Deleted member 110222
D
I for one am glad that everyone is now the same. It's the ultimate form of balance.
XX Reasons Engineering 3.0 Is Horrible & Needs To Be Fixed.
- Thread starter feelsickened
- Start date
You actually came to a forum for a good read? Bahaha I've got a spare copy of the catcher in the rye if you're in need?
+1 for me on this. I like the new engineering much better than the old. I also like the materials trader system as well.
Who left all this salt all over the floor? Anyone got a broom?
Might agree not sure with some of it, not sure, a little offensive wall of text is what I scan read. Despite bolding "helpful/constructive", it seemed just like a list of things the OP did not like, with blame of either outsourced programmers or Sandro, with a lazy or two thrown in. Well that is what I picked up. IT was quite a substantial post, so clearly OP feels strongly, just do not understand the need to turn every point into an attack on someone, blame culture much?
Still I think the OP might be able to put a solid attempt together for a decent rant, given based on the post.
I quite like the engineering in 3.0. Done the engines and defensive stuff on my Python to grade 5, so much easier to do with pinned recipes. T-9 next, or possibly the Vulture - upgrade the old engineered modules, if I succeed in starting the war I am planning. I have to fit engineering in to other activities I want to do in ED, with very little time at the moment, so 3.0 method suits me down to the ground. I was a backer of pinning all the levels of a recipe back in beta, so glad that - as community feedback made it in. Perhaps because it was put forward as helpful/constructive posts.
I have used the data and manufactured material traders, they are useful as I have one of everything now, so I have clues from the description, how to go get more. I only use in-game tools, so I found them essential to get the description of each material. YMMV by use of external tools and playstyle.
Cheers
Simon
Still I think the OP might be able to put a solid attempt together for a decent rant, given based on the post.
I quite like the engineering in 3.0. Done the engines and defensive stuff on my Python to grade 5, so much easier to do with pinned recipes. T-9 next, or possibly the Vulture - upgrade the old engineered modules, if I succeed in starting the war I am planning. I have to fit engineering in to other activities I want to do in ED, with very little time at the moment, so 3.0 method suits me down to the ground. I was a backer of pinning all the levels of a recipe back in beta, so glad that - as community feedback made it in. Perhaps because it was put forward as helpful/constructive posts.
I have used the data and manufactured material traders, they are useful as I have one of everything now, so I have clues from the description, how to go get more. I only use in-game tools, so I found them essential to get the description of each material. YMMV by use of external tools and playstyle.
Cheers
Simon
Sorry, but I must disagree with all your points, albeit with minor caveats.
1) Your claim assumes two things, falsely. That all players will max out each grade before going on to the next, & that players won't implement any experimental effects (and FDev have indicated that more Experimental Effects will be coming in later Chapters). Now the Caveat is that I would like to be able to "Call in a Favour" to tweak 1 or 2 specific Stats on an Upgrade (like Mass, or DPS, or Heat).
2) Again you wrongly assume that everyone will sit & max out all their modules in a single sitting. Now if that is how you want to do it, then fine.....but don't blame the game for how grindy that feels. You also ignore the fact that your current Rank impacts how quickly you progress through the lower grades. Again, though, if we had a more dynamic ranking system (Calling in Favours), this complaint would have even less resonance.
3) Completely wrong. I love the Material Traders. Best thing they have added so far in relation to Engineering. Again, the Caveat is that they need to tweak exchange rates, & we should be able to "Call in a Favour" with Factions to alter our Material or Commodity Rewards.....but that is about it.
4) Really? I played for over 2 hours last night......& I spent less than 20 minutes of that time collecting materials. Yet in that time I managed to collect over 2 dozen materials with ease......even one I'd never collected before(Chemical Storage Units).
5) Once again you choose to speak for "the many", even though you have no clue if you actually are. Changes made to the DSS back in 2016, coupled with changes to planetary surfaces in 3.0, & likely changes in Q4, are very likely to make the collection of raw materials significantly less random, & I also suspect that Q4 improvements will make collection of other materials less random too. The presence of traders & the new mission pay-out system also helps to reduce the randomness.
Now, if you'd instead told us about how the ranking system is too heavily dependant on crafting, & how rank has no impact beyond what grade of Upgrade you can access.....then you might have had a point. Also, your final comment just reveals what a troll you are.....however much you claim to speak for "the majority".
