Elite Dangerous - Community Goal FSD Reward and Modification/Application of Experimentals

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Tbf, the whole double engineered module thing created a new layer of pain, and makes your engineers look like complete idiots.

They were supposed to be the top of the bill, the front line of engineering... now they are not, and you have to drag yourself to a tech broker, and pull something from their vending machines.
Classic power crep

"lets buff it, not nerf op things"

"lets add it"
"now it"
"let's add double engineered modules with experimentals"

I'm waiting for triple engineered modules with 2 experimentals, but not even from brokers.
From 1 simple mission :)
 
although the modulo is dual engineered this does not justify the modulo not being able to receive a experimental effect, the FSD 5A itself can receive experimental effect.
Can the design team say why it wouldn't be possible now? why wasn't this thought of before the reward was announced? why weren't we warned about this before?

we have reached a point where a simple community go can't be planned properly, unfortunate.
 
This isn't a new design decision. It's been this way for...ages right? We're addressing the issue now

It may have "been this way for ages" on the design document, but in game no, this is a new design decision.

The playerbase were talking about for a LONG time, how cool it was to add experimentals, and discussing which would be the best for what pre-engineered module.
Did... did the game designers seriously not know that players were adding experimental effects to pre-engineered modules since they were first created?

If they truly didn't know, this is... somewhat telling.

This smells very similar to SURPRISE! and SHOCK!? when the designers were totally CONFUSED as to why people were suddenly asking about why they were now getting notoriety from ground based combat. It's like they truly believed it had always been that way, and that they had changed nothing at all.

This can only really mean one of two things.

The designers changed their mind, but didn't want to say they had for some reason.
The designers didn't actually know what was going on in the game they designed.

Both are really bad.
 

Deleted member 254248

D
Don’t take this the wrong way, tone is unbelievably hard to convey on the Internet, and is often misconstrued, but it’s things like this that leads people to believe that the developers don’t play the game they’ve developed. That’s not uncommon, who wants take your work home with them every day? On the flip side, every studio should have a pool of people who just play the game, to avoid things like this.

Offering a CG reward for an engineered long range, class 1 mining laser, when everyone facehugs the asteroids to minimize the travel time for limpets, and uses class 2 lasers to spin off more mineable chunks.

Offering a CG reward for an engineered long range abrasion blaster when literally no one who has ever core mined has ever said “darn, I wish I could shoot that rotating chunk off the surface of the asteroid from 3km away.”

Now offering a CG reward for what are arguably the most popular modules in the game for any ship build, going through the issues with the class 5 FSD with user complaints about not getting it, and having to make a completely new CG to make it available for purchase to assuage player complaints. Then reinventing the wheel and reproducing all of those exact same complaints with this CG. Now actually telling people that the way that literally everyone in the game has been using the double engineered CG modules is behavior previously unknown to the developers.

P.S.-I’ve been looking to relocate to the UK to be closer to my great-uncle’s memorial at the Cambridge American Cemetery, I’ll come work for you and just sit in a room playing the game. That way someone who plays your game can keep you up to date on how these comments are going to be received in the future. 😉
 
Its pretty been common knowledge since the CG offering the first Double engineered FSD that it was possible to apply experimental effects on top. D2EA did video's about it. I have several with mass manager applied on top of the increased range and faster boot. If this is reversed it will suck

They shouldn't penalise players who've been using these experimental modules for months because of their oversight.
 

sallymorganmoore

Senior Community Manager : Elite Dangerous
As always since you have been following our reactions carefully on the Forum, we have a clear and precise answer from you Sally. Again thank you for your follow-up and your explanations. Personally I very much appreciate your follow-up And it doesn't matter if you don't answer right away, everyone is entitled to a vacation
No worries, no worries - I'm really sorry that the whirlwind has awakened from this but trust, am on it o7
Thanks for your understanding!

Will just say as a sidenote - Sorry Sally that y'all got blindsided - i guess in the end, we all just assumed as it was possible from the start it was intentional to match.
Thanks for working on gettting to the bottom of this.
No worries, again - I know this is all a bit of a snowstorm suddenly but working through it. Will stick with you all.

So, the Class 5 CGFSD for example, LR + Fast Boot - Optimal Mass 1,785T.
With Mass Manager, mine's been running at 1,856.4.
If retroactive action is required, It's in my Crusader, AIV Soyuz - or i can just hit remove experimental, depends how you go.

Class 3 CG Power Plant - Armoured + Overcharged, 18.24MW output. Applied thermal spread, taking the thermal efficiency from ~0.45 to ~0.41.
currently fitted to my type 6, AIV Granin.

...I missed the rails and shield generator, KWS and ECM so, can't comment for those.
The DSS doesn't have experimentals so was safe i think - noone had reason to re-engi it to be worse.
Salvation's CG stuff of course, there was no guardian engineer so, not seen anything happen there.
Thanks so, so much for the extra info here. I don't know how many times I can possibly say 'sorry' for confusion caused right now but will get to the bottom of it o7
 
Right...It's like, you flip over a stone and then there's a stone under the stone.

Commanders, I've grabbed all your comments on experiences with double engineering on 5As and all sorts of things like that and I'm discussing with the team.
If anyone pings or comments with more experiences of having done this please, can you direct them to this comment of mine?

Going to get my head down with the team on more info.

Thanks o7
Hi Sally, ALL of the double-engineered modules so far can have experimentals applied, including the size 5 V1 FSD. I really hope the official stance will be rethought, suddenly deviating without even an announcement is not quite acceptable.
 
Its pretty been common knowledge since the CG offering the first Double engineered FSD that it was possible to apply experimental effects on top. D2EA did video's about it. I have several with mass manager applied on top of the increased range and faster boot. If this is reversed it will suck
If it wasn't for the fact it's virtually impossible to search on here, I'd link the explicit confirmation we got that it was possible to add experimentals to double engineered gear. By 'explicit confirmation' I mean replies to posts by FDev confirming it. I've had a quick look but I'm doing my actual job right now and don't have time to go down a rabbit hole looking at 40+ page threads from a year ago.

None of this is Sally's fault incidentally, sending the CM out to unintentionally gaslight the player base can't be much fun for her either.
 
If you keep consistency with this FSD by making them accept an experimental, like the C5 FSD. Could you also keep consistency by making them buyable with mats like the C5 FSD is.

Thanks in advance !
 
Не волнуйтесь, я нигде не говорил и не подтверждал подобные страшные мысли. Чем раньше я смогу подтвердить, что ничего страшного не будет, тем лучше. В теме!
Доброго времени суток ВАМ Салли! Хочу спросить вас как разработчика этой игры! Когда была цель сообщества, я очень хотел поучаствовать в целях сообщества, чтобы получить движок fsd 6A для моей анаконды, но оказалось, что я много работал и не было на это время, будет ли возможность получить этот fsd 6A, который был выпущен техноброкером как цель сообщества, и если да, то когда это будет ???? Спасибо за ответ!
 
Again, don't worry, I do feel as extremely bad about the things you're typing out here as you want me to, and should have cherry picked every single one of those so many bug reports you speak about out, in line with all the other ones that come in.
Re-reading my post, I can see how you could take some parts of it on yourself personally, but please don't do so: when I said "Frontier", I didn't mean you specifically. There are probably several people who were responsible for this situation having happened, but as a Community Manager, you weren't one of them - and while my opinion is not important, I don't think less of you (singular) for any of this.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom