Who,with a mentally stable mind and healthy life priorities, would want to do that though?
Honestly?
Beyond did literally nothing to help the grind.
- Thread starter Darty
- Start date
Who,with a mentally stable mind and healthy life priorities, would want to do that though?
Honestly?
Refining the definition to some other word won't do. Of course it's gameplay. It's just not FUN gameplay to some.
It's also a perfect example how to ruin a game by introducing new "gameplay".
It's also an example how an always online game can screw you because you're stuck with any new "gameplay" being introduced, even if you don't like it. In SP I'd simply mod it or cheat around it.
Then again I hear the publisher are all horny about live services and have begun selling cheats and mods as microtransaction, so we'll probably have to pay for tweaking our games in the future.
To improve the modules? Or was this a rhetorical question?
Good one, Man.
Tbh the whole argument could be put to bed if players were allowed to either buy or sell themselves mats they find in game, it opens up a new career path for people, people with money can buy what they want (like in real life, people!!!!) people with spare mats can either trade or sell them. As it is regardless of intent the whole thing is a poorly designed grind mechanic. I had to spend literally 4 hours yesterday collecting all the mats I needed just to upgrade a single module on a single ship.... because for some reason the engineer can't go straight to level 5 any more but has to start from level 1 again.
You can get any material you need at a material trader.
Call it beaurocracy. There's tons in the real world. The romans had it and no reason to think it won't still exist, in the 33rd century. Calling is a gamplay loop deconstructs the game. Forget it .. to achieve stuff you have to do, stuff. Way of the world.
Ah I see now. You're just completely ignoring any comment about the material trader exchange ratios. Glad we cleared that up.
Yes it should. I am not a fan of USS's in general either and think there should be a better system. Whether it is a mix of static USS's and then throw in the odd random one or a completely different system, but something needs to be done with them and how we get materials from them.
Personally I find the ratios are okay as long as you only use them for edge case scenarios. I don't think they are meant to be a replacement of the search for materials.
Last edited:
In any case they aren't a replacement since you need materials to trade for other materials.
Agree they are not meant as a replacement. But if youve accumalated a lot of aterials over the year as i have, you pretty much can. For a few modules at least.
I agree with one of your points but not the other.
Hardly anyone I know or have even heard of in PvP ever got more than two ships up to really serious spec in 2.1-2.4. Frankly, for most of us it was more like one-and-a-half ships. And I'm talking about guys with half of their 3,000+ hours in game invested in RNGineering.
Hence, I agree that most PvP-ers don't have huge fleets of ships to upgrade and any complainants from the PvP community are indeed a minority within a minority.
However, I must go on strongly to disagree that any significant proportion of the complaints are coming from PvP-ers. I can think of one guy - an outlier - who complained in Beta, then stopped. That's one out of several hundred regulars. Show me a guy who under 2.1 achieved a large fleet of seriously specced ships and I will show you a guy who is by no means 100% PvP. Because basically at that point you're showing me a guy who's into diverse PvE upgrading.
Serious PvP-ers are almost universally mono-maniacal about achieving the best mode of destruction; because under 2.1 no time could ever be enough time to do that on one or two ships, they couldn't do it for more than that; hated 2.1; have already maxed their preferred ship or are getting there; and have a mood best described as 'vindicated', 'triumphant' and perhaps even 'smug'.
Idk man, personally I wouldn't but who am I to judge another's hobby - and a facet of a shared hobby, at that...?
Put another way, if I wasn't into PvP then in my 2100 hours in game I guess I probably could have done all kinds of other stuff. Others have. I respect that.
This I think is the real problem with the choke-points. I haven't yet fallen victim to them myself, but the Materials Trader offers no way to circumvent them. (In respect of manufactured and data mats, that is - in respect of elements, they can be force-refreshed at g5 with sufficient speed to make any trade work.)
But in respect of manufactured and data, because there's no effective way of force-refreshing g5, you're left with trading up from g4 at 6-1 or trading across from g4 at 36-1. Neither really overcome the choke-point and generally, however unsatisfactory, direct pursuit of the needed g5 will still be quicker, albeit 'quick' may not be my best choice of word, there...
Last edited:
Ive been playing elite for over 3 years and have never, ever met anyone Who even owned 10 ships. Let alone own AND engineer 31....
Anyway, i respect your post and I appreciate the effort you put into the wording of it, but im sticking to my guns here and assuming that there is currently no one, and i mean no one, in Elite, worried about re engineering 31 ships. And if there is? I think its ok to form an opinion in this case...
