mission server - the death of ED

[EUS]

If this server is the gateway for FD to get off their collective duffs and get the missions sorted, i'm all for it.
But I don't want to wait another 4 years to be able to fulfill my in game dream of running a luxury liner (beluga) with 30 luxury spots in groups of 6s and 5s before this can happen.
I cannot get 5 luxury missions in an allied boom state system of over 2, 3, billion people.
My liner is in the top 2.8% of all liners ever, these dorks with credits to burn should be lining up to get on my boat. The verbal assault is free.

 

[Bionic Bytes]

Why is it the devs problem, or ours for that matter, that you dont have time to play?

FDev absolutely should take note of their player base and how much time players spend on average in each session/number of sessions per week. This would allow them to design content to suit their players and sell them appealing content. Your missing the point completely, I not whining about how much time I have, I'm saying it should be satisfying to play the game with the time I have and missions play a large part in that. If you ever bothered to engage in serious mining the you'd know first hand how long it takes and the penitence required. That's why I have much respect for all those who fly to Colonia and other distant places.

I am tired of that argument.

Why should any one on this forum, or any one at FDev care that your tired of 'that argument'?

 

[Vorxian]

@ Vorxian
you wrote some of the worst arguments i ever read in a game thread.

Thread brings out the best!

 

[Jex =TE=]

Well, you may think you've answered it but all I got was a lot of noise with you whining about not being given every mission you want first time.



If you think it'll help you think your way through this non-issue then sure.

What part of the answer are you struggling with?

 

[Darkfyre99]

I suspect you are in a minority, can't back this up with stats though (2.8% etc).

I, also, am a member of the minority of players who don't board flip during their play sessions. You know, the 97.2% of board users who aren't board flipping on any particular day.

 

[bitstorm]

No, it doesn't add up.

What does add up, because it's an empirical fact, is that under specific circumstances many more than 2.8% of players board-flip and that has a catastrophic effect on the mission generator and the game's stability in general.

Can you source your empirical fact please, specifically that board flipping is having a catostrophic effect on the mission generator.

I don't think I've seen Frontier say that.

 

[bitstorm]

I, also, am a member of the minority of players who don't board flip during their play sessions. You know, the 97.2% of board users who aren't board flipping on any particular day.

Weirdly I'm a member of that group too!

Odd how that works isn't it.

Was just looking at my stats, 477 crew fired, unbelievable =p :

Spoiler

 

[Bionic Bytes]

Was just looking at my stats, 477 crew fired =p :

You're ruthless! A rather lengthy industrial tribuneral waiting for you back on Sol.

 

[Vorxian]

Was just looking at my stats, 477 crew fired, unbelievable =p :

LOL Bitstorm.

Or should I say Lord Sugar !

 

[Kamiyoda]

Weirdly I'm a member of that group too!

Odd how that works isn't it.

Was just looking at my stats, 477 crew fired, unbelievable =p :

Havent seen that many layoffs since Telltale games went under

 

[Jex =TE=]

Yeah, that how it sounds like.



You mean "3.3 with static mission boards accross all game modes, refreshing once every 10min will have negative impact on the small part of playerbase that use board flipping" of course.

It's not a small part of the player base though, is it - it's 2.8% each day so that would be a concurrent figure, not a total?

 

[Sierra_Hotel]

Not reading the entire thread. OP is laughable at best.

 

[Jex =TE=]

See, this is a classic example of the sort of cognitive dissonance required to justify board-flipping.

The fundamental issue is that in both cases a game is capable of providing the player with a range of outcomes ranging from lousy to superb and it's faulty thinking for a player to assume they're entitled to a superb outcome every time.

Isn't the issue that players don't want a "superb" outcome each time just not an outcome that sucks "all" the time? The missions pretty much suck so let's not get confused here and try and make out there's anything good here. The best I think you can hope for from a "superb" roll in ED is "midly entertaining" and that's why this is a huge issue.

If it was possible to also roll "Great", "amazing", "Good", "Fine" then people wouldn't have an issue. The problem is being such a bad part of ED, the best you can hope for with a top shuffle of the cards is a pair of 5's

 

[Stealthie]

Can you source your empirical fact please, specifically that board flipping is having a catostrophic effect on the mission generator.

