20 Mission cap is a tad silly.

[EValve]

The purpose of a multirole ship

Spoiler

is that it can do a great many things, yet not at the same time or not as good as dedicated ships and even when maxed to try and compete, not gonna win.
This is why loadouts need changed. I can do a great many more things in an AspX than I can in say a courier and not need to go back to the system where I have stored other ships. I will need a high tech system or at least a good one to switch in and out what I need, depending on what role I choose.
I have no problem with this and multi-role ships can do more than one role but never be a match for dedicated combat builds, so we run. Don't have a problem with that either.
It's about the need to swap ships as opposed to having a ship that can be outfitted to do many roles, hence multirole.
I don't like your assumption that an Asp will just stack mining lasers because it's a miner. That is you trying to make a point that is far from valid because it doesn't take 5 mining lasers to mine anything? Why you would even go down this road is questionable. Your point in that regard is invalid and kinda funny.

I'm just gonna lay this out plain for you.
Farming in this game is not involving yourself in the game or caring about how it works beyond your own credit balance.
You want to farm things for the candy then fair enough but you really aren't doing it right.
You will always be allowed to play that way but I agree with FD that you should not be allowed to just endlessly farm credits.



Maybe the problem is there aren't harsh enough penalties for the player, not so much the affects on the BGS, where if you fail then you get held to account. Trolled by badass npc's.
Maybe you should be more selective in your missions and complete them before taking others, than blaming the game when you caused the issue in the first place.
They will need to nerf the bugs first though but for every action there should be an equal and opposite reaction.
They can always change the mission timers which will annoy a few as well.
If the mission timers were a lot shorter we wouldn't even be having this conversation but they're trying to cater for those with limited time. However, you just flipped it on its head.
Which do you prefer regards mission timers?
Old system or new?

They seem opposed to farming so...

Again.. you were the one suggesting you needed to have a specific load-out to engage in a certain activity; "Missions should involve changing loadouts and doing different things."
I'm saying it's absolutely not true by giving a valid hyperbole.
You're completely besides the point. Nobody's farming anything here. There is no mention of grind, no mention of "effective money-making".
I don't understand why you keep hammering on this when it's completely unrelated.

Mission timers don't have anything to do with it... If I have 2 hours to go through 7 systems for 5 different factions I'll do it. The timer gets postponed perpetually because the new mission resets a new timer.

 

[EValve]

Fold

I'll lay it out for you:

Systam A: Take 4 delivery missions ( 50k payout because neutral rep ), take 2 boom delivery missions ( low pay-out ).
Total missions: 6
System B: Deliver 1 delivery mission
Total missions: 5
Take 3 delivery missions as per point 1.
Total missions 8
Go to System C.

And so on. Until I reach 20. At which point I'm not aloud to take any type of mission because << insert arbitrary reason >>.
I'm not abusing anything... I'm just taking what's there, hoping some missions will overlap, if they don't it's fine it gives me another destination.
I'm not aiming to grind a specific reputation.
I'm just working a cluster of factions.
Meanwhile, my hold is half-empty because I decided to take 2 boom delivery missions.

You're hammering on abuse/farming/grinding but it has strictly nothing to do with it.
You keep mentioning about "the proper way to play" but why would this not be "proper" ? Why's this invalid?
And why are you even talking about a proper way to play if anyone's out there to blaze their own trail in the first place?

I'd almost even argue I'm working the BGS in a much more profound way than you are suggesting...

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

Again.. you were the one suggesting you needed to have a specific load-out to engage in a certain activity; "Missions should involve changing loadouts and doing different things."
I'm saying it's absolutely not true by giving a valid hyperbole.
You're completely besides the point. Nobody's farming anything here. There is no mention of grind, no mention of "effective money-making".
I don't understand why you keep hammering on this when it's completely unrelated.

Mission timers don't have anything to do with it... If I have 2 hours to go through 7 systems for 5 different factions I'll do it. The timer gets postponed perpetually because the new mission resets a new timer.

