Automate some of colonisation efforts

[luminous_void]

I know this saying 'no pain no gain', but the way how currently colonisation works is not sustainable. Neither good for CMDRs nor for the game itself.
This reddit post inspired me to write here. A suggestion to tweak colonisation mechanism further.

A bit of background

So far we see many 'zombie' systems that are not and will not be developed by an architect any further.
Reasons are plenty: simple 'too much effort with hauling', 'this outpost was built just to move away from the bubble anyway, i actually want to build my systems in XYZ sector', 'i don't want it / need it anymore'. Plenty of beautiful systems are at threat of being forgotten zombie systems with one station only.

Suggestions

1) Instead of relying solely on architects work (hauling...) - automate hauling and delegate it to NPCs that will (using existing trading network mechanics) deliver cargo to new stations.
Initial station still will have be built fully by a CMDR. But subsequent developments - goals set by an architect - will be automated by NPCs.
It will require more time to develop system by NPC efforts only so a CMDR would still have motivation to speeding things up by doing the hauling himself.

2) create a way to modify system infrastructure (upgrade existing stations t1-> t2, change station types agriculture-> industry, extraction -> refinery etc) so the architect is able fix some mistakes or to adapt system to changing environment (market, neighbourhood systems, own capacities and resources).

3) increase weekly payout for developed systems to give incentive to architects to develop it further.

4) create some metric on 'colonisation attractiveness' of a system (interesting POIs? amount of slots? variety of slot types?) - anyhow - with clear criteria on why a system is an 'attractive colonisation target'. Then have more demanding rules on developing such systems: system will be put to decay if is abandoned by an architect, or architect will be forced to sell the system at some (well known in advance) price, after a period of inactivity.

5) Another metric could be a 'developed system threshold' above which any penalties will not be applicable anymore.

6) create a ranking system for architects? if it goes below certain point - an architect can't claim new systems. And the opposite rule - if the ranking is good there could be more claims made - Reward architects for more effort.

We have 400 bln stars in galaxy, putting a leash on architects or penalising them for 'not developing system enough' seems ridiculous, yet having hundreds of systems as zombies, or blocked for further development is a waste too. A balanced approach is needed and any effort that has been made by CMDRs should be appreciated.

Thank you!

 

[aRJay]

No automation.

 

[Therinfluffs]

No automation.

Too late, built my colony to 52% using nothing but supercruise assist and autodock. It's dumb enough labor/gameplay it may as well be automated or botted at this point. I can probably make an autohotkey script do it all in a button press.

I can probably render it down to a single mouse macro.

When colonization building can be broken down to a single mouse macro maybe the gameplay sucks.

 

[luminous_void]

Too late, built my colony to 52% using nothing but supercruise assist and autodock. It's dumb enough labor/gameplay it may as well be automated or botted at this point. I can probably make an autohotkey script do it all in a button press.

I can probably render it down to a single mouse macro.

When colonization building can be broken down to a single mouse macro maybe the gameplay sucks.

Please share the script once you have it I will name one of my stations with your name

 

[Therinfluffs]

Please share the script once you have it I will name one of my stations with your name

It'd need to be specific to the individual route, and dependent on how many commodities you carry at a time and whether you directly deposit them in your carrier or are selling all to the colony ship. So may be more of a pain to micromanage than anything.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Participants are reminded that automation of the game is not permitted. See below, taken from a thread about botting:

Hello everyone,

This thread was passed onto us from the forum team.

Automation is not permitted in Elite, we class automation as more than one action in game per button press, this includes fleet carrier automation.

If you suspect that automation is being utilised in specific systems, or you think a specific user is using automation, please report that to us here. We can then forward on your report to our anti cheating for them to look into.

Alternatively if you know the commander name of the account you suspect, you can submit an in game report and that will go straight to the anti cheating team.

 

[KRISXR]

I have to agree somewhat that systems with only a tiny outpost could potentially be a problem. If a chain of small outposts are all that exists for many light years a large ship could get into fuel trouble, even if the ship has a fuel scoop, definitely if it doesn't. I have run into this on the fringes of the bubble that are branching toward different directions towards popular destinations. It is dangerous, so that's good, but it also kinda puts a kink in the whole premise of colonization.

I don't think any automation is a good idea. I think all kinds of negative tactics would be exploited, (not sure what they'd be but I am sure players would figure out some kind of underhanded method), and if it is automated then why not have FDev just implement new systems every thursday tick.

I don't agree with any of the other suggested methods, payouts, award/penalty systems, or ranking system. It sounds a bit convoluted and again a bit exploitable on one side and punishing on the other. Colonization is all about progress, expanding the bubble, and those ideas hinder that process.

Maybe instead if an architect isn't interested in developing a system they could abandon the system and allow another Cmdr to develop the system. The only problem is the architect not abandoning the system. I think there would be players that would like making pit stop systems, I'm probably one of them. I know I have been hauling food, leisure items, and general goods to an outpost that has only one faction member present. Alone... isolated... orbiting a star... forgotten... trying to stave off space madness. Last I checked in he was agitated, aloof, and a bit smelly.

