Malfunctions: increase in chance with engineering grade to reduce power creep

[Linnunrata]

Neutron charging could be an extra dangerous way to gain extra jump range, by shields/hull degrading extra fast while overcharging the drive. A bit of uncertainty about exit point could be added too! No risk as it is, Elite not-that-Dangerous indeed.

It'd be a classic example of risk analysis then. Then you'd have to make Neutrons jump you significantly further, or people just wouldn't bother with the risk.

The essential problem here is, the current exploration is kinda combination of very low risk (it is actually very hard to die unless you do stunts like land on high G planets) and very high risk, perhaps the only steep risk in the game outside flying without rebuy (try eating a rebuy at Silentium).

 

[Sysmon]

It'd be a classic example of risk analysis then. Then you'd have to make Neutrons jump you significantly further, or people just wouldn't bother with the risk.

The essential problem here is, the current exploration is kinda combination of very low risk (it is actually very hard to die unless you do stunts like land on high G planets) and very high risk, perhaps the only steep risk in the game outside flying without rebuy (try eating a rebuy at Silentium).

Not quite. People would weigh the risk of degradation and malfunction against the reward of neutron jumping. Most would probably use it less then, and the Neutron Highway would not be a thing except for owners of ships built especially to withstand the stresses (high integrity modules, adequate shielding and so on).

Right now, one of the most glaring inconsistencies is that we flit about pew-pewing at NPCs and each other with lasers, but we are extremely resistant to the light pumped out by countless zillions of tonnes of burning hydrogen even when skimming close to it for topping up fuel.

Getting close to stars should damage shields and hulls.

S

 

[Linnunrata]

Not quite. People would weigh the risk of degradation and malfunction against the reward neutron jumping.

It of course depends what kind of degradation we are talking about here (the neutron hopping already does degrade the FSD, after all), but risking significant a lot just to skip 5-6 jumps? Probably not.

Right now, one of the most glaring inconsistencies is that we flit about pew-pewing at NPCs and each other with lasers, but we are extremely resistant to the light pumped out by countless zillions of tonnes of burning hydrogen even when skimming close to it for topping up fuel.

I don't think it is possible to make very consistent and still have it fun. All heat generated by any weapon system would be minuscule compared to skimming Bellatrix and balancing space magic shielding against neutron stars would be even more ridiculous.

And as I noted - there's the risk. What do people generally consider a risky business, being shot down in PvP? It's nothing compared to blowing up on the other side of the galaxy.

 

[Sysmon]

It of course depends what kind of degradation we are talking about here (the neutron hopping already does degrade the FSD, after all), but risking significant a lot just to skip 5-6 jumps? Probably not.


I don't think it is possible to make very consistent and still have it fun. All heat generated by any weapon system would be minuscule compared to skimming Bellatrix and balancing space magic shielding against neutron stars would be even more ridiculous.

And as I noted - there's the risk. What do people generally consider a risky business, being shot down in PvP? It's nothing compared to blowing up on the other side of the galaxy.

I don't see why having to stop and do a systems check or repair job after one or a few neutron jumps is an issue. It would make the jumps mean something. The commander would have to prepare and evaluate whether the risk is worth it, and the commander might even experience a bit of a thrill of a succesful jump.

About the balancing, consistency and fun, we differ in opinion there again. The mechanics of space flight and battle would need a good rework to make the experience consistent and playable: Having an increased chance of the ship getting destroyed by the natural environment could be countered by means to recover data and assets (personalised black box recovery, for example). The energy weapons could be different from lasers or at frequencies the shields are not meant to protect against originally. That would make sense too, as shielding would first have been invented to keep space from chewing up our ships. Next we would realise that the second-most dangerous thing in the universe is other people...

The natural environment should not be balanced. There should be parts of it that would eat us without hesitation if we were dumb enough to go there. Close to stars and black holes are the obvious examples. Others could be areas of high star density where radiation and stellar winds are pumping hard. When/if we get atmospheric flight, venturing into dense atmospheres and in place with high wind shear could tear us to bits too, at least overwhelm maneuverability if we are not careful.

S

 

[Sysmon]

... but all that is a distraction from the thread theme. But it is in the spirit! For all the god-like powers we all seem to be gradually gaining in this game there really should be some sort of downside. Or things just gradually become too easy to be interesting to do.

S

EDIT: Oh! Oh! We could solve the lacking "god-like powers for backers" by making engineering backers-only! There, that should make everybody happy.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I'm thinking about combat.

Epic PvP fight and then RNG be like "I'm about to end this man's whole career".

But the choice is yours: do you go all out hulk G5 or play it safe? Less power but more reliability?

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

But the choice is yours: do you go all out hulk G5 or play it safe? Less power but more reliability?

And then what? Have RNG decide how the encounter resolves? You grind your rear through RNG layers to get another layer that determines whether all that grind even works?

 

[Rubbernuke]

And then what? Have RNG decide how the encounter resolves? You grind your rear through RNG layers to get another layer that determines whether all that grind even works?

