"A" Rated means nothing anymore, do we have to Engineer?

[Scoob]

Not sure since before engineering I had only a hand full of ships. The way I see it with or without engineering A-rated is the only and best to use except if you do high range jump stuff where you need to be lighter. So basically engineering is the step after A-Rated ship.
When I started Engineering I found I have everything to do 1-3 level upgrades but 4 I had only a few and most of 5 level upgrades I needed to grind the items for. I do not own even 1 ship that is fully engineered with max level 5 upgrades on everything.
The idea of Engenierign seems to be to extend game play in return to get more of what you need for your ship by modifying the modals to whatever you need them do have more and have less of. If anything I find it's the only last good change to the game since it opens the possibilities for new builds. But yes it mainly just makes stronger PVP opponents that have superior offence and deffence.

I'm the same. I had the Sidewinder of course, a free iEagle and Cobra MkIII due to my original pledge level. Never really flew the Cobra at the time as is felt like too much of a leg-up starting the game. Back then the Hauler and Adder did not exist, so I went Viper then a Type 6 for trade and finally Asp Explorer. I got the Vulture early last year, but really wasn't playing much, then had a long break. Both the Type 7 and Python are very new acquisitions.

Initially, I too appeared to have materials for the most basic tier one items with Felicity Farseers. So, I've upgraded FSD's, Thrusters, Power Plants and Shield Boosters, but only to low levels. I think I have one tier 3 FSD upgrade, but I didn't know what I was doing at the time lol. So, yeah, currently its materials holding me back.

Scoob.

 

[fitzsteve]

I love my D Rated fully engineered passenger Conda, it flies like a traditional A rate build at a fraction of the price.

I do struggle when I play my XB1 account with no Horizon's though, I deeply miss engineered FSD & Drives, everything else I can live with.

 

[Scoob]

Unless I'm missing something in the OP's posts, interjecting PvP context into this is not at all what the OP is asking and is irrelevant.

I read the question as: "were existing ship characteristics & specs adjusted down when engineers were introduced?" From what I understand, the answer is "no" and that your A rated Vulture has the same power distribution and flight specs today as it did prior to engineers.

I also know that some ships have seen adjustments in various patches, but those were related to engineers.

Yes, you're right, I wasn't really thinking PvP directly as that's not how I play. However, I do welcome peoples thoughts on this as never say never lol.

I never got to personally explore many full "A" Rated vessels prior to my starting playing again a couple of weeks ago. I think my iEagle was the only one and it was, and is, a fantastic little ship. However, since starting to play again I've gained the funds to experiment more, which has highlighted various weaknesses. I thought I remembered reading - back when I wasn't playing - how the Vulture was "OP" and it'd been suitably handicapped by the power plant limit. Perhaps I miss understood and it was a beta vs. live discussion - I am on the Private backers forum at the time.

I do quite like Engineers, being able to tweak a ship further is quite fun. What I don't like is that it appears I'll need to grind other activities to get the materials I need. I really thought I'd been in a good position when I visited Felicity Farseer this time, being near-full of Materials and Data...I simply didn't have the right things though lol.

Scoob.

 

[Scoob]

I love my D Rated fully engineered passenger Conda, it flies like a traditional A rate build at a fraction of the price.

I do struggle when I play my XB1 account with no Horizon's though, I deeply miss engineered FSD & Drives, everything else I can live with.

Heh, you know, I fully intended just to "D" and "C" rate my Python for the most part. However, I thought I was likely asking for trouble if I did so - it's a multi-role craft after all and I wanted to be able to defend myself, not like the Type 7 I came from.

In many ways I feel I likely jumped to the Python a bit too soon. It's no faster than my Type 7, Passenger/ Cargo capacities are comparable at least but it cost so much money for something that, combat aside, is equally as good at the same task!

Possibly in part due to RNG, but my earning in the Python have been a lot less that I was obtaining in the Type 7. This is despite undertaking the same Cargo, Passenger and Data missions I was previously. This is, in part at least, why I wanted to pursue Engineering as a way to make my Python exceed the Type 7 in more ways. So, Jump Range, speed etc.

Scoob.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

I rarely A-rate all my modules.
Power plants and Distributors for most builds.
Frame Shift Drives without question.
Combat ships I often use B-rated Power Plants as they're more durable.
Thrusters, only when I'm building for speed.
Life Support, almost never.
Sensors, rarely.

A-rated modules are not a be-all-end-all answer.

Engineering certainly matters - especially where Frame Shift Drives are concerned, at least for me.

 

[Conch]

I rarely A-rate all my modules.
Power plants and Distributors for most builds.
Frame Shift Drives without question.
Combat ships I often use B-rated Power Plants as they're more durable.
Thrusters, only when I'm building for speed.
Life Support, almost never.
Sensors, rarely.

A-rated modules are not a be-all-end-all answer.

Engineering certainly matters - especially where Frame Shift Drives are concerned, at least for me.

A-rated LongrangeG5 sensors are a must for bountyhunting tho!
having 14km range on them is great!!

