![[DOOK] Droogie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/124/124078.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
We'll never see dynamic missions like that again. It's sad.
All these mining updates and patches. So combat updates when?
- Thread starter Sir Ganksalot
- Start date
We'll never see dynamic missions like that again. It's sad.
They still exist.... they only spawn for an hour or so after the Thursday PP tick.
Whether their lack of ongoing spawning is intentional or not isn't known. FD are likely aware of it though, since a thread where i discussed this was at least read by FD staff.
Things cost and pay the same. There's no favors. But I assumed that with those 3000 hours you've learned how to increase profit instead it being handed to you. Sorry for being wrong.
What on earth are you talking about? Getting lucky with a fleet carrier?
Sir Ganksalot, I think having access to larger and more efficient ships is what gives you, the veteran, the edge over a newcomer in terms of making credits efficiently and in large quantities. The problem at the moment lies in the rather over-the-top amounts of money that were being made in mining. With only a small ship and a bit of information regarding triple LTD hotspots, a newcomer is currently able to blast past almost all of the ships in the game straight to the top tier ships. In my opinion this is highly abnormal and bypasses the normal levelling process that exists within this game. I don't consider it to be realistic even for someone as yourself to be able to buy a fully kitted out Anaconda after only a couple of hours of game play. However, someone with resources and experience such as yourself SHOULD be able to get enough to buy an Anaconda after a day or two of intense game play. A newcomer should not be in that same position.
Except it doesn't, with the single exception of stacking pirate massacre missions, which absolutely does not require a fully engineered combat gankboat (or anything remotely resembling that) when the targets are, on most occasions, Novice/Competent targets. This is the only moneymaking meta with combat at the moment.
You only need that sort of gankboat if you're targeting things like Threat 5/6 Pirate Activity USS, or Wing Assassinations.... now... point me to where these are the next "big money meta?". That's the big, fat problem.
Are you trying to tell me that a newcomer in a Sidewinder is going to be able to make as much money as quickly as Sir Ganksalot in a Corvette? I hope that is not what you are trying to tell me. I know it's a bit of an extreme example but it emphasizes the point I am trying to make: those larger ships by nature of their bulk, their cargo capacity and the weapons loadouts on them, will be able to do more and more quickly than tiny starter ships. THAT is the advantage you as a veteran have in this game. Unfortunately, when newcomers can hop into an Anaconda within days of starting this game, things get REALLY wonky to say the least.
Within an hour or two, definitely.
An A-Rate, unengineered viper can wipe stacked massacre missions just as handily as someone in a corvette. Targets are generally novice-competent, and will engage as you engage them (i.e they will not target you unless you shoot first, and their mates sit idly)
Edit: is not hard to get the money for a basic combat fit like that, and the lions share of effort is in moving between uss, not killing the ships.
Last edited:
Doesn't pay the same though...
Just popped back into the game after several years away. I started in the original beta and witnessed most of the game's gold rushes (except the current mining one) and spent many months when active, back in the day, campaigning for better combat rewards but discussions like this one always missed part of the issue; content design.
Pay has largely always been skewed towards activities other than combat, even when we could mass stack missions (an unintended design that shouldn't have been left to the simplistic fix it received without further care and development to maintain higher end combat pay rewards at a suitable level) but that's only part of the problem.
The other part, for me, is that I return to the game in its seventh year and, except for some minor alterations, the things that we do as combat activities remain exactly the same as in beta.
CZs are fundamentally the same. What you do in them is the same basic format of combat as it's always been. Resource sites, basically the same. Nav beacons, the same. At least the Thargoid content introduced something new but from what I can see that's a pretty niche part of the game with an entirely different set of requirements.
All the majority of combat consists of is random, featureless fights in random, featureless locations with no structure whatsoever. Layered very roughly on top is the similarly basic mission system which helps add a very thin veneer of context with muddled credits benefit (depending, I guess on your willingness to game the stacking meta). But it's still largely featureless. Just a way of augmenting the lack of structure with an RNG objective that's largely identical every time.
I know that scenarios have been added over the years but it's the complete lack of development on the core combat scenarios that's most glaring to me, as a returning player. Why are CZs still so basic? Besides immersion fluff in the form of added audio transmissions that give feedback (welcomed in isolation), the idea that dropping in to fight randomly spawned opponents in an entirely featureless, empty location with no structure to it besides "well done, you won, now reset the instance to start again, yay" is, somehow, acceptable in a six year old game is baffling.
You just look at every phase of development over the years... PP, CQC, Planets, Engineers (both the original iteration and the extensive rework), mission system, passengers, crew, mining, exploration, Thargoids and now FCs... At no point in all of that did someone pipe up and say "you know, combat scenarios could do with a bit more meat to them... We've been basically using the same RNG placeholder systems introduced in beta..."