I'm replying to questions asked.
You want to just stack, stack and stack more until you have a full ship on the grounds that it isn't working until the game fills your ship. I think this is wrong.
I'm telling you that FD capped it so you can't do this and offered other solutions on how to fill up your ship but nope, too much effort.
It's highly unlikely that just because you have a big ship that they will change the game for players who have big ships. Not everyone plays in the big ships so the game needs to be balanced for all.
Do the missions, then get more when you have freed up some space to accept more...they spawn eternally so where is the problem?

I don't think you care if you complete a mission or not. I think you just want an eternal source of candy where you can cherry pick the best missions.
Something the current game denies.
They may even need to go more draconian on your patootie as well.

You're trying to do too much too soon as well. You need focus and what is good for you. All you seem to be doing is spamming missions with no objective in mind.
That isn't gonna make the game better for you, understanding it will though and stacking 20 missions isn't that necessary.
Completing them to free up space may be an idea though.

Even if they gave you 40 missions, players who are more in tune with the game will out play you but things need to be kept balanced so those who have better understanding than the regular player (like me) can't dictate terms.
Give 40 to a dedicated player and watch what happens.

You're not good at answering questions so would you care to?
Old system or new?

I guess I'll need to go back a bit to see when I mentioned "proper" but it generally means within the rules of the game.
This also relates to being able to complete these missions within a set period of time. Like a sense of realism. How long should it take, variables on non-hurried cargo transport missions and greater profits for those in a hurry.
Ppl pay for fast delivery these days, seems legit.
Something lost last patch.

 

[777Driver]

Maybe the problem is there aren't harsh enough penalties for the player, not so much the affects on the BGS, where if you fail then you get held to account. Trolled by badass npc's.
Maybe you should be more selective in your missions and complete them before taking others, than blaming the game when you caused the issue in the first place.
They will need to nerf the bugs first though but for every action there should be an equal and opposite reaction.
They can always change the mission timers which will annoy a few as well.
If the mission timers were a lot shorter we wouldn't even be having this conversation but they're trying to cater for those with limited time. However, you just flipped it on its head.
Which do you prefer regards mission timers?
Old system or new?

They seem opposed to farming so...

Failing missions results in negative rep and/or a fine, if the fine is not paid you will have Elite bounty hunters on your tail. Not quite sure why you keep bringing up failing missions, in my case it is irrelevant, I am not failing mission.

Am not blaming the game for anything, merely pointing out what looks like a flaw in the game, there is no logic to limiting a player to the amount of missions they can take. There are only two reason I can see as to why they would limit players

1: Discourage exploiting through stacking - Donation missions etc, the devs have upped the donation payments to curb stacking, smuggling and haulage is now cargo specific, pre 2.1 I have never heard of anyone stacking 20+ Robigo missions. I can still technically stack 20 identical missions if I want to in 2.1

2:It is a limit within the game engine, just like the ship storage limit per station for each player.

I am being selective in the missions I choose, my previous post outlined the missions I chose and the reasons for doing so, I didn't close my eyes and randomly pick a bunch of missions for the hell of it. The 20 limit is not a huge deal, I can work with it, that doesn't change the fact that it is an artificial limit that doesn't seem to have any logic behind it.

Regarding mission timers, I'm easy either way - 2.0 I would only do haulage & smuggling, most of those missions had a 17 hour limit. The longer times suit me better since I have limited time to log into ED

 

[excalibus]

e-valve you mentioned before that this is not even a problem (filling your cargo hold) once you have friendly or higher reputation with a faction, so with that in mind, the cap gives an added incentive to improve relationships with factions to make the missions you take not only worth more rewards but also maximise your cargo space...

I could take a whole bunch of delivery missions - courier jewels / paperwork / reports etc and none of them use cargo space, and simply buy a bunch of suitable cargo that may sell for a decent profit at the destionation(s)... really I do not see the problem the same as you do because to me, the taking missions to a system and then topping up with saleable goods and then going and completing the missions and selling the goods is the way I have always played the elite games... Another words I tend to try and maximise the 'return' on my time investment in the game when I am doing missions... That to me is a key aspect of a trader / mission runner role IMHO...

So with that in mind, hit the cap and fill up on goodies that will sell where you are going to...