Last edited:
Therefore they don't exist amirite?
Your opinion calls others mentally unhealthy and guilty of having life priorities you don't agree with. Pretty despicable as far as arguing goes.
Last edited:
Spotted in the wild (see cmdr AstirTII's fleet):
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/334612-Your-Fleet
I have about 10-12 fully engineered G5 ships myself, with a few waiting for me to start on them (they’re going to be waiting a while now
). Some of us just like the process outfitting and engineering ships for specific tasks, experimenting with different combinations and trade-offs, teasing out the best builds that we can etc.
Last edited:
His point being that the number of such players can likely be counted on one hand. Therefore they constitute such a tiny minority of the community as a whole as to not have enough skin in the game to expect to be an influence on how the engineering system was designed or functions for 99.99999% of the community.
As this thread continues down the same utterly clueless path it was taking the last time I checked in, all I can say is WOW! The disconnect here between how the new system is designed to be used, and how so many in this thread are oblivious to that blatantly obvious use is amazing to witness.
As so many who have already finished engineering all of their fleets using the new system keep saying to the clueless...
Go out and collect G5 mats and data! Since you didn't bother to use your time wisely in the weeks leading up to the 3.0 release, (likely spending it instead complaining on here about the impending grind of the new system) where you could stockpile 150 to 200+ of the most valuable G5 mats and data based on what was revealed by playing the Beta, you now have to work within the 100 cap, but that is still plenty to flesh out all the other lower grade mats you need for most engineering tasks.
Last edited:
Sidewinder, Viper III, Viper IV, Asp X, Vulture, Type 6, Haulers, FAS, Cobra III, Python - hm - that's from the top of my head. The ships I have. I even had more but I sold courier, Diamondback and stuff. That's 10 ships easily assembled with some time put into it and "normal" gameplay.
Count the module slots and the rolls rquired yourselves - I won't bother with it.
Count the module slots and the rolls rquired yourselves - I won't bother with it.
About 80% of the time I use my Vulture and my FAS, but I also have an FDL just in case, a DBX for travelling, an FGS and a Keelback for the fighters, a Sidey and an Eagle for the fun of the ridiculous agility, and now a Chieftain because why not. A grand total of 9 ships, all engineered to the teeth, with the obvious exception of the last one. Ah, and I'd like a Courier, too.
These are a heck of a lot of modules to grind G5 materials for, and still I can call myself a lucky guy, since I happen to dislike large ships...
So in short you're another one who is either incapable of reading the first two lines of the first post, or simply chose not to. Cheers for self-identifying.
To recap, by far the most significant grind (and most significant waste of time on pure RNG-based bran tub gaming) in engineering material collection to begin with is exactly the thing you are saying people should do - subject themselves to the multi-layered RNG that determines whether you can collect the G5 materials that require endless HGE USS hunting to begin with.
Everybody knows that you can trade down for pretty favourable rates. That does not make one scrap of difference when what is needed are specific G5 materials. As I posted a page or two back, I spent around an hour and 45 minutes last night on that, searching for a single material type and did not get a single HGE spawn. Not one, in over an hour and a half of flying around in supercruise 'enjoying' the mind-numbing tedium that has been the hallmark of G5 material collection since day one. It beggars belief that this is considered gameplay.
That is the one aspect of engineering that the material brokers could have ended forever. As it is, the upward exchange rates are so punitive that the amount of time needed to collect enough materials to trade up for the average 10 G5 materials needed to max out a single module on a single ship renders the task just as terrible regardless of which of the two options you choose.
It's not that people are too thick to understand how the system is intended to be used. It's that using it that way does nothing significant to alleviate the worst of the utterly bunk gameplay because the gameplay in question is the very collection of G5 materials that a players needs to do in order to trade down to begin with, or indeed to actually obtain some of the G5 materials that they need to actually use. People are saying that this was where material traders could and should have made some really significant improvements but have actually made none.
Trade-across rates at G5 to G5 are also bunk when you need to trade two full drops of one G5 material to obtain a single unit of another.
Perhaps you could now stop throwing your army of strawmen into battle, although I very much doubt it.
As I've already said to another player, if it's working well for you that's great but it doesn't mean that someone who doesn't share your enthusiasm is stupid, entitled,, clueless, or any other insulting term that you may wish to employ. Frankly if that's the extent of your contribution I'd suggest we can probably get by without it.