 

[Darrack]

I have to agree somewhat that systems with only a tiny outpost could potentially be a problem

Its just the same as a system with no stations at all, just need to plan or set jumping to only scoopable stars.

O7

 

[Therinfluffs]

I have to agree somewhat that systems with only a tiny outpost could potentially be a problem. If a chain of small outposts are all that exists for many light years a large ship could get into fuel trouble, even if the ship has a fuel scoop, definitely if it doesn't. I have run into this on the fringes of the bubble that are branching toward different directions towards popular destinations. It is dangerous, so that's good, but it also kinda puts a kink in the whole premise of colonization.

I don't think any automation is a good idea. I think all kinds of negative tactics would be exploited, (not sure what they'd be but I am sure players would figure out some kind of underhanded method), and if it is automated then why not have FDev just implement new systems every thursday tick.

I don't agree with any of the other suggested methods, payouts, award/penalty systems, or ranking system. It sounds a bit convoluted and again a bit exploitable on one side and punishing on the other. Colonization is all about progress, expanding the bubble, and those ideas hinder that process.

Maybe instead if an architect isn't interested in developing a system they could abandon the system and allow another Cmdr to develop the system. The only problem is the architect not abandoning the system. I think there would be players that would like making pit stop systems, I'm probably one of them. I know I have been hauling food, leisure items, and general goods to an outpost that has only one faction member present. Alone... isolated... orbiting a star... forgotten... trying to stave off space madness. Last I checked in he was agitated, aloof, and a bit smelly.

I think there would be more effort put into colonization if there was more value in building them. Instead we just get something we have barely any control over, and barely any reward other than the EA games style of "sense of pride and accomplishment" in return for participating in a massive grind so we can pay real world money to put funny names on buildings that people may or may not ever witness anyway.

Architects don't even get anything along the lines of like.. Commodity storage.

Oh boy, you invested potentially billions of credits and hundreds of hours into a system? 10k per installation per week, it will take literal decades to get a return on your investment, you will literally be dead and rotting in the ground IRL before you gain any monetary value from colonization.

The biggest discounts you can get after hundreds of hours of investment is around 3% on ships and 7% on markets. The markets will potentially not even reflect the economy you set up in the first place.

This is why people just drop their station and leave. Pretty sure most people are just waiting for more incentive to be added.

 

[KRISXR]

Its just the same as a system with no stations at all, just need to plan or set jumping to only scoopable stars.

O7

Of course, but there a few scenarios where there might not be a fuel star on your journey following the trail into the black, in a large fuel hungry, possibly limited jump range ship. With the term colonization it would be kinda lame to adventure out into something that is part of the expanded bubble, and yet there isn't any other means of survival other than what is already there. Is that really colonizing, is that really expanding the bubble with populated systems? It's not much different than taking your existing exploration ship out into the black.

My imagining of the term trailblazers, expanding the bubble, and colonizing is just that, and not hundreds of single outposts that are totally useless to large ships. If it persists you could change the name from trailblazers and colonization to ghost towns and colonia or bust. I think it would be cooler to have highways into the black with some pit stops on the way to facilitate further exploration of the black. I did say potential problem, not huge problem, but a very static lame problem. The cool factor drops way off as it stands now.

 

[SlickPBW]

My colonization efforts have not created “zombie systems”. I am simply waiting until FD’s ever changing rules stabilize and the BETA has settled into whatever state they leave it in. Then I will proceed with it after understanding the rule set at that time. I suspect that other players are doing the same.

 

[Darrack]

Of course, but there a few scenarios where there might not be a fuel star on your journey following the trail into the black, in a large fuel hungry, possibly limited jump range ship. With the term colonization it would be kinda lame to adventure out into something that is part of the expanded bubble, and yet there isn't any other means of survival other than what is already there. Is that really colonizing, is that really expanding the bubble with populated systems? It's not much different than taking your existing exploration ship out into the black.

My imagining of the term trailblazers, expanding the bubble, and colonizing is just that, and not hundreds of single outposts that are totally useless to large ships. If it persists you could change the name from trailblazers and colonization to ghost towns and colonia or bust. I think it would be cooler to have highways into the black with some pit stops on the way to facilitate further exploration of the black. I did say potential problem, not huge problem, but a very static lame problem. The cool factor drops way off as it stands now.

With the way it is implemented ie the limited range, it was always going to create chains of single station systems as folks head out to a chosen spot.
It will be a long time yet before its a real issue of distance.

O7

 

[Zak Starfall]

My colonization efforts have not created “zombie systems”. I am simply waiting until FD’s ever changing rules stabilize and the BETA has settled into whatever state they leave it in. Then I will proceed with it after understanding the rule set at that time. I suspect that other players are doing the same.

^^^ This is my exact same situation/viewpoint
I’m fully expecting a 6 month to 1 year pause on my colonisation efforts, given Fdev’s usual track record

 

[Therinfluffs]

Of course, but there a few scenarios where there might not be a fuel star on your journey following the trail into the black, in a large fuel hungry, possibly limited jump range ship. With the term colonization