 

[EValve]

I'm replying

Spoiler

to questions asked.
You want to just stack, stack and stack more until you have a full ship on the grounds that it isn't working until the game fills your ship. I think this is wrong.
I'm telling you that FD capped it so you can't do this and offered other solutions on how to fill up your ship but nope, too much effort.
It's highly unlikely that just because you have a big ship that they will change the game for players who have big ships. Not everyone plays in the big ships so the game needs to be balanced for all.
Do the missions, then get more when you have freed up some space to accept more...they spawn eternally so where is the problem?

I don't think you care if you complete a mission or not. I think you just want an eternal source of candy where you can cherry pick the best missions.
Something the current game denies.
They may even need to go more draconian on your patootie as well.

Your trying to do too much too soon as well. You need focus and what is good for you. All you seem to be doing is spamming missions with no objective in mind.
That isn't gonna make the game better for you, understanding it will though and stacking 20 missions isn't that necessary.

Even if they gave you 40 missions, players who are more in tune with the game will out play you but things need to be kept balanced so those who have better understanding than the regular player (like me) can't dictate terms.
Give 40 to a dedicated player and watch what happens.

What's wrong about it... A trucker doesn't travel with a half empty load... It may start empty but it will look for more and more to haul every stop it makes so that it is constantly carrying cargo.
FD didn't cap it so you can't do this, this is a side-effect from their preventive act against stacking 100 planetary assault missions and do them all in one go. The latter is an exploit. Mine isn't. That's why I'm asking for them to review it. They didn't offer a solution to work around it. You're pointing to one ( albeit valid ) that was already implemented and is not in the optics of my activity. It's a workaround to a risen problem, which doesn't invalidate the problem. Anyone who doesn't play in a big ship isn't even concerned in the first place. There's no balance to speak of because anything under a big ship can't even perform such activity at this scale.
If your balance means that anything above 480 tons is useless in the optics of doing missions then I'm sorry to say but that's ridiculous. I paid for those extra tons so that I could be more effective and efficient in my activity.

The problem is I'm doing the missions, but hey I have 20 missions, yet there's one boom delivery mission or another haulage that goes to one of my destinations! No, you can't take it. Because people were abusing planetary assault missions. It doesn't add up.

I really don't understand how you can come up to the conclusion about how I feel about completing a mission or not... It's an assumption I just can't my wrap my head around because it's simply not true. I'm not even cherrypicking the missions... I'm taking what's there. I'm not mode-switching to get the best value/bang for buck.

Just because you don't see or maybe understand my objective doesn't mean there isn't one. If I start my process in hudson space, I'm working HIS factions. What's more Elite than that?

Spoiler

e-valve you mentioned before that this is not even a problem (filling your cargo hold) once you have friendly or higher reputation with a faction, so with that in mind, the cap gives an added incentive to improve relationships with factions to make the missions you take not only worth more rewards but also maximise your cargo space...

I could take a whole bunch of delivery missions - courier jewels / paperwork / reports etc and none of them use cargo space, and simply buy a bunch of suitable cargo that may sell for a decent profit at the destionation(s)... really I do not see the problem the same as you do because to me, the taking missions to a system and then topping up with saleable goods and then going and completing the missions and selling the goods is the way I have always played the elite games... Another words I tend to try and maximise the 'return' on my time investment in the game when I am doing missions... That to me is a key aspect of a trader / mission runner role IMHO...

So with that in mind, hit the cap and fill up on goodies that will sell where you are going to...

I understand your point. This is in regards to actually getting that reputation of being friendly. As long as I'm not, I'm not utilizing my potential for this arbitrary reason. It implies there's only one way to do mission trading; rank up first, then go mission trading within the confinements of your friendly factions. I'm simply going through all the systems, and it may take me a month, a year maybe to get to friendly to the entire cluster. This cap is preventing me from using my potential space to do so.
It goes against the "blaze your own trail" moto...

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I don't think you care if you complete a mission or not. I think you just want an eternal source of candy where you can cherry pick the best missions.

What's with this perpetual straw man argument anyway?

