issues that mean it's a refinement to the new system. Better to bed in the code changes we have and not fret too much I think because the idea of engineering being a process, rather as a pure unlock to G5, has a lot of merit I think for longevity (of interest) in the game. i would look at a 'cloning' system, possibly limited to weapons only.

I recognise people want all the stuff right away but that does not a game make. Standard modules are "unlocked" with cash, the new system is likely to be more effective in maintaining variation between ship builds that the original engineering system did not maintain. Reaching a stage where I always know that I can beat every sidewinder I meet but will lose to every eagle, is extremely boring.

The first thing I do to any/all ships, no matter what, is G5 its FSD.

Let's consider that under my proposal? If I were fairly new to the game (say at Python stage) and finally bought an Trade Anaconda, I'd have no choice - seemingly as per FD's desire - but to then work that Anaconda's FSD up from G1->G5, as I'd have no other FSD of its size to "clone" from.

BUT, once I'd done that, and managed to G5 that Anaconda's FSD, if I then decided later I wanted to build a Battleconda? At least now, I can choose the "Clone Existing" option to top level G4 the FSD on that Battleconda from the Tradeconda (eg: Grand Father a top level G4 FSD for it).

I've already paid my dues. I had to work to level that first FSD (of that size) up from G1->G5. Am I really gaining valuable gameplay having to do the same again... and again...? Before I then go ahead and no doubt have to G1->G5 so many other areas of that ship?

So, surely a simple option to let me at least skip the G1->G4 aspect of it, if I've done that before (for the same module/size), is a reasonable feature to ask for?

 

[PiLhEaD]

But surely it's the same people/process than gave Powerplay... etc... Why is Engineering V2 as it stands a surprise?

My point precisely.

Personally? I like the alteration so the upgrades are more predictable/reasonable, but that's about it...

Agreed.

 

[NeilF]

Sandro made it pretty obvious that he's committed to the idea of people gradually carrying out upgrades as and when they locate the required mat's.

If you could actually easily hand in mats at Station towards Engineering as you play the game, that might actually be (more) possible. And it's exactly what my simplied/streamlined Engineering proposal from year(s) ago aimed to offer...

You just hand in mats in stations at anytime to in effect add to your Engineer of choice's balance... And then, fly there to spend it - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...axed-not-a-contrived-quot-accounting-job-quot

 

[Winterwalker]

Since posting above I've changed my mind.

Nobody starts ED in a FDL. I think there's a lot of interest in transferring weapons from ship to ship as you progress up the ship ranks and if you're worried about having 7 points to fill on a gunship, worry not .. you have 6 of them from the Asp that earned you the money to buy it.

I'm a -1.

 

[Macros Black]

This is my compromise that I'd be willing to accept:

• Remove the per module upgrade path. It is completely overkill. Go back as we have it now.
• Kill the Material Trader, have all Engineers supply his service. Having to fly off to find a mat trader is a waste of time.
• A 50% mat trading overhead is too steep. 15% is enough, min. 1 mat.
• Trade any material for any material, no grouping required.

When I buy a new ship, I like to engineer it as much as possible as quickly as possible for whatever role I intend for it. I usually have all the G5 mats in stock for the upgrades so the process just involves a visit to the 8-9 engineers. Sometimes I bulk update modules and store them for future use, further speeding up the process. I usually don't roll repeatedly aiming for god-rolls, 4 rolls for a good enough 5 grade is where I tend to stop.

The upgrade for a new ship in the new system will take longer to upgrade due to the excessive and specific material demands.

FD said they value our time and won't waste it. I fail to see that.

Now if you'll all please excuse me, I have some modules to upgrade and storage ships to buy.

 

[Winterwalker]

FD said they value our time and won't waste it. I fail to see that.

Now if you'll all please excuse me, I have some modules to upgrade and storage ships to buy.

Ah., but YOU'RE choosing to waste YOUR time?
---> How many of those weps can you use at once? (which ship has the most hardpoints?).

All the rest are gathering dust and - your choice of course - it's only hoarding.

 

[StiTch]

Since posting above I've changed my mind.

Nobody starts ED in a FDL. I think there's a lot of interest in transferring weapons from ship to ship as you progress up the ship ranks and if you're worried about having 7 points to fill on a gunship, worry not .. you have 6 of them from the Asp that earned you the money to buy it.

I'm a -1.

Speaking as someone that has the minimum number of each module and transfers them between ships as needed, I'd really appreciate not having to do that any more lol.

Assuming new mods have an effective cap in the form of convergence at a maximum limit, I'd feel considerably more immersed and comfortable being able to outfit each of my ships and just...get in the other ship when I want to use it, rather than playing "module manager 2018".

 

[Abomination]

If you could actually easily hand in mats at Station towards Engineering as you play the game, that might actually be (more) possible.

In other words: increase storage limit. Same result.

