This sounds pretty cool to me...though in fact being able to terraform planets is something I'd like to able to do outside of CGs at some point. 'Course, that would kind of throw realism a little out the window because even with 3300 tech, and I think according to lore?, it still takes a good long while to do...as in years and years.
The Mission Board - Single Server or not, its a flop.
- Thread starter Chaparral
- Start date
This sounds pretty cool to me...though in fact being able to terraform planets is something I'd like to able to do outside of CGs at some point. 'Course, that would kind of throw realism a little out the window because even with 3300 tech, and I think according to lore?, it still takes a good long while to do...as in years and years.
At the risk of going slightly off topic, my real hope for the Single Server mission board is that they'll enforce some rules of Scarcity on missions. In other words, Missions are there until someone takes them, and then they're gone. Missions that are taken more frequently? Go down in payment. Missions that are taken less frequently? Go up in payment. That's a simplification of what I'm suggesting, but I think that a game, whose very foundation is based on Scarcity should also reflect it in the payment. Enough of these 2 million credit to deliver biowaste missions. Let the market pay what players are willing to take from it.
I doubt it will happen too, but... it's what should be.
4 cents now...
Would never work. What about all the players that play at different times, from different time zones? Are we do just ignore them?
Your proposal means that whomever gets to the mission board first, gets the cream of the crop.
Way too many peeps here confusing real-life with a game.
The idea of the mission board is to give a balanced set of missions to any players looking to use them as a form of earning credits, to well buy the ship they always wanted etc etc blah blah.
The problem is, the missions are completely unbalanced. Travel 1 jump for 2.5m or travel 40 for 1.3m. How is that balanced? The missions need to be balanced against risk vs reward vs time vs competency. Right now you have newbie missions spawning elite engineered targets paying pittance. While if you reroll the board, you'll get a mission that spawns a newbie ships paying 5m.
There is no balance and until that is addressed, it. will. always. be. doomed.
Agree - and if a faction has to retreat from a system or seek refuge then maybe they'd hire a commander to scan some nearby systems for possible safe harbor. Solves the POI problem, you get paid for discovering stuff and get to follow the story as well.
There's so many things that would be great if they were connected but it's so fragmented in the BGS right now.
- I have seen a number of those "blow up our enemy installations" show up.
- Photograph installations? I remember those in Silent Hunter 4 but I've never seen such a mission in ED. Did you mean "hack their data points"? THOSE are in there.
- PoW's get moved about under passenger missions. And yes, I see those as well.
- Moving food - I don't see those, but "need medicine / advanced medicines / progenitor" missions do show up.
- Has anyone ever seen a mission to protect / attack a convoy? Ever? Saw lots of that in Silent Hunter 4 - pretty hard challenge to "protect" them but was standard orders to "attack" convoys. BTW, I doubt "attack convoys" would work. They'd be in SC and each ship would have to be interdicted and dropped to sub-light.
- I do see mining missions show up but unless you want to spend a few dozen hours to do that, my personal preference is to just "source and return 400 tons of [needed items] and return them here for a nice juicy 2, 3, 4, or even 5 million credit payout.
I won't argue with you there. I do see some missions regarding subterfuge and it would be fun to see something concerning the shipping of weapons / armor / mining equipment / supplies to land bases in preparation for wars or trying to get a leg up on other factions.
They only ever show up for Anarchy factions, and that is in any state, not just war. Anarchy factions with the Criminal ethos are literally the only faction type with unique mission sets.
These were in Frontier Elite 2 and FFE. They were also pretty good fun.
And there's missions for weapons usually. But the problem is they get drowned out by the fact mission boards for war states generate too many massacre missions, on account of players mis-reporting the original problem of massacre missions not showing on the board. Note, this is not the player's fault necessarily... but players constantly bugreported "Massacre missions not appearing"... the actual problem was that the War state wasn't being picked up properly for the purposes of mission generation. FD put in a "fix" for the former to "guarantee" they'd appear on the board, by making heaps generate. But that didn't fix the actual problem. It did eventually get fixed, but the orginal bad fix never got rolled back.
It would be really nice to have a few unique mission types for Social-ethos, Corporate-ethos and Authoritarian-ethos factions.
The two non-Anarchy factions with Criminal ethos also get these missions, which makes them quite a bit more interesting.
Yes. With glide working as it does, I'm not completely sure how you'd get the same experience in Elite Dangerous. You really need the "extended normal-space approach under fire" experience.
SRV datapoint scan missions to high-security bases I guess are the equivalent, but it's not quite the same.
Where in my OP is supercruise mentioned? You are ignoring the official trailer references to professions. You're pretty much off topic and not responding to the points.
Last edited:
Just like I thought, it's pointless to discuss with you.
I am applying your argument to another area of the game to show you how it's flawed. I am very much responding to your points.
Pointless to discuss because you refuse to address the points. Responding does not = addressing points. I could say 2+2=4, and you could respond by saying "You're wrong!, my favorite cheese is yellow!"
Enjoy Mr. Fisch.
Caerphilly with mustard seeds.
You simply failed to understand my post. That's OK. I don't blame you for it.
I agree, more variation between corporate and democracies, and the other non-criminal government types would be fun.
I think it would be fun if the losing side in a war gained some criminality for the remainder of the war, potentially spawning the go destroy base power supply missions. Civil war factions always gained it (civil wars always seem to me to be the most brutal of wars, perhaps because they are frequenylu fought between non-porofessional military, but I am digressing with my explanation why). War seems a little boring/unattractive at the moment. Massacre Missions tend to encourage conflict zones, which are just farms. Mission variety would help, with a review of what counts as influence generating.
OK I am going to be unpopular here.....
I never played the camera issions in FE2. I did play them in FFE, and was somewhat meh about them. Sure it was fun trying to line up the shot whist 10+ ships shot at you, well as long as you were in the right ship! I always scouted and then attacked from low, make the launching ships take off and crash. I was never sure if this was game design or poor implementation, and I was exploiting.
Simon
Yeah ED BGS is NOT a functioning economy. Price levels do not respond to market forces as they would in player economies like Diablo (version 1), Guild Wars 2, ESO, etc. GW2 literally has an economist on staff evaluating market forces and applying moderating factors.
It is also the case that not all missions are pew pew missions.
You're hilarious. "You don't understand my bad analogy that is disconnected from your point, don't feel bad about it."
I really don't.
My analogy is as bad as your argument, that's the point.
Look, if you want more missions available everywhere that's great. I want it too. But please don't tell me that your best argument is that the game was advertised as blaze your own trail and therefore the game should offer everything you want all the time and everywhere because that's simply ridiculous.
Simply saying 'because I want it' is way better than your failed attempt at mental gymnastics.
Last edited:
![[VR] M4st0d0n](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/182/182772.jpg?1569064854){kind=avatar}
Why would it be ridiculous to have more mission types on boards fitting each playstyle? Because it compromises immersion in a realistic spacesim where transdimensionnal crab people wont deter ceremonial Belugas shipping indecisive men? Or because it would be ridiculous for FDev to start implementing now tried and true gamedesign concepts in a game launched four years ago?
I admit both are atrociously ridiculous.
Yeah, that may not work if the faction in particular that you want to support only operates in a single system.