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

Failing missions results in negative rep and/or a fine, if the fine is not paid you will have Elite bounty hunters on your tail. Not quite sure why you keep bringing up failing missions, in my case it is irrelevant, I am not failing mission.

Am not blaming the game for anything, merely pointing out what looks like a flaw in the game, there is no logic to limiting a player to the amount of missions they can take. There are only two reason I can see as to why they would limit players

1: Discourage exploiting through stacking - Donation missions etc, the devs have upped the donation payments to curb stacking, smuggling and haulage is now cargo specific, pre 2.1 I have never heard of anyone stacking 20+ Robigo missions. I can still technically stack 20 identical missions if I want to in 2.1

2:It is a limit within the game engine, just like the ship storage limit per station for each player.

I am being selective in the missions I choose, my previous post outlined the missions I chose and the reasons for doing so, I didn't close my eyes and randomly pick a bunch of missions for the hell of it. The 20 limit is not a huge deal, I can work with it, that doesn't change the fact that it is an artificial limit that doesn't seem to have any logic behind it.

Regarding mission timers, I'm easy either way - 2.0 I would only do haulage & smuggling, most of those missions had a 17 hour limit. The longer times suit me better since I have limited time to log into ED

Well, I wasn't replying to you but okay...I'll give this a go with best intentions.
Hard to have 2 conversations at once, or be quoted on things not directed at yourself.
Reason for bringing it up is there should be a penalty for failing. It works in some regards but not all.

As for stacking missions, what would be your completion rate?
This whole stacking crap is alien to me, maybe 4-5, never much more and they are always kinda on the way somewhere. I was even doing it with the heavier restricted times in 2.0 but it was a bit more fun.
I'm not even sure it has a pulse these days because there is no challenging option. Always about the 24 hours or longer...nothing is ever truly urgent. Most challenging is docking quickly for bonus (pre last patch) yet that seems a wee bit too hard but nor crucial to mission completion. Not saying I want it included if it annoys players but some sense of urgency might be nice.

If it's a limit within the engine then I won't be complaining. No idea about that though.
I just want the game to be fun, which it generally is for me but these threads.
-.-

Sleepy, back in 8-12.

 

[EValve]

I just want the game to be fun, which it generally is for me but these threads.
-.-
Sleepy, back in 8-12.

Why do you have to say this?
You make it sound as if it is a generic topic.
I'll assume it's because you're sleepy. I find this absolutely disrespectful. I mean you're the one claiming our play-style to be irrevocably and rightfully hindered. Seemingly based on the principle you have not encountered this for the sole reason you don't or can't fathom to play this way

 

[Fru]

I've recently come back to the game as of 2.1 and playing "space trucker" was something I used to enjoy. I enjoy getting to know certain systems, stations, factions and the logistics needed for efficient mission management. So far I'm pleased with the changes to the mission structure although I feel there is still a lot of tweaking to be done.

I used to stack way more than 20 missions, mostly fetch and carry, back in 1.x so when I learned of the 20 mission cap I was somewhat concerned. I'm inclined to agree with the OP that it's way to easy to hit that limit. Even doing a 4 system circle trade route you can pick up way more than 20 supply/delivery missions alone not to mention the other mission types.

Here's the thing though, since 2.1 I've lost my A rated ASP 3 times. Twice before the recent update and once again last night. Each time I've had lot's of fetch/carry missions ongoing and close to the cap. Between hostile ships sent after me and normal (PvE) piracy interdictions have been an absolute nightmare. If I'm reading the mission updates correctly it seems like multiple groups of ships attached to various missions are all trying to interdict me at the same time. A few times I've had interdiction after interdiction with little time to even select a navigation target in supercruise. Now, I'm no slouch when it comes to combat but with the changes to AI prowess these encounters are no trivial matter. As it stands, without tweaking, I reckon removing the mission cap is not a viable option as there are instances where it might make the game practically unplayable.