Also - and I warn you - this is probably a very shocking surprise to many so make sure you're sitting firmly:
(here it comes)
There are actually players out there who like gradually carrying out upgrades as part of their ongoing 'story'.
And that includes me

But storage increase? Sure.. 100 isn't enough. Far from it.
A bit smaller trade ratio? yeah, why not. A fair and probably needed compromise.

 

[Winterwalker]

Assuming new mods have an effective cap in the form of convergence at a maximum limit, I'd feel considerably more immersed and comfortable being able to outfit each of my ships and just...get in the other ship when I want to use it, rather than playing "module manager 2018".

See what you're saying but if you didn't engineer up all your weps in the old system, will (what?) a 5% increase in engineering, stop you from not doing that now? However ... if you multiply that 5% by the 100 people who play ED on a regular basis, you have 500% less need for engineered weps in the first place. In other words, on the individual level there's an up in the materials you'll need (and which you can now swap) but as a total population it puts a break on the arms race by reducing the absolute-must-have need.

Spoiler

 

[StiTch]

See what you're saying but if you didn't engineer up all your weps in the old system, will (what?) a 5% increase in engineering, stop you from not doing that now?

It's not about that - it's about finally having an effective "maximum" limit to engineering.

In the current system thanks to secondary effects it's pretty much impossible to have one "perfect" roll, let alone one for every module of every ship. I could roll 500 shield boosters and one or two of them would still be stronger than every other booster I rolled. Therefore it's sub-optimal to use anything less than the top one or two rolls I get, so I keep the top of the top modules I get and transfer them between every ship.

As the new system ditches random secondaries I'll be able to roll a module to the point it's effectively as good as it's going to get, and can then proceed to engineer a second to that standard. When I am done I could have 10 shield boosters that for all intents and purposes are the same as each other and are as good as they're gonna get, so I lose pretty much nothing having my entire fleet with their own shield boosters.

I entirely agree with you that as you progress your next ship can "inherit" the engineered modules. I don't think that will ultimately reduce the work you have to do by that much, but actually that's what I am least concerned about; if you're still progressing in the game, you shouldn't expect to have every ship instantly outfitted with top end modules.

The real kicker is when you already have a fleet and want to make them effective. To engineer the entire fleet would take a helluva lot of repetition. IMO they should reduce the progressive rolling so you only have to roll once to proceed to the next grade, or kill it entirely...if they feel the need to make the process a little less instantaneous, I'd rather they add something engaging such as reintroducing cargo requirements and make the cargo acquisition more fun.

 

[Scoob]

My suggestion, in other thread, was an attempt to reduce the additional grind the new Engineering method makes more casual players undertake for the same level of modification.

Basically, to give some back ground, I consider myself a "casual" user of Engineering. By that I mean I'll generally Engineer what I can, to the best Grade I can based on Engineers unlocked, the level they can mod things to an my materials. Usually, I'll get to an Engineer and grind a few basic upgrades, or other methods, to level them a bit. Some of these upgrades I'll even keep. Then, I'll start upgrading other modules usually just once as long as I get a roll that's "reasonable" - i.e. a decent improvement with no major upgrade-killing penalties - then I'll keep that upgrade and not touch that item again.

I have lots of items Engineered just once giving a satisfactory improvement without grinding re-rolls...and grinding more materials to generate those re-rolls. I have fun playing the game this way. Under the new Engineering, I'm going to be using MASSIVELY more materials as where I once did just one roll per item I want to Engineer, at usually the highest level the Engineer offered, I'm now going to have to do multiple grade 1 rolls, multiple grade 2 rolls etc. to get to the exact same point. I'm no longer casually Engineering. Not even close. Despite my modest expectations from Engineering, I'm going to need more than 10x the materials (at least) and spend more time in the Engineering screen. This is bloody ridiculous, and only seems to cater for those who'd obsessively grind materials and re-roll to get their ideal rolls. This is fine of course, it's just the changes appear 100% biased towards these players.

My proposal, yes, I got there eventually, was to allow us to level individual mods. For example, we can unlock an Engineer to level 5 and they'll stay there. How about we do the same for mods? I.e. I take one of my Beam Lasers and I grind to G5 Efficient Weapon for Beams once. From now on, I can apply a G5 Efficient Weapon mod to Beam Lasers directly. However, if I wanted to add say Long Range, I'm starting at G1 again. Before all upgrades were linked to the Engineers level, now we have levels by mod.

This is GOOD, as it removes massive amounts of grind - especially for more casual Engineering players who don't have a crap-tonne of materials, nor the desire to spent their potentially limited play time farming them. It also allows people to specialise in certain weapon types and mods as part of their personal narrative

I've shared this idea a number of times, perhaps I should add it to an official feedback thread. I did respond to the initial feedback thread for engineering changes, but not in quite as much detail as things weren't quite as clear then.

Scoob.