Last edited:
I have just two modules ranked up to g5. That is on purpose, I just don't need, nor want, to put that much effort in. I can wreck the NPC's with my g2/3's I have over all.
Of the two I did rank up, I did just to see what it took to get there. My PP I brought all of the way to max g5. From 75% g3, it took eleven rolls to max it out. The last few rolls felt a little laborious. But, I feel it should be that way getting the very last out of the process. I brought my FSD up to 66% max g5 from max g3 in five rolls.
I had predetermined that for this test I would limit myself to just two g5 rolls, to see where that got me. In contrast to pushing all of the way to the maximum. Getting two thirds of the way through g5 was genuinely gratifying. That put my aChief at a 27+ Ly jump range. Which I feel is excellent.
I was ranked to t5 with the Engineers in question. Now, I know everyone's mileage will vary, and I only pressed through with two modules, but I think it is illuminating none the less. Done in reasonable doses, the new Engineers is a vast improvement.
None of the above even considers how much easier the Mats Traders has made things. Without the Traders, I could never have come anywhere close, in fact I hadn't before, to gaining g5 on any module.
As something of a post script, every module on my aChief was engineered from scratch. No legacy mods were damaged in the production of my aChief. All in all, the improvements to the Engineers have been great
Of the two I did rank up, I did just to see what it took to get there. My PP I brought all of the way to max g5. From 75% g3, it took eleven rolls to max it out. The last few rolls felt a little laborious. But, I feel it should be that way getting the very last out of the process. I brought my FSD up to 66% max g5 from max g3 in five rolls.
I had predetermined that for this test I would limit myself to just two g5 rolls, to see where that got me. In contrast to pushing all of the way to the maximum. Getting two thirds of the way through g5 was genuinely gratifying. That put my aChief at a 27+ Ly jump range. Which I feel is excellent.
I was ranked to t5 with the Engineers in question. Now, I know everyone's mileage will vary, and I only pressed through with two modules, but I think it is illuminating none the less. Done in reasonable doses, the new Engineers is a vast improvement.
None of the above even considers how much easier the Mats Traders has made things. Without the Traders, I could never have come anywhere close, in fact I hadn't before, to gaining g5 on any module.
As something of a post script, every module on my aChief was engineered from scratch. No legacy mods were damaged in the production of my aChief. All in all, the improvements to the Engineers have been great
Last edited:
I think it's better now than it was. The problem is , as I see it, that engineering should be a side-activity. Not the 'game's' main focus.
I think, despite what others may say, FD have made engineering the main focus for now - whether one wants to argue that it's entirely 'optional' or not.
I think, despite what others may say, FD have made engineering the main focus for now - whether one wants to argue that it's entirely 'optional' or not.
Last edited:
I realy like the new engineers and imho I think gathering materials has become a lot easier.
I do still think that 6 for 1 at the broker is steep though.
I do still think that 6 for 1 at the broker is steep though.
verminstar
Banned
I was a critic of the old engineers having more or less ignored them since their introduction, and always said I would never be bothered unless it changed. Guess what...it changed and so did I...Im now about two thirds the way through unlocking all of them and is best described as a work in progress.
Im not entirely sure I would agree with just about any of yer points and just add that I really was a stuck in the mud hardliner when it came to ignoring them, so if I can be converted, well then Sandro must have done something right considering that was their original intention...enticing more players to get involved as it appears Im not the only one who just couldnt be bothered in the past ^
Im not entirely sure I would agree with just about any of yer points and just add that I really was a stuck in the mud hardliner when it came to ignoring them, so if I can be converted, well then Sandro must have done something right considering that was their original intention...enticing more players to get involved as it appears Im not the only one who just couldnt be bothered in the past ^
Results are better, material trade is cool. improved limits on storage of material good.
But I have level 5s already... Not happy I have to downgrade to 4 to upgrade
To get back to my starting position I use 5 or 6 rolls. Waist of time and mats.
It would have been nice to start where it was, and remove any secondary effects the old engineer engine created.
Then I would only need 2 rolls to max out a module. Which was nearly at the max when I started
But I have level 5s already... Not happy I have to downgrade to 4 to upgrade
To get back to my starting position I use 5 or 6 rolls. Waist of time and mats.
It would have been nice to start where it was, and remove any secondary effects the old engineer engine created.