I don't think I've seen Frontier say that.

You understand what "empirical" means, right?
It's something that's verifiable as a result of observation and/or experience.

Anybody who's been at or around any gold-rush can verify that it creates massive, often catastrophic, failures in the mission board and leads to connection problems in the game.

Added to that, back in one of the "gold-rush megathreads" we had one of the dev's posting and they were specifically asked a couple of questions about whether gold-rushes overload the mission-generator and whether board-flipping contributes to the problems.
The answers to both questions were in the affirmative.

I'm afraid I'm not going to bother digging out the quotes so you'll just have to take my word for it unless somebody else wants to make the effort.

As I said, though, regardless of whether a dev' confirmed it or not, the empirical evidence is indisputable.

Fundamentally, it isn't a big deal if 2.8% of players board-flip regularly.
It does become a big deal when a larger percentage of players do it.
Somewhere between 2.8% of players and the percentage of players who board-flip at gold-rushes there's a tipping-point, where the mission generator can't handle the load placed on it.

That's why FDev feels the need to take this action.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I suspect you are in a minority, can't back this up with stats though (2.8% etc).

I have never board flipped either. Never seen the need for it.

 

[Vorxian]

For me board flipping is equivalent to flicking through pages on the free ads...

Not board flipping is equivalent to forcing yourself to stick to page one, until a new edition comes out a week later in hopes the ads have changed

Told you more incoming!

Ultimate solution: More content and more diverse choice within the board. Job done, issue resolved, next stamp applied.

IT IS that easy !!

 

[Mohrgan]

People seem to forget that the board flipping issue is just a side effect of the changes coming. The stated reason for the mission server change is server stability and service, not as a cure for board flipping. That just turns out to be a positive side effect. I just can't see how flipping can become a cause not to improve the game.

 

[Bionic Bytes]

Not reading the entire thread. OP is laughable at best.

So you don't read the whole thread then just wade in with your insulting comments, yet criticise others for the same.

I think we need to get some more people in here that clearly state they haven't read the thread then clearly state a point that's been made ad nauseum already.

Look in a mirror why don't you.

 

[Stealthie]

Isn't the issue that players don't want a "superb" outcome each time just not an outcome that sucks "all" the time? The missions pretty much suck so let's not get confused here and try and make out there's anything good here. The best I think you can hope for from a "superb" roll in ED is "midly entertaining" and that's why this is a huge issue.

If it was possible to also roll "Great", "amazing", "Good", "Fine" then people wouldn't have an issue. The problem is being such a bad part of ED, the best you can hope for with a top shuffle of the cards is a pair of 5's

I guess that's subjective.

Using "Smeaton" as an example, when a mission-board has 80 missions available and around 2 of them are "Smeaton runs" that suggests - to me - that it's intended to be a rare opportunity.
That being the case, if I look at the mission board and see anywhere between 1 and, say, 4 of those missions I'm going to be okay with that.

What I'm not going to do is start moaning that I've got a ship that can carry 300 passengers so I should be able to fill it up with "Smeaton run" passengers or moan that I can take 20 missions at a time so they should all be "Smeaton runs".

The fact that FDev have said that board-flipping is "undesirable behaviour" rather suggests my perception is fairly close to the mark.
If people are saying that board-flipping results in none, none, none and then 2 missions then that's probably a fairly reasonable complaint which needs addessing - make the board spawn missions more consistently.
If, OTOH, people are bleating 'cos they can't stack 20 desirable missions, or fill their ship to capacity with desirable missions, - which, make no mistake, people have whined about - then I don't think that's reasonable at all.

 

[Jex =TE=]

For me as a miner in ED to get couple (3-4) of metallic comodity mining missions I needed to board flip as those mining missions are quite rare.
With the new system it will be almost impossible to get 3-4 metallic comodity mining missions and no waiting is not an option for me.
I would be totally OK with the one mission server solution if also FD would introduce fix for generating more various missions or even IMO the best solution would be separate mission boards for trading, combat, mining, exploring... just like passenger missions are.
The one server mission solution alone is no solution. It will totally prevent some players to get their's favorable missions.

How many board flips would you have to do to get those missions?