How to fix Engineers powercreep without upsetting those who grinded for it?

Power creep means that old modules are underpowered. If you rebalance them it's no longer power creep.

Power creep does not mean old modules are underpowered, nor is it balancing differences between modules. Power creep means base statistics are globally affected in an upward, increased fashion; this results in a stronger outcome. It will also increase any existing disparity.

That is, just making everything 1.5x stronger won't solve. Oddly, rebalancing modules doesn't solve power creep, either. Granted rebalancing absolutely would help the situation. But power creep isn't solved by inter-module differences; it's solved by not escalating the global relative strength in the first place.

They are two seperate, but inter-linked issues. It's complicated, because people are usually preferentially drawn to increased power. So the natural approach is to just make everything stronger; but this only serves to increase the disparity.
 
Last edited:
Power creep does not mean old modules are underpowered, nor is it balancing differences between modules. Power creep means base statistics are globally affected in an upward, increased fashion; this results in a stronger outcome. It will also increase any existing disparity.

That is, just making everything 1.5x stronger won't solve. Oddly, rebalancing modules doesn't solve power creep, either. Granted rebalancing absolutely would help the situation. But power creep isn't solved by inter-module differences; it's solved by not escalating the global relative strength in the first place.

They are two seperate, but inter-linked issues. It's complicated, because people are usually preferentially drawn to increased power. So the natural approach is to just make everything stronger; but this only serves to increase the disparity.

I get the feeling that we are discussing semantics. I use the definition I posted earlier. The outcome would be the same though.
power creep

(collectible games, video games, role-playing games) The situation where updates to a game introduce more powerful units or abilities, leaving the older ones underpowered.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/power_creep
 
How to fix Engineers powercreep without upsetting those who grinded for it?

It's actually quite simple and I wonder why I haven't thought about it earlier (probably because I don't really care):

Just increase all ships base stats by something like 1.5 times. Make them faster, more maneuverable, let them jump further, make them harder, increase weapon damage etc. Tweak Engineers modifiers so that engineered ships perform the same like they do know.
Nobody can complain: Everyone gets better base ships, including NPCs and Engineered ships don't get something taken away from them, it just makes the gap smaller.

Thoughts?

PS
That's only relevant if you want to fix power creep. If you think everything is well that's fair too.

I would definitely be up for that.

I had a similar thought about increasing the downsides to modules so you couldnt have all G5 all the time, you would have to pick and choose one or two things on your ship to focus on, and not engineer anything else, or engineer everything as a G1-2, but not get the bigger bonuses. So you'd have to choose between specific and general bonuses.

This would be much harder to balance though as not all G5s are created equal, so I actually like your idea better. Makes sense with the game's lore too, once tech is acquired it inevitably works its way down to the purchasable mass market. So 'guardian' tech becomes normal, and the new 'guardian' engineering tweaks take it up to old modules G5 equivalent.

it would still need some tweaks I think, as shield strength even with everyone on a level (ish) field is insane, but that's only nerfing one thing at least, not everything!

The 1st two aren't arguments at all. The 3rd makes sense. If you do all that engineering it's because the advertised benefit is desirable to you. Everyone has the freedom (maybe not the time though) to do exactly as anyone else does where engineering is concerned. So nerfing the high end benefits just cheats the most dedicated of players out of their payoffs. I feel like you've added your own hyperbole to it to sensationalize the actual take. I doubt anyone said "I want to have a huge benefit over..." Instead I'd move more toward the middle and say "I want what I worked for, which is a power differential between me and low end ships of the same type"

If FDev doesn't want the "power creep" they shouldn't work so hard to institute it, but nothing makes me shelve a game faster than developers who move the goalposts time and again, and make all your in game efforts amount to nothing more than someone who did less than half of what you did. I can imagine some of the hard core traders feel this way about passenger missions, and explorers about sightseeing missions. Now if you take the Nth degree engineered ship owners and force them into a lower rated version of their ship, that's not going to solve the underlying issues.

Well, if ED is going to be pushed as an MMO, which many engineers grinders seem to be in favour of (certainly few single player RPers who dont grind engineers are in favour that I've seen), then those same grinders (PVE or PVP) should be prepared to have their 'hard earned' advantages wiped out every so often. See every MMO ever.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused.