Also, the mission updates changing the destination for cargo deliveries means stacking fetch/supply missions are a real pain. I collected a bunch of them to bring back to my main system only to be sent hither and thither to varying places that were not part of my schedule. What should have been my last couple of journeys for the night turned into rather more than that. The bonus credits are nice but I'd much prefer the option to deliver to the original destination as planned. Again, as it stands, lifting the mission cap on these types of missions would result in a logistical nightmare. Say you stack 20 of them only for 10 of them to have their destinations changed to 10 different places. Uh-uh.

I'm loving the new combat AI though, even after losing a few ships.

 

[excalibus]

EValve - I just want to point out something regarding RL trucking, they often carry an item for one client or just a handful of items for different clientelle, I am not talking about specialised couriers, but general freight/ Unless they are on a specialised regular courier deilvery route most heavy haulage is not so much lots of items for lotst of people, and often they have to wait a day or more for getting backloads or they drive back to their hometown empty...

That said, consider the mission system in such a light might help you to reconcile within yourself why it is working how it is now... beyond the obvious for removing an 'exploit' with mission stacking, an exploit I was taking advantage of myself, not with regards to base attacks but for stacking kill X NPC's missions for reputation, influence and credit gains. Now I will only be able to stack so many of these missions which seems to be the intended gameplay instead of stacking a boatload of them then completing them.

On another note, I do wish they had not made mission timers a minimum of 24 hours, I liked the short timed missions for a challenge and it meant there was a real possibility of mission failure if you got too greedy and took to long or did not research your destination correctly...

On the whole though I do like the changes to the mission system, and once the actual bugs, such as the deliveries requiring huge cargo holds to outposts and other bugs with the system it will be a much better system than we had in 2.0 IMHO. It is getting back towards what we had in the previous games with missions coming from a face not just text on a screen...

 

[EValve]

I reckon removing the mission cap is not a viable option as there are instances where it might make the game practically unplayable.

By this would I be correct to assume you mean this in regards of interdictions?
If so, then I understand your concern. The choice however in my honest opinion should remain within the hands of the concerning commander. As you say the risk scales immensely with the respective AI's interdicting you for each mission. It for me however cannot be a reason to "care-bear" us in that regard, so to speak.
Thanks for your constructive input

EValve - I just want to point out something regarding RL trucking,

Spoiler

they often carry an item for one client or just a handful of items for different clientelle, I am not talking about specialised couriers, but general freight/ Unless they are on a specialised regular courier deilvery route most heavy haulage is not so much lots of items for lotst of people, and often they have to wait a day or more for getting backloads or they drive back to their hometown empty...

That said, consider the mission system in such a light might help you to reconcile within yourself why it is working how it is now... beyond the obvious for removing an 'exploit' with mission stacking, an exploit I was taking advantage of myself, not with regards to base attacks but for stacking kill X NPC's missions for reputation, influence and credit gains. Now I will only be able to stack so many of these missions which seems to be the intended gameplay instead of stacking a boatload of them then completing them.

On another note, I do wish they had not made mission timers a minimum of 24 hours, I liked the short timed missions for a challenge and it meant there was a real possibility of mission failure if you got too greedy and took to long or did not research your destination correctly...

On the whole though I do like the changes to the mission system, and once the actual bugs, such as the deliveries requiring huge cargo holds to outposts and other bugs with the system it will be a much better system than we had in 2.0 IMHO. It is getting back towards what we had in the previous games with missions coming from a face not just text on a screen...

I really just hope they'll care to review it and perhaps be more specific in their imposed limits as to open up this segment again...
I can't refer to tikigod's suggestion way earlier in the thread enough, as much as I like it, it's something that will require some work if it ever does.

I'm with you entirely on your second point! Part of the fun was to manage tight schedules in order to meet the requirements. Be very selective in the missions you took.
I believe 777Driver mentioned it may be related to engine limitations if I read this correctly a few posts above.

With you on the overall positive changes as-well. It's a big step towards scaling the galaxy back down to our nimble persona. I can't wait to stretch my space-toes! Or... toe.. our space-shoes haven't really given it away yet... Who knows after a thousand years of evolution.

 

[Ben Ryder]

20 missons isnt enough

Here a really simpe example/

I'm flying a big trade ship with loads of cargo space. I'm happy to camp in a station and do missions for any old faction becasue I want to get alliediwth them all and get even more and better paying missions.