It is a little irritating to see comments like "Fdev focused on combat for years" when none of the above actually updated any of the existing, relatively hollow combat scenarios, into rich combat focused content beyond the seven year old whack-a-rng-mole we've got.
I'm assuming we'll get much the same style of "dynamic bland" combat scenarios with Odesey as well.
I don't care if mining is the current gold rush. I took part in a few of the various gold rushes years ago (starting with rare runs early on and ending with the long distance smuggling runs) and the one consistent feature of how Fdev handled each of them was they negated each without clearly attempting to maintain the viability and rewards by expanding upon what actually made each of them fun to do.
There really should be a pay scale that ramps up as you gain ranks and thus access to more rich and diverse mission scenarios. There really should be a massive array of CZ scenarios, ranging from novice skirmishes at the fringes of the conflict, right up to coordinated raids on bases, fleets, ground locations and so on, for more advanced players.
And they should get more pay for it.
There really does need to be more focused missions for bounty Hunters, pirates, mercenaries and even combat smugglers (or anti smuggler bounty Hunters even) that begin with a scenario and expand into a short, but detailed event at certain relevant locations. Fulfilling the entire event's stages should reward more and more and rank should affect all of this.
The obvious golden ticket would be somehow blending all three forms of combat into one beautifully structured opera (space, land vehicular/structure and foot) with Odesey (but there's not a chance we'll see that because all history points to is it'll be just another entirely isolated game play module that is kept very much separate from everything else we do).
Then, and only then, can I agree that combat got the love it's needed since launch.
Pay has largely always been skewed towards activities other than combat, even when we could mass stack missions (an unintended design that shouldn't have been left to the simplistic fix it received without further care and development to maintain higher end combat pay rewards at a suitable level) but that's only part of the problem.
The other part, for me, is that I return to the game in its seventh year and, except for some minor alterations, the things that we do as combat activities remain exactly the same as in beta.
CZs are fundamentally the same. What you do in them is the same basic format of combat as it's always been. Resource sites, basically the same. Nav beacons, the same. At least the Thargoid content introduced something new but from what I can see that's a pretty niche part of the game with an entirely different set of requirements.
All the majority of combat consists of is random, featureless fights in random, featureless locations with no structure whatsoever. Layered very roughly on top is the similarly basic mission system which helps add a very thin veneer of context with muddled credits benefit (depending, I guess on your willingness to game the stacking meta). But it's still largely featureless. Just a way of augmenting the lack of structure with an RNG objective that's largely identical every time.
I know that scenarios have been added over the years but it's the complete lack of development on the core combat scenarios that's most glaring to me, as a returning player. Why are CZs still so basic? Besides immersion fluff in the form of added audio transmissions that give feedback (welcomed in isolation), the idea that dropping in to fight randomly spawned opponents in an entirely featureless, empty location with no structure to it besides "well done, you won, now reset the instance to start again, yay" is, somehow, acceptable in a six year old game is baffling.
You just look at every phase of development over the years... PP, CQC, Planets, Engineers (both the original iteration and the extensive rework), mission system, passengers, crew, mining, exploration, Thargoids and now FCs... At no point in all of that did someone pipe up and say "you know, combat scenarios could do with a bit more meat to them... We've been basically using the same RNG placeholder systems introduced in beta..."
It is a little irritating to see comments like "Fdev focused on combat for years" when none of the above actually updated any of the existing, relatively hollow combat scenarios, into rich combat focused content beyond the seven year old whack-a-rng-mole we've got.
I'm assuming we'll get much the same style of "dynamic bland" combat scenarios with Odesey as well.
I don't care if mining is the current gold rush. I took part in a few of the various gold rushes years ago (starting with rare runs early on and ending with the long distance smuggling runs) and the one consistent feature of how Fdev handled each of them was they negated each without clearly attempting to maintain the viability and rewards by expanding upon what actually made each of them fun to do.
There really should be a pay scale that ramps up as you gain ranks and thus access to more rich and diverse mission scenarios. There really should be a massive array of CZ scenarios, ranging from novice skirmishes at the fringes of the conflict, right up to coordinated raids on bases, fleets, ground locations and so on, for more advanced players.
And they should get more pay for it.
There really does need to be more focused missions for bounty Hunters, pirates, mercenaries and even combat smugglers (or anti smuggler bounty Hunters even) that begin with a scenario and expand into a short, but detailed event at certain relevant locations. Fulfilling the entire event's stages should reward more and more and rank should affect all of this.
The obvious golden ticket would be somehow blending all three forms of combat into one beautifully structured opera (space, land vehicular/structure and foot) with Odesey (but there's not a chance we'll see that because all history points to is it'll be just another entirely isolated game play module that is kept very much separate from everything else we do).