I'm not even sure that buffing a ship's "base stat's" would significantly improve things like speed 'cos I would have thought that's down to the thrusters but, for the sake of discussion, let's say it does.

If you buff the ship's stat's, the people who've got god-rolled modules would still retain the same advantage over everybody else.
 
I'm confused.

I'm not even sure that buffing a ship's "base stat's" would significantly improve things like speed 'cos I would have thought that's down to the thrusters but, for the sake of discussion, let's say it does.

If you buff the ship's stat's, the people who've got god-rolled modules would still retain the same advantage over everybody else.

You buff the old modules, not ships (or replace entirely with new 'guardian' versions at G3 equiv)
You tweak engineering down so the G5 results are the same stats/power level as before the changes, resulting in a smaller increase through engineers from base ships. (or introduce 'engineering' for the new guardian modules that maxes out at the stats of the old modules G5, same result)

Engineering results would not stay the same, you haven't quite understood the proposal. The end result G5 stats would remain the same. That is all.
 
I'm confused.

I'm not even sure that buffing a ship's "base stat's" would significantly improve things like speed 'cos I would have thought that's down to the thrusters but, for the sake of discussion, let's say it does.

If you buff the ship's stat's, the people who've got god-rolled modules would still retain the same advantage over everybody else.

Doesn't matter, I just said buff ships for the sake of simplicity. It's about the general idea rather than implementation.

You buff the old modules, not ships (or replace entirely with new 'guardian' versions at G3 equiv)
You tweak engineering down so the G5 results are the same stats/power level as before the changes, resulting in a smaller increase through engineers from base ships. (or introduce 'engineering' for the new guardian modules that maxes out at the stats of the old modules G5, same result)

Engineering results would not stay the same, you haven't quite understood the proposal. The end result G5 stats would remain the same. That is all.

This guy gets it.
 
I get the feeling that we are discussing semantics. I use the definition I posted earlier. The outcome would be the same though.


https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/power_creep

Great citation - but what does it mean?

You need to take in account the consequences and the overall effects on the whole system. If you just buff everything why did you introduce more powerful stuff in the first place? You'll always run in a circle of constantly rebalancing old vs new if you keep power creeping. Or you just don't give a damn, like in ED and let the players who don't comply to crap they don't want to eat. As long as enough gullible players believe in their trip to more power you'll do fine.
Eventually you'll end up with huge dispüarities not only between players but also between AI - because they became too trivial.
 
Must say I'm not keen on anymore engineer changes unless they finally agree to auto-convert god-mods. Otherwise they are still allowing a unfair advantage to a select few.
 
Last edited:
Great citation - but what does it mean?

You need to take in account the consequences and the overall effects on the whole system. If you just buff everything why did you introduce more powerful stuff in the first place? You'll always run in a circle of constantly rebalancing old vs new if you keep power creeping. Or you just don't give a damn, like in ED and let the players who don't comply to crap they don't want to eat. As long as enough gullible players believe in their trip to more power you'll do fine.
Eventually you'll end up with huge dispüarities not only between players but also between AI - because they became too trivial.
The current engineering benefits aren't what FDEV initially intended. What we have know as the top level which everyone has or wants to achieve just exists because FDEV didn't want to take stuff away from those who grinded for god rolls. FDEV was forced to make the modifications as powerful as they are, it basically wasn't their decision or design goal.
 
The current engineering benefits aren't what FDEV initially intended. What we have know as the top level which everyone has or wants to achieve just exists because FDEV didn't want to take stuff away from those who grinded for god rolls. FDEV was forced to make the modifications as powerful as they are, it basically wasn't their decision or design goal.
True, but given the new levels are not exactly a mile away from the previous ones, surely we're not far from where their design goal intended us to be?

Now, how good that position is for the game is another discussion, but we are where FD wants us to be. ie: Worse case Engineers V2 could have rejigged everything to any new level for the betterment of the game.
 
True, but given the new levels are not exactly a mile away from the previous ones, surely we're not far from where their design goal intended us to be?