 

[Scoob]

I rarely A-rate all my modules.
Power plants and Distributors for most builds.
Frame Shift Drives without question.
Combat ships I often use B-rated Power Plants as they're more durable.
Thrusters, only when I'm building for speed.
Life Support, almost never.
Sensors, rarely.

A-rated modules are not a be-all-end-all answer.

Engineering certainly matters - especially where Frame Shift Drives are concerned, at least for me.

Yes, I do leave things like Life Support as a "D", but FSD, Power Plant, Distributor, Thrusters and Shields are "A". My Type 7 was largely "D" rated for ages, but I got a bit concerned that perhaps I'd not manage to evade the next Interdiction and I'd been lucky.

I think it's FSD Engineering I'm most interested in, with Thrusters following after that. Shame there's nothing to improve super cruise transit times, as I took a few missions to far out stations - one took me an hour and five minutes from the arrival point! lol.

Scoob.

 

[fitzsteve]

Heh, you know, I fully intended just to "D" and "C" rate my Python for the most part. However, I thought I was likely asking for trouble if I did so - it's a multi-role craft after all and I wanted to be able to defend myself, not like the Type 7 I came from.

In many ways I feel I likely jumped to the Python a bit too soon. It's no faster than my Type 7, Passenger/ Cargo capacities are comparable at least but it cost so much money for something that, combat aside, is equally as good at the same task!

Possibly in part due to RNG, but my earning in the Python have been a lot less that I was obtaining in the Type 7. This is despite undertaking the same Cargo, Passenger and Data missions I was previously. This is, in part at least, why I wanted to pursue Engineering as a way to make my Python exceed the Type 7 in more ways. So, Jump Range, speed etc.

Scoob.

I got a C/D rated Python out in Colonia, it's actually pretty decent but I do have a G4 A rated FSD on it that I transferred from the bubble.

A semi A/D build with engineering is fantastic though, my Python in the bubble boosts over 425, jumps 27+ and blasts it's way through everything.

 

[Codger]

I've been playing continuously for the last couple of years (PVE only) and I was thinking this same thing the other day. I can no longer just buy a ship and modules and go on out the door like that, unless I just enjoy flying a rather gimped ship.

It's a bit of a catch-22. I *really* like how my engineered ships perform. But...it takes a lot of work to get them there.

Is that a bad thing?

I don't really think so, although I sympathize with the OP. The time investment is a bit more than it should probably be.

However, the added performance and flexibility for my ships is something I do not wish to give up.

So, given the choice, I'd keep engineering because of the added value to all my ships. It just takes time

 

[Scoob]

I've been playing continuously for the last couple of years (PVE only) and I was thinking this same thing the other day. I can no longer just buy a ship and modules and go on out the door like that, unless I just enjoy flying a rather gimped ship.

It's a bit of a catch-22. I *really* like how my engineered ships perform. But...it takes a lot of work to get them there.

Is that a bad thing?

I don't really think so, although I sympathize with the OP. The time investment is a bit more than it should probably be.

However, the added performance and flexibility for my ships is something I do not wish to give up.

So, given the choice, I'd keep engineering because of the added value to all my ships. It just takes time

I think you've nailed it in many ways.

There are tasks I enjoy doing in-game. I'm primarily a trader, so I've enjoyed the Passenger missions too. I go through phases of peaceful mining too from time to time. I also enjoy a little BH with my friend, both in our iEagles. Great fun, but after an hour or so I've usually had enough.

I'd like to further engineer certain ships of mine to improve their ability to do what I like doing. However, it looks like I need to do other tasks to gain what I need. So, I could trade for hours and it'd not feel grindy at all - though I appreciate it might for many - however, doing Combat for too long does, the fun level drops off quickly for me. Additionally, I'm reading the INARA page now on Engineers, it looks like I'll have to do activities that will feel like a grind to me to get what I want. I guess that's why I hoped my "A" Rated ships would feel more special than they do, sometimes the gains from "E" to "A" don't feel like enough. Indeed some "E" rated stuff - I'm looking at you FSD's - is laughable. I mean, 8 ly jump ranges? Really? lol.

I'm going to ponder what I'll do next, I may well go for some activities purely for the materials, I'd rather not, but that looks like it's how it is.

Scoob.

 

[d8veh]

I think Engineers would have been very good if it only applied to FSD, Thrusters, PP, PD and sensors, but when applied to weapons with special effects, it changed PvP into a game of Top Trumps instead of a game of skill and experience. In PvE, you can still get by without ever seeing an engineer. Overall, I think I enjoyed the game more before engineers.

 

[bootsam]

With regards to engineers, it would have been a simpler mechanic just to run missions for the engineer to enable the particular upgrade. With the reward being the particular data/materials required and then the upgrade RNG. Save all that faffing around hunting this and that, which is generally a time sink.

 

[Scoob]

I think Engineers would have been very good if it only applied to FSD, Thrusters, PP, PD and sensors, but when applied to weapons with special effects, it changed PvP into a game of Top Trumps instead of a game of skill and experience. In PvE, you can still get by without ever seeing an engineer. Overall, I think I enjoyed the game more before engineers.