Then I would only need 2 rolls to max out a module. Which was nearly at the max when I started
Last edited:
Dear feelsickened,
I suppose you feel sickened.
Shame - can I haz ur stuff?
I suppose you feel sickened.
Shame - can I haz ur stuff?
didn't read whole thread... all I can see from what I've read so far is "meh, my ship is not gonna be unique, I can't have a better ship than my enemy/opponent thanks to RNGesus..." well, finally we go the way it was intended: wining a dogfight is no luck-based thing, but rather skill based.
thanks FD
thanks FD
I think there should be more reasons to have mods that aren't always maxed out due to the tradeoff involved. For example, before I had a level 1 low emissions power plant. I needed the heat reduction, but if I took more than level 1 I would have had a power loss issue with my given loadout.
For the record, I disagree with all your points.
So do I. Having a level playing field is a principle of fair play. I'm very pleased to see RNG removed from the end results. I would like it removed from the rolls as well. Engineering is a scientific process, not RNG!
You lost me on the bit about experimental effects which can be done at just about any point in a mod, and applying experimental effects is now awesome, so I don't know what you're on about there...However your main point above is what??? Are you going to drag a corvette with essentially no jump range to somewhere 190LY away to only half engineer the FSD? What on earth are you talking about? Of course players go to engineers to max out a module. That's engineering. The engineers are almost/seemingly deliberately spaced out so you want to go to them prepared, once, and MAX out a specific module at that one place, so as to not completely waste your time/effort. There would be an exception in cases where a player doesn't have all engineers unlocked and wants to MAX out as far as they can (less than grade 5) with that particular engineer. Fine. Not really on point in the grand scheme of things though. And remote engineering provides no access to experimental effects which in almost all cases you would want, so again - you're gonna head out and make the most of your trip. Aren't you?
Yep, obviously completely wrong. Give or take the bit where you need to use them and want a better exchange rate, right? huh!
Happy for you. I've been prospecting multiple planets for raw mats, taking limpets into HazRes and Conflict Zones (painful), and sucking up literally everything since 3.0 launched. First 4 attempts to engineer anything to grade 5 were monumentally disheartening failures, when in reality I already had the materials for a reasonable number of grade 5 rolls by 2.4 standards. Clearly where part of the frustration lies. Really not convinced you're really doing that much engineering.
Now you're having a laugh. The RNG is absolute rubbish. If ObsidianAnt talks about it at length (and he does), it's clearly a problem.
Cool. It was a pretty badly worded post by admission. But at the same time, I'm not even convinced we're playing the same game. Enjoy, avoid them trolls if you spot any and fly safe cmdr o7
I would say that from grade 4 to max out 5 is awful. Just converted four overcharged MCs form legacy grade 5 and even though I was full on required materials for that after just two maxed out MCs it was obvious how stupid the process is and how much materials I spent so the two other MCs left at half.
I can't even imagine making four efficient something, since proto heat radiators, unlike MEF are not mission reward...
I have almost maxed out 6 beam laser turrets on my Conda.
The way I acquire proto heat radiators are:
1. USS in independent boom state systems with a very high population, billions if possible.
Yesterday I had a single USS drop five of them witch equals 15 radiators
2. material trader
heat vanes to proto heat radiators is worth it once you have everything ready to be upgraded to G5
I occasionally transfer materials I do not need that much/ do not need at all to radiators, too - looking at you, core dynamics composites.
3. killing trade vessels at anarchy systems
they drop heat vanes and you will not get a bounty
4. when flying through space, look at every USS you come by. There will be a few HGE's from time to time which can at the very least be traded in
5. once you have all your laser hardpoints at a high G5 state you hardly gain any advantage from additional upgrades - take your time and upgrade whenever you happen to have the necessary materials by chance - it really is not worth it. rather apply an expermental. In my case every turret has flow control.
2.5 pips in wep can keep all six of them supplied in a regular combat situation
3 pips will charge the capacitor up to max and keep heat low
4 pips = infinite supply and absolutely no heat, even when fireing a huge and large plasma accelerator in addition
*maxed out G5 charge increased A rated capacitor, of course
Seriously, this ship is a beast.
I don't even target subsystems anymore... they just get targeted and blow up in a short matter of time, no matter what.
Last edited:
Agreed. Why we all had to have our modules down graded, I don't understand...