Page 1 of 75 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 1125

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: 2.2 Update: Engineer Crafting Commodities Discussion

  1. Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #1
    Sandro Sammarco is offline
    Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous
    Frontier Employee

    2.2 Update: Engineer Crafting Commodities Discussion

    Hello Commanders!

    We’ve received a lot of feedback requesting cargo storage, specifically for engineer commodities. We’re investigating a few options, and we’d love to get your feedback before we make a final decision, so I’m posting this thread to gather your thoughts.

    To clarify, the issue at hand is that many blueprints require one or more units of a special crafting commodity, gathered from in various activities, which means you have to have cargo space available when you want to craft upgrades for your modules.

    This forces any player interested in crafting to A) always fly with a ship that has cargo space, and B) have an amount of that cargo space committed to carrying crafting commodities.

    Our plan was to introduce crafting commodity storage, which would allow you to collect and store crafting commodities at Engineer bases for use in crafting at a later date. This would mean that you would only need to fly a cargo-capable ship when you were actively engaged in collecting the commodities, and could store up commodities to allow for multiple crafting attempts in one sitting.

    However, examining the current schedule, it’s looking like this feature will not come online in the time frame we’d like, so we are considering our options:

    A. Wait it out and get crafting commodity storage at a later date.

    B. Temporarily remove crafting commodities from blueprints until crafting commodity storage comes online.

    C. Temporarily allow various starport markets, potentially even Engineer markets, to sell crafting commodities until crafting commodity storage comes online.

    Our current thoughts are to go for option B, but we’d love to hear your thoughts on this choice, so feel free to discuss in the thread and let us know which option you’d prefer, and why.

  2. #2
    Hi Sandro,

    I'm liking option C, where a commodity is available at markets (even one single market, or a very few markets).

    It just seems like any "Commodity" should be marketed somewhere, at least?

    Thanks!


  3. #3
    I am strongly in favour of B, indifferent about C, and against A. (Hotfix is better than no fix)

  4. #4
    Hi Sandro.

    I'd go with option B immediately.

    Though I'd prefer option D : Permanently remove commodities from engineering blueprints.

  5. #5
    I'd take a "B", please Sandro.

    .... as I expect that if all Engineer commodities were to be sold by markets for a time that their removal from sale would be poorly received as and when Engineer Commodity storage is implemented.

    .... and, as soon as the update containing removal of sale / introduction of storage was announced then I'd expect hoarding in a stripped Cutter to be the order of the day just prior to the update going live.

  6. #6
    (A) Wait it out.

    I like being required to plan ahead for Elite Dangerous. It's not "Arcade Mode".

    I'm mildly miffed that I don't have basically infinite data-storage, but for commodities we all ought to plan.

    <runs for cover>
    Ithaca Line

Ithacan Queen - Imp Cutter
Ithacan Warrior - Anaconda
Ithacan Wanderer - 53Ly Asp X
Ithacan Rascal - Dogsbody Asp X

  7. #7
    Hey Sammarco. It is absolutely fantastic that you guys in FDev actually listen to, and respond to your player base/customers, highly commendable.

    This topic will surely get some debate Lol.

    For me, I would go with B until such times you guys have what you want to share.

    Keep up the great work and thank you once again.

    CMIV

  8. #8
    The problem with Option A is that players are already foaming at the mouth for this kind of feature, so one of the other two options would be preferable to relieve CMDRs of the burden of always carrying commodities.

    The problem with Option B is that once you do introduce CCS, and revert said Blueprints to their previous "harder" state, you'll get a tonne of butthurt over it.

    Option C is your best bet, as it does make most sense for a Commodity to be available at a Commodities Market. It is a bit strange that these Commodities even exist in ED's universe when no-one actually produces and sells them, no? Then once CCS is implemented, you can remove them from sale and relegate them back to Mission Rewards.

  9. #9
    A or C, B sounds like a cheat

    Markets are fine.
    LET PLAYERS DETERMINE THE MISSION REWARDS AND WORK FOR THEM.

    It is by will alone I set my ship in motion.
    It is by gaming that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning.
    It is by will alone I set my ship in motion.

  10. #10
    Thanks for taking the time you address this, Sandro.

    Option C would be absolutely fine but only if you can buy at all engineer bases.

    Option B is also fine.

    Option A is not fine

    Whichever out of C and B is easiest for you guys to implement, go for that. What I will say is that C would be the best path for the final transition to storage. B would be somewhat more jarring for players, particularly if the change takes a long time to come.

    PS where's the poll?
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/image.php?u=50093&type=sigpic&dateline=1416858574

  11. #11
    Please do B *and* consider implementing general commodity storage. I know you have strong reservations, but it can be balanced out. Also, again, it would leave door open for having rare cargo sashed away. Just slap big fee for storing them. For this it would make sense to do delay for.
    Peteris Krisjanis
    Call sign: Eagleboy | Will play: All Online | Federation | Trader and Explorer, with a little of everything else
    Please support call for ED Linux port https://www.change.org/p/frontier-de...-linux-desktop

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Knightshark View Post (Source)
    I am strongly in favour of B, indifferent about C, and against A. (Hotfix is better than no fix)

    On a related topic, are there plans for material storage, or a system that prevents material loss with ship destruction. I am asking, because the lack of such system tangentially affects hot topics as PvP balance and combat logging. (Ship destruction can easily cause loss of tens of hours gameplay)
    You don't lose mats upon ship destruction!

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by CMDR MERANGOIV View Post (Source)
    You don't lose mats upon ship destruction!
    I must be confused.

  14. #14
    Absolutely B as a first choice.

    C would also be acceptable.

    And though it was not in the choices, my highest preference would be D (2 posts higher): Permanently remove commodities from engineering blueprints.

    It really does slant Engineering in a particular direction when the smaller/medium combat ships cannot efficiently carry commodities around, especially given that it's standard practice that you may try for multiple "rolls". (IE, good luck carrying around 30T of 3-4 different materials around, when you're aiming to upgrade your Viper.)
    "Oh, hell. I've been to the edge. Just looked like ... more space." - Jayne Cobb

    Pilot Rating: Master | Federation Navy: Lieutenant

  15. #15
    Nice see you devs listening to the player base. For now I think B is the best option.

Page 1 of 75 1234511 ... LastLast