Now, how good that position is for the game is another discussion, but we are where FD wants us to be. ie: Worse case Engineers V2 could have rejigged everything to any new level for the betterment of the game.

I remember many people saying that G5 ranks post 3.0 are way better than the average G5 roll pre 3.0. I have to admit that I am no expert on the topic though and can only refer to what I gathered from the discussions during beta.
 
Replace entirely with new 'guardian' versions at G3 equiv.
You tweak engineering down so the G5 results are the same stats/power level as before the changes, resulting in a smaller increase through engineers from base ships. (or introduce 'engineering' for the new guardian modules that maxes out at the stats of the old modules G5, same result)

Engineering results would not stay the same, you haven't quite understood the proposal. The end result G5 stats would remain the same. That is all.

This was my idea right at the beginning. So eventually all ships will come with guardian modules as standard and the engineered versions are either slightly better then the current G5 or the same area. Then the powercreep is effectively reduced.

Maybe they will get rid of the A-E grades for a lot of modules and any updates are done via engineers from then on. You want a lightweight module for exploration, go to an engineer it to make it like that. Simplifies it too for newer players.
 
Last edited:
I remember many people saying that G5 ranks post 3.0 are way better than the average G5 roll pre 3.0. I have to admit that I am no expert on the topic though and can only refer to what I gathered from the discussions during beta.

Me neither, especially as I've not even really played since 3.0 :)

I think basically the new top V2 G5 roll is basically as around as good/better than a previous God V1 G5 roll... So maybe for your average CMDR it might be better, but it's not a mile away from where it could have been before.

All said and done, IMHO Engineers V2 just a bit more overpowered than the V1 overpowered unbalanced mechanics... And FD have control over all this, so it's all by their doing/design IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Up with the floor and down with the ceiling would both help. Anything that reduces the gap would make the game better.
 
The current engineering benefits aren't what FDEV initially intended. What we have know as the top level which everyone has or wants to achieve just exists because FDEV didn't want to take stuff away from those who grinded for god rolls. FDEV was forced to make the modifications as powerful as they are, it basically wasn't their decision or design goal.

The engineering benefits were designed to be unbalanced from 2.1 on. Power creep went into effect then. The rework introduced more but that isn't the point of the underlying problem, just a symptom.
 
I fully engineered a new python and a new corvette just before the change and while it was considerably more work for on-average worse mods than availabe now; I did end up with approx 5-6 god-mods ( mainly shield mods ) which are not available today. I also engineered a bucket load of weapons and some of those eg PA's and some multi-bonuses cannot be fully replicated under the new system.
 
I fully engineered a new python and a new corvette just before the change and while it was considerably more work for on-average worse mods than availabe now; I did end up with approx 5-6 god-mods ( mainly shield mods ) which are not available today. I also engineered a bucket load of weapons and some of those eg PA's and some multi-bonuses cannot be fully replicated under the new system.

Handy to know... So you have some V1 Engineered stuff that cannot be matched by V2 rolls?
 
Yes as do many, generally the new stuff is better, but only get a set 'upgrade path' with exactly the same two or 3 stats that get the bonus, whereas with the old 1.o sys you could get like up to 5 sympathetic bonuses on a single mod.
So even if two or 3 of those bonuses weren't quite as good as todays the fact that 5 synergised together made a better all-round modification. Without looking in game I seem to recall it happened most for me on defensive mods shield/hull but I did get a few on weapons as well.

Edit; sort of re-hashing a lost argument here but this is the thread that really opened my eyes on what the haves/have nots lotto grandfathering delivered; https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/366176-OK-so-post-your-god-rolls, stuff like +66% shield boosters in there with a bonus secondary, current max, with special is +43%
 
Last edited:
Doesn't matter, I just said buff ships for the sake of simplicity. It's about the general idea rather than implementation.

I don't see how it'll accomplish anything.

In fact, it seems like the only thing it would accomplish is to escalate the "power creep" you seem to want to reduce.

If it's possible to buff a ship's stat's so that it's 1.2x faster with any given thruster, for example, then everybody in an un-engineered ship might be happy with that but all the NPCs ships will be 1.2x faster too, and all the people with engineered thrusters will be 1.2x faster as well.

Net result: no change.
 
Back
Top Bottom