I get 3 data delivery type missions from each of the five factions. Okay thats 15 missions. Next up tere is space for a total of five trade type missions. So I hit my limit and my cargo bay is as good as empty. Maybe 1/4 full at very most. Yes I could hit the commodities market and hall stuff around. That's not the point. The point is I like doing missions, I want to become allied by doing missions so I get even better missions. The 20 mission cap is too low to allow the kind f game play I'd like to continue with. May it's necessary but it seems too low. Hopefully it will get bumped up a bit to maybe 40? It's not a game breaking issue from my point of view, just a tad annoying.

 

[Fru]

By this would I be correct to assume you mean this in regards of interdictions?

That's what I meant yes. I'd actually like to see a higher mission cap or none at all but with the mission mechanics the way they are right now, I think it would cause unwary pilots to get themselves into all kinds of trouble. I understand where you are coming from with regards to "nannying" players away from danger but hear me out on this.


Last night I brought 5 supply missions back to my home system in my mostly A rated ASP. I think I had 3 separate groups of ships after me and I was interdicted almost as soon as I arrived in system. I escaped the first interdiction and within 5 seconds was interdicted again. I had to submit this time although I managed to boost away with my shields down. As soon as I re-entered supercruise I was caught AGAIN within seconds and had to submit but this time I had no shields. Trying to boost away my thrusters were hit and I was helplessly spinning and I thought I was dead for sure but I managed to re-set my systems and jump to a nearby star system. Hull at 50%.

Now, I read somewhere that if you jump to a nearby system then jump back the ships following you are gone. This is not the case. I foolishly jump back to my original destination only to be interdicted almost instantly. I have 50% hull and full shields. I resolve to fight and with the help of the system authority manage to get the upper hand. As I watch them finish him off and prepare to jump away to another system and safety a different enemy, presumably from the same group, drops in behind me and kills me dead.

Don't get me wrong, this was all good fun if a little frustrating. Imagine though, you have 5 or even 10 groups pursuing you? You'd have no chance. These are only my observations with stacking fetch/carry missions. Much of the time, it's plain sailing with no problems but when things go bad, they go very bad.

Maybe they could tweak the mission mechanics but until then, if the cap is lifted I think you'll see a huge number of complaints from pilots being caught unaware and killed or having no hope of completing the missions they accept. Honestly, I think that's probably the reason why the cap is there.

 

[Lobstris]

This entire thread just throws up two different design concepts, and groups of people to me.

Those who think missions on their own should be a viable career and...

Those who think that missions are a nice additional 'top up' earner above regular commodities trading, to be taken if you just happen to be going in the right direction.

Whilst both are arguably valid play styles, I think the game was really designed with the latter in mind, not the former. (Personally, I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep if the maximum was only 5-10 missions).

 

[excalibus]

Spoiler

That's what I meant yes. I'd actually like to see a higher mission cap or none at all but with the mission mechanics the way they are right now, I think it would cause unwary pilots to get themselves into all kinds of trouble. I understand where you are coming from with regards to "nannying" players away from danger but hear me out on this.


Last night I brought 5 supply missions back to my home system in my mostly A rated ASP. I think I had 3 separate groups of ships after me and I was interdicted almost as soon as I arrived in system. I escaped the first interdiction and within 5 seconds was interdicted again. I had to submit this time although I managed to boost away with my shields down. As soon as I re-entered supercruise I was caught AGAIN within seconds and had to submit but this time I had no shields. Trying to boost away my thrusters were hit and I was helplessly spinning and I thought I was dead for sure but I managed to re-set my systems and jump to a nearby star system. Hull at 50%.

Now, I read somewhere that if you jump to a nearby system then jump back the ships following you are gone. This is not the case. I foolishly jump back to my original destination only to be interdicted almost instantly. I have 50% hull and full shields. I resolve to fight and with the help of the system authority manage to get the upper hand. As I watch them finish him off and prepare to jump away to another system and safety a different enemy, presumably from the same group, drops in behind me and kills me dead.