Then, and only then, can I agree that combat got the love it's needed since launch.
Last edited:
1st mining could give PvP another go in open (with some right design)
2nd you dont want to see combat being broken even more dont you ? =D
Since those who want combat still play and build for combat, and the ships that are introduced are mostly geared for combat, it's not like the developers don't realize the combat element of the game is already sold to you. They just work to develop different/better ways for you to afford it.
What does combat entail that's so esoteric that it needs to be better developed or enhanced? You have flight model and weapon characteristics. Everything else is the pilot. Scenarios against NPCs are obviously cardboard and comical, but would a new set of text scripts change how anyone feels about engaging the 45th chaff spamming Dbx NPC during a pirate massacre mission? "I'm going to boil you up, son" vs the new and better "you've done it now!".
But let's introduce structure - let's have a combat zone around a capital ship. Oh wait, that happens already. No, let's have one around a station, only you cannot fire near most stations without incurring infractions. How about land based combat, where you are required to survive/fight over a base of operations on the ground? Nothing stops players from engaging in that now, but what about NPCs being there to provide some fodder? How many times do you want to go through the atmospheric script to get to the battle? Ok, how about battles 1km above the hard deck on high G planets? Challenging flight maneuvers but aren't you just getting closer to a regular fighter sim at that point? "Atmospheric worlds!"... ok right back to a regular fighter sim.
Curious as to what parts of combat need to be enhanced. It already seems like shields, shield boosters, shield cell banks, fancier shields, ECMs, point defense, chaff, etc.. all contribute to dragging out the "fun" to levels of absurdity (with NPCs, player vs player fights are different altogether). We grind for better weapons like high powered, expensive laser systems only to have them nerfed by chaff spamming NPCs, making them almost more of a liability than an asset because grinders and lifers wanted it to be harder. Powerplay introduce exclusive weapons and shields to either lengthen the fight (PvP) or shorten it (PvE). Then came all the engineering that created uber-weapons and defenses, so that engineered ships dwarf most NPC builds in stamina, speed, agility and firepower. So now you can have this beast of a build, a corvette with curb stomping ability. Now it's on! Only the combat zones changed so now you get a few kills in and it's all over.
But let's look at the narrative for combat in the 1st place - pirates are attacking our ships.. HALP!!.
Now you find the exact same scenario in almost every mission signal source, the ambush in debris fields, or the group of randomly gathered target ships all flying a big loop waiting to be called into the fray one at a time, but never caring about others in their own faction. Or you have the CNB with loads of pirates from the target faction, all scanning and killing the assassination targets that drop in (from their own faction!) because they might have 2 commodities in their holds.
The problem with combat is the same problem with any specific activity - the game is a jack of all trades but a master of none (except maybe the flight part). It doesn't spend enough energy on any specific task so that it's more involved than superficial, ad hoc reasoning for engaging in the affair in the 1st place. Only the explorers get that, and even then much of what they get from it is self-created narrative, as the game just lets you go pretend to do whatever.
Eventually when you've done most of it, if not all of it, you might want a rework on some things because you remember the fun you had once upon a time, but the game for many has run its course and a facelift doesn't change the shallow nature of the game, sans imaginary narrative. It doesn't change the fact that many of those you enjoyed playing with have since dipped, or that the dull droning of your ship in supercruise is going to constantly cause you to want to sleep instead of play. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
What does combat entail that's so esoteric that it needs to be better developed or enhanced? You have flight model and weapon characteristics. Everything else is the pilot. Scenarios against NPCs are obviously cardboard and comical, but would a new set of text scripts change how anyone feels about engaging the 45th chaff spamming Dbx NPC during a pirate massacre mission? "I'm going to boil you up, son" vs the new and better "you've done it now!".
But let's introduce structure - let's have a combat zone around a capital ship. Oh wait, that happens already. No, let's have one around a station, only you cannot fire near most stations without incurring infractions. How about land based combat, where you are required to survive/fight over a base of operations on the ground? Nothing stops players from engaging in that now, but what about NPCs being there to provide some fodder? How many times do you want to go through the atmospheric script to get to the battle? Ok, how about battles 1km above the hard deck on high G planets? Challenging flight maneuvers but aren't you just getting closer to a regular fighter sim at that point? "Atmospheric worlds!"... ok right back to a regular fighter sim.
Curious as to what parts of combat need to be enhanced. It already seems like shields, shield boosters, shield cell banks, fancier shields, ECMs, point defense, chaff, etc.. all contribute to dragging out the "fun" to levels of absurdity (with NPCs, player vs player fights are different altogether). We grind for better weapons like high powered, expensive laser systems only to have them nerfed by chaff spamming NPCs, making them almost more of a liability than an asset because grinders and lifers wanted it to be harder. Powerplay introduce exclusive weapons and shields to either lengthen the fight (PvP) or shorten it (PvE). Then came all the engineering that created uber-weapons and defenses, so that engineered ships dwarf most NPC builds in stamina, speed, agility and firepower. So now you can have this beast of a build, a corvette with curb stomping ability. Now it's on! Only the combat zones changed so now you get a few kills in and it's all over.