I've not really played with weapons yet, are the Engineered weapon effects potentially quite game-changing too then?

With regards to engineers, it would have been a simpler mechanic just to run missions for the engineer to enable the particular upgrade. With the reward being the particular data/materials required and then the upgrade RNG. Save all that faffing around hunting this and that, which is generally a time sink.

I agree. Almost like the Engineer has their own mission board, so the player can choose a mission that suits their play-style. I.e. maybe the Engineer need to to eliminate a pirate whose been raiding their supplies, or perhaps supply some good, even possibly transporting a "science team" somewhere. So, the basic play-styles are covered. I for one would have welcomed this.

I'd imagine that any changes made to Engineers - other than the Engineering results, as previously mentioned - can't be too extreme as it'd punish those who have done the grind to gather materials. Still, perhaps the update could simply give a bonus to those who've already done the work, maybe adding some additional materials for free or something.

Scoob.

 

[akaliel]

Only on Elite forums would people complain that a patch added a feature that makes their ships better. Because they enjoyed them sucking for role play purposes. You don't have to engineer if you don't want to, you know.

 

[bootsam]

Better? Well, thats moot. It added further imbalance to the precarious imbalance already present. Youre correct we dont have to engineer. Thus I do not. I havent the game time to do it. If you do, then great. I dont PvP and only play group or solo, so its off no use to me. Thus I generally ignore engineers.

Only in Elite forums would someone post a complaint against people complaining about something. Now Im complaining about a compliant made against the original complaint. I'd complain but someone would just add another complaint and we'd all lose sight of the original complaint and begin complaining.

 

[CMDR Pugwash]

Have we all had enough of them yet? Can we get rid of them now?

 

[sidereal6]

with or without engineering A-rated is the only and best to use

That's not true at all. The compulsion to A-rate *everything* without any additional thought is a mistake.

For example, class-B modules have higher integrity. If you're running a class-A FSD in a combat ship, you're making a mistake - you're making it easier to knock out your FSD.

Class-A costs as much as four times as much as a class B module, but usually only gives a small increase in capability. So for example, if you're running a 6A fuel scoop on your Asp, you're making a mistake. You paid 20 million credits more than the B scoop, you increased your rebuy by more than a million, and you only got a tiny increase in capability, which in this case you don't even need (try it for yourself, downgrade to a B and you'll still find that you top off your tanks faster than you can steer around the star).

And there are other examples too - you mentioned D-rating yourself. I'm not saying you shouldn't ever fit A-class modules. I'm saying that doing it without understand it is a mistake.

 

[CMDR _BigJay_]

Another thread full of people who don't engineer talking about what's wrong with engineering.

 

[bootsam]

I'm an Engineer. I can diss my profession all I like. So ner.

 

[Scoob]

Only on Elite forums would people complain that a patch added a feature that makes their ships better. Because they enjoyed them sucking for role play purposes. You don't have to engineer if you don't want to, you know.

Lol, you know that's not what I meant It's about having to do activities you might not enjoy in order to patch obvious holes in the base ship designs, despite them being fully conventionally upgraded. I like Engineers in principal, it's gaining the required materials via my normal play-style that seems to be problematic. I'm simply not getting the material returns I expected. There's actually a bug report on this, seems something went screwy with materials rewards from missions in a recent update.

Better? Well, thats moot. It added further imbalance to the precarious imbalance already present. Youre correct we dont have to engineer. Thus I do not. I havent the game time to do it. If you do, then great. I dont PvP and only play group or solo, so its off no use to me. Thus I generally ignore engineers.

Only in Elite forums would someone post a complaint against people complaining about something. Now Im complaining about a compliant made against the original complaint. I'd complain but someone would just add another complaint and we'd all lose sight of the original complaint and begin complaining.

No strict need to engineer, we can agree on that certainly. Though some of the weaknesses of certain ships does irk me. For me, there's this new (I was away a while remember) feature that looks really interesting and allows my ships to be more how I hoped they would be without Engineering. I mean, my newly-acquired Python is "A" Rated, but it's really not that exciting to fly. It's jump range is a bit rubbish and it feels slow. Remember, I've just come from a Type 7, where unexciting and slow is a given. However, I really liked flying that ship! The Python feels like a bit of a let-down by comparison, though on paper it's the better multi-role ship. I feel like it needs to be Engineered to meet by expectations, which is a surprise. The Type 7 on the other hand felt great for it's purpose when not engineered, yet my own light Engineering (tier 1 only with tier 3 FSD) enhanced it further for it's role.

I'm not trying to complain, just present my thoughts on how things are currently. To come from a generally "A" Rated Type 7 - which I loved flying - and upgrading to the Python, "A" Rating it and thinking "meh" isn't something I expected. I.e. I feel obliged to Engineer it to be the ship I expected it to be in the first place. I mean, a "A" Rated Python, flying and handling like a Type 7? Doesn't seem right to me! Nor does the Type 7 being able to out-jump it...I assumed the Type 7 to be a much more massive ship, perhaps I'm wrong, I've not explicitly compared the stats.

Scoob.