As the title says, what are your thoughts?
Mine are that I will be able to get most of my group back to work the BGS!
Mine are that I will be able to get most of my group back to work the BGS!
Your thoughts please on the BGS and Odyssey?
- Thread starter Marcus Machiavelli
- Start date
The big expectation I have is that the significant increase in contestable assets in systems is going to make crossover-without-conflict very rare for a while in a lot of places.
I also expect how Odyssey activities are balanced against the existing ones to take some time to shake out - and probably not be stabilised until well after the console release. How much effect that has overall I don't know but I expect some groups to take advantage.
I also expect how Odyssey activities are balanced against the existing ones to take some time to shake out - and probably not be stabilised until well after the console release. How much effect that has overall I don't know but I expect some groups to take advantage.
generally, my expectations for BGS side of odyssee are rather low (but i like the new planetary tech a lot!) - i start the base game, not horizons if i want things done in the bgs, and my impression from alpha was this is not gonna change much. i can see a role of odyssee in conflicts eventually, but mainly new ways to create negative influence (a tool not much used).
Based on my observations, Odyssey will be nearly useless for the generation of influence/effects[1], because missions take so much effort to complete. Don't get me wrong, the missions are still fun, but they won't stack[2], and a single mission can take upwards of 10-20 minutes to complete, so contrasted against how quickly ship-based missions can be complete, it certainly won't be a useful source of influence.
Although, there were also certain mission types from the ship-based mission board that were absent, such as Source missions, and cargo delivery missions. Whether that's "Just alpha things" or a change remains to be seen.
[1] Although I can't be 100% certain on effects; there may be grindable activities at a site such as raining missiles onto a base which are very effective at generating negative influence. Will have to see what the new meta becomes.
[2] Again, might be an Alpha thing (there was a lot of hinky stuff with the mission boards),, but you might see several missions to the same location/task which you'd normally stack, but if you took one, Odyssey's mission board (not the ship based one) would then remove any copies of that mission from the board, even if offered by different factions. Not sure if bug or intended fix for stacking.
Although, there were also certain mission types from the ship-based mission board that were absent, such as Source missions, and cargo delivery missions. Whether that's "Just alpha things" or a change remains to be seen.
[1] Although I can't be 100% certain on effects; there may be grindable activities at a site such as raining missiles onto a base which are very effective at generating negative influence. Will have to see what the new meta becomes.
[2] Again, might be an Alpha thing (there was a lot of hinky stuff with the mission boards),, but you might see several missions to the same location/task which you'd normally stack, but if you took one, Odyssey's mission board (not the ship based one) would then remove any copies of that mission from the board, even if offered by different factions. Not sure if bug or intended fix for stacking.
My biggest wonder is trading for influence on the small pad settlements. With the largest small ships carrying not even 88 or 92 tons of cargo, the current understanding of trading for influence would make it a horrible influence generator. Surely it can't be that simple.
My worries come from the advantages that the client switching process offers.
My worries come from the advantages that the client switching process offers.
- Crime: You seem to be able to transfer bounties from one ship to another with the client switches unless Horizons remembers which ship had the bounties, but the wording makes it sound like it'll only go for the active ship. This makes the hot sidewinder loophole rear its ugly head back.
- Mission Boards: You'll have 20 missions for Odyssey and 20 for Horizons, fully separate. This returns board flipping to a certain extent, with Odyssey owners getting 2 mission boards per 10 minutes, and being able to hold up to 40 missions this way.
Last edited:
Will the commodity prices at the EDO bases be useful? Dav said they will be better than other locations. I'm not a big BGSer, so can't remember if profit affects influence 
Iirc, it's total profit that matters (paging @goemon )Will the commodity prices at the EDO bases be useful? Dav said they will be better than other locations. I'm not a big BGSer, so can't remember if profit affects influence
So probably the landing pad size matters most, if you can't land a cutter you are stuffed anyway (even if the time added by needing to land doesn't make it too slow)
influence gain is a combo of tonnage and profit per ton, and even at >2000 credits per ton profit in a shieldless dolphin (88t) you will just have minuscle gains.Will the commodity prices at the EDO bases be useful? Dav said they will be better than other locations. I'm not a big BGSer, so can't remember if profit affects influence
at 2000 credit per ton profit, here the tonnage sigma:
Awesome, I remember total profit factored, but forgot how tonnage mattered.influence gain is a combo of tonnage and profit per ton, and even at >2000 credits per ton profit in a shieldless dolphin (88t) you will just have minuscle gains.
at 2000 credit per ton profit, here the tonnage sigma:
Pretty sure some of the bases had at least M pads. 'If' the profit is better 'and' there are L pads it might be of interest I guess. But we'll have to see how much extra profit there is - would probably need to be VO numbers to be worthwhile.