But let's look at the narrative for combat in the 1st place - pirates are attacking our ships.. HALP!!.
Now you find the exact same scenario in almost every mission signal source, the ambush in debris fields, or the group of randomly gathered target ships all flying a big loop waiting to be called into the fray one at a time, but never caring about others in their own faction. Or you have the CNB with loads of pirates from the target faction, all scanning and killing the assassination targets that drop in (from their own faction!) because they might have 2 commodities in their holds.
The problem with combat is the same problem with any specific activity - the game is a jack of all trades but a master of none (except maybe the flight part). It doesn't spend enough energy on any specific task so that it's more involved than superficial, ad hoc reasoning for engaging in the affair in the 1st place. Only the explorers get that, and even then much of what they get from it is self-created narrative, as the game just lets you go pretend to do whatever.
Eventually when you've done most of it, if not all of it, you might want a rework on some things because you remember the fun you had once upon a time, but the game for many has run its course and a facelift doesn't change the shallow nature of the game, sans imaginary narrative. It doesn't change the fact that many of those you enjoyed playing with have since dipped, or that the dull droning of your ship in supercruise is going to constantly cause you to want to sleep instead of play. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Last edited:
I wish there were some mining updates and patches. Here's two I'd like to see:
Look ma, a mining update and a combat update rolled into one!
- Make mines invisible on radar until you are on top of them (click). No more PDs clearing mine fields!
- Give mines a much greater AOE, "drifting" towards targets that enter their sphere, like mines in Homeworld.
Look ma, a mining update and a combat update rolled into one!
Last edited:
If you feel the current design of CZs and RES, largely unchanged since 2014 except perhaps the AI (which isn't strictly related to the CZs or RES design anyway), is perfectly complete and expanded upon then good for you, mate. Enjoy what we've got.
I will allow myself to disagree.
I expanded upon exactly the ideas I'd love to see many years ago. I do not get the impression there's a sincere willingness to discuss those from the questions you've posed and accept that they're likely rhetoric. And I don't believe me repeating stuff I posted years ago will actually change a thing from my perspective.
So, probably a happier occasion for us all if we leave it there. You disagree. And for that, I'm overwhelmingly pleased for you.
Myself, I'd prefer the game move forward and not retain 6+ year old mechanics that were pretty much slapped in during beta and mostly forgotten about since. Each to their own.
Edit: I'd like to add that quite a bit about the game is better than when I last played, for balance. Not limited to Engineers, which I much prefer now. But this thread isn't really about that. It's about combat and the really reasonable assertion that "it could be a lot better".
I'd be incredibly surprised if FD agreed with your thoughts that it can't get better.
Last edited:
You said you haven't played in many years. Why do you suddenly have an opinion on it?
I don't "suddenly" have an opinion, I've always had opinions but I'm sharing them now because I've just returned to play. But I think you know this, because I said as much as the opening sentence just three posts above, in the same sentence you're referring to. I believe you are capable of understanding that concept.
Can you confirm, yes or no, that your question is a genuine desire to understand my point of view?
Last edited:
... until you compare it to certain other in-game activities.
There is little or no depth to combat scenarios that's for sure. Why are we not winging up with CMDRs or NPCs and undertaking more involved combat scenarios such as as escorting a convoy through an asteroid field, or protecting a location from pirate or Thargoid attack? CQC should have done this and added the ability to holo-me into fighters at a location to undertake a task/mission.
25+ years ago there were space games which allowed you to undertake combat scenarios with a wing of NPC which you could give basic stay, attack that, follow me commands. Why is it, after 6yrs, in 2020, ED can't offer anything like that at all?
Consider if CQC had offered the ability to holo-me into fighters to undertake defend/attack/escort gameplay. Not only could that mechanic have been leverage across missions and Powerplay, but also importantly been used in the Thargoid Invasion to bring some much need variety and depth to it.
There seems to be little desire (or ability) for FD to move on and deepen the core game. And it seems "New Era" underlines this by them now opening up on a whole new Eastern Front with FPS pewpew instead of improving the core game's combat depth.
I wonder if, throughout the years of incompetent changes, they simply gave up upon trying to appease (or understand) the community. So much time and effort wasted on changes that didn't amount to a lot of positives. I hope this is not the case, however. This attitude would be an immediate death sentence to Odyssey.
As for buffing combat payouts, you really can't go wrong any further, with such a f-ed economy.