It would be a small chance but why not? G5 is pretty much an 'I win' card in PvE, and in PvP everything is meta and static. You can gamble it works and have that edge 98% of the time, or go lower and know its all solid.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

It would be a small chance but why not? G5 is pretty much an 'I win' card in PvE, and in PvP everything is meta and static. You can gamble it works and have that edge 98% of the time, or go lower and know its all solid.

And what good would it be? Minmaxers would still use G5. You get a chance your fellow minmaxer has a system failure. It'd be like premium ammo with truly no-one knowing.

 

[Rubbernuke]

And what good would it be? Minmaxers would still use G5. You get a chance your fellow minmaxer has a system failure. It'd be like premium ammo with truly no-one knowing.

It comes down to the chance of failure during operation.

If your G5 guns kept on jamming which allowed your enemy to escape or kill you in a knife edge battle would you keep on using them? With G5 dirty drives: the more you boost with them, the higher the chance of failure leaving you drifting (allowing a devastating strike). A powerplant glitch might drop your shields, leading to death on shield heavy builds.

Add all those together and its something to worry about- maybe enough to make other mods and levels more attractive.

In the end min/maxing is getting the top stuff, currently thats G5. If engineering was nerfed you'd still have people doing the same with whatever was top there. What this does is make the top end more fuzzy and less 'ultimate', enough to make lower tiers and other modules have some advantages.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

It comes down to the chance of failure during operation.

If your G5 guns kept on jamming which allowed your enemy to escape or kill you in a knife edge battle would you keep on using them? With G5 dirty drives: the more you boost with them, the higher the chance of failure leaving you drifting (allowing a devastating strike). A powerplant glitch might drop your shields, leading to death on shield heavy builds.

Add all those together and its something to worry about- maybe enough to make other mods and levels more attractive.

I don't get it. You could just nerf them altogether to make other mods and levels more attractive. RNG failures won't change minmaxers unless you'd make it totally unusable - which is basically the same as giving it the nerfbat.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I don't get it. You could just nerf them altogether to make other mods and levels more attractive. RNG failures won't change minmaxers unless you'd make it totally unusable - which is basically the same as giving it the nerfbat.

To be honest nothing will deter min/maxxing here or elsewhere. It will always happen because there is a hard 'max' and a 'min'.

RNG fits the concept of engineering in practice- for a number of mods you are pushing the limits, it should be that the limits sometimes push back in an unpredictable way rather than with hard stats that will eventually be nullified by the new established meta regardless. Plus, RNG is fair if both of you are fighting under the same rules with these overpowered parts. The only way to improve your odds is to use less risky parts across your build. So the more bleeding edge you are, the higher the chance of lots of your systems being a built in problem.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

To be honest nothing will deter min/maxxing here or elsewhere. It will always happen because there is a hard 'max' and a 'min'.

RNG fits the concept of engineering in practice- for a number of mods you are pushing the limits, it should be that the limits sometimes push back in an unpredictable way rather than with hard stats that will eventually be nullified by the new established meta regardless. Plus, RNG is fair if both of you are fighting under the same rules with these overpowered parts. The only way to improve your odds is to use less risky parts across your build. So the more bleeding edge you are, the higher the chance of lots of your systems being a built in problem.

I know what RNG does in this context. But what is the purpose in the game design?

 

[Rubbernuke]

I know what RNG does in this context. But what is the purpose in the game design?

I just told you: to establish a meta you need to know what is 'top'- if that top is fuzzy then a meta is harder to establish.

Certain high power mods then become less dependable in practice without losing that power outright, making others look more attractive in a way that does not itself make a meta.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I just told you: to establish a meta you need to know what is 'top'- if that top is fuzzy then a meta is harder to establish.

Certain high power mods then become less dependable in practice without losing that power outright, making others look more attractive in a way that does not itself make a meta.

The meta is still there. Just more unlikely to happen.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The meta is still there. Just more unlikely to happen.

Which implies that its doing its job because some will want rock solid modules while others will want a hot rod ship.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Which implies that its doing its job because some will want rock solid modules while others will want a hot rod ship.

What job? What's the point of it?

 

[Rubbernuke]

What job? What's the point of it?

The point to gently stop the top being 'the ultimate' in a way that does not keep the meta G5. Hard stats make ship design easy to max out, if those stats are (partly) uncertain the then higher you go the 'meta' level falls much lower (i.e. the boundary of a powerful ship is under G5 rather than being G5).

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

The point to gently stop the top being 'the ultimate' in a way that does not keep the meta G5. Hard stats make ship design easy to max out, if those stats are (partly) uncertain the then higher you go the 'meta' level falls much lower (i.e. the boundary of a powerful ship is under G5 rather than being G5).

But there is still the top. The meta. For those who risk it.

 

[Rubbernuke]

But there is still the top. The meta. For those who risk it.

And if that risk is palpable then the top is not always the top in use- the meta in this case is not set in stone any longer.

Identical meta builds suddenly become less guaranteed winners, whereas grades below more so, or ones that use alternative modules.