I expect it to be a repeat of carrier release but far worse.
so, at least 3 months of bgs destruction and total failure
and at least some mining and combat cascaded credit errors....still cant seem to fix combat and its been months...
I have less than zero respect or hope for a programmer that cannot do math. and is so blind that they cannot see 1 bounty on screen as it is earned, only to have it then multiplied by magic once it gets into your pocket.
and still over 2 years since the empire or fed or pilots federation(which has only recently been brought back) percentages vanished
TBH, as much as it saddens me, I believe this update will make or break ED, for me it is most likely going to break.
I am already beyond fed up with the molasses behavior in systems with more than 1 carrier, god forbid you live in an area like I do where there is the max carriers in many of the systems.
I never used to even think about docking anywhere, just do it. now its such a freakin pathetic time wasting f-up, I find it easier to just jj to stop near stations rather than try to fight the molasses...its as bad as fighting an interdiction.
but why fix anything. just add more and more....treat it like a clown car.
so, at least 3 months of bgs destruction and total failure
and at least some mining and combat cascaded credit errors....still cant seem to fix combat and its been months...
I have less than zero respect or hope for a programmer that cannot do math. and is so blind that they cannot see 1 bounty on screen as it is earned, only to have it then multiplied by magic once it gets into your pocket.
and still over 2 years since the empire or fed or pilots federation(which has only recently been brought back) percentages vanished
TBH, as much as it saddens me, I believe this update will make or break ED, for me it is most likely going to break.
I am already beyond fed up with the molasses behavior in systems with more than 1 carrier, god forbid you live in an area like I do where there is the max carriers in many of the systems.
I never used to even think about docking anywhere, just do it. now its such a freakin pathetic time wasting f-up, I find it easier to just jj to stop near stations rather than try to fight the molasses...its as bad as fighting an interdiction.
but why fix anything. just add more and more....treat it like a clown car.
there have been mission boards on the setllements in the alpha iirc, and - again iirc - those mission boards have been only for missions of the settlements controlling faction. if that translates to the main game, it would be at least a very good way to get missions for a specific faction you want to push.
I wonder if there'll be any advantages to running missions from the outposts. I notice it at least guarantees all missions are from the owning faction only, which is an advantage, but as mentioned, the Odyssey ones simply don't have efficiencies in terms of influence, given how involved they are.
Guess we'll find out.
Guess we'll find out.
Interesting point
The main thing that I think will make EDO stuff not useful for BGS is the time to get to the surface.
The attack surface for botting is also a worry - Apex allows data missions to be run without fear and without needing to code anything for flight
same here. but - for exampel the change to tonnage being that important in trade made surface installations a valueable asset somewhat in m-pad orbital systems under certain circumstances (as a t9 will be around double the effect of a python, and it won't take you twice as long to go to surface). i could see a similar thing if you want to push a low inf minor faction into conflict for example - you might have problems stacking missions at a normal board (if they get 3 missions each 10 minutes, and those suck... and they don't have a place to form bounties...), so going to their settlement and picking up 5 missions might be quicker.
my bgs-bubble accoutn has no odyssee (yet) though ...
For controlling factions, likely not.Will the commodity prices at the EDO bases be useful? Dav said they will be better than other locations. I'm not a big BGSer, so can't remember if profit affects influence
But if they're distributed between the factions in an Alpha-like way, that just gave a lot more factions access to the Trade and Exploration levers, which could be a big difference for how secondary influences are managed and changed.
It would be nice if disabling bases counted as a negative for the local faction. Will be interesting if in 6 months all bases belong to the system controller, gonna get a lot of wars real soon