Don't get me wrong, this was all good fun if a little frustrating. Imagine though, you have 5 or even 10 groups pursuing you? You'd have no chance. These are only my observations with stacking fetch/carry missions. Much of the time, it's plain sailing with no problems but when things go bad, they go very bad.

Maybe they could tweak the mission mechanics but until then, if the cap is lifted I think you'll see a huge number of complaints from pilots being caught unaware and killed or having no hope of completing the missions they accept. Honestly, I think that's probably the reason why the cap is there.

Interesting observation, perhaps this also has something to do with the reasoning behind a cap being put in place - it's quite likely a combination of reasons, where frontier want to slow credit progression through mission stacking to help balance the 'professions' somewhat and to help keep it so that there is some feeling of progression without a whole lot of ships getting left unused due to too qucikly earning credits.

EValve - no doubt balancing passes will be done with regards to a mission cap, give it time for them to collate data on it I guess, I cannot see how it could be an engine issue due to previously being uncapped but it could well be something that has changed in the engine behind the scenes that none of us know about...

 

[EValve]

Maybe they could tweak the mission mechanics but until then, if the cap is lifted I think you'll see a huge number of complaints from pilots being caught unaware and killed or having no hope of completing the missions they accept. Honestly, I think that's probably the reason why the cap is there.

I see what you mean, I can't say I share the same experience since I've generally been able to fence off my opponents in my (well) armed Imperial Cutter. I'm still convinced it's somewhat more of a case of "Don't bite off more than you can chew". What I'm surprised with, is the numbers you've come up with; with about 20 missions I've only rarely come across more than 3 opponents including a security vessel out to check my hold. It's probably related to the type of missions taken which may have more or less chance of spawning an enemy on every jump. I've noticed it to happen more often with illegal smuggling than with boom delivery missions for example.

Whilst both are arguably valid play styles, I think the game was really designed with the latter in mind, not the former. (Personally, I certainly wouldn't lose any sleep if the maximum was only 5-10 missions).

Sounds like a nightmare to me... Being forced a specific path, to be done in a specific way. It in my opinion opposes the whole concept of a sandbox.

EValve - no doubt balancing passes will be done with regards to a mission cap, give it time for them to collate data on it I guess, I cannot see how it could be an engine issue due to previously being uncapped but it could well be something that has changed in the engine behind the scenes that none of us know about...

I'll be patient in the meanwhile and stick to other occupations in the meanwhile when flying large vessels. I think it's not as much the mission cap which was related to the engine but rather the mission timings, although I can't for sure understand exactly why since the source isn't exactly open for me to look into

 

[Fru]

I see what you mean, I can't say I share the same experience since I've generally been able to fence off my opponents in my (well) armed Imperial Cutter. I'm still convinced it's somewhat more of a case of "Don't bite off more than you can chew". What I'm surprised with, is the numbers you've come up with; with about 20 missions I've only rarely come across more than 3 opponents including a security vessel out to check my hold. It's probably related to the type of missions taken which may have more or less chance of spawning an enemy on every jump. I've noticed it to happen more often with illegal smuggling than with boom delivery missions for example.

The missions I mentioned were all "Industry Needs" or "Supply us with..." fetch types. Easy to stack up and then gather the goods from one or two locations. Too easy to hit the cap with these as well. Each mission has a random chance hostile ships will be sent after you and/or having the destination changed etc. If you roll the dice on enough of them at the same time it's entirely possible to have multiple groups after you. This isn't always a major issue as sometimes you don't get caught or you can manage to fight your way through but I've been ganked a couple of times now by the AI. Thinking about it, perhaps having multiple missions returning to the same system is compounding the issue with each concurrent group sent after me now trying to ambush me at the same location.


Anyway, I'll keep on doing what I'm doing. Once I hit rank I might try the clipper.

 

[Lobstris]

Sounds like a nightmare to me... Being forced a specific path, to be done in a specific way. It in my opinion opposes the whole concept of a sandbox.

Stacking as many missions as possible, when those mission pay silly amounts compared to regular trading (which *is* the backbone of Elite since '84 ), seems like cheating to me. Funny how opinions differ, innit?

None of this would matter if the game was single player and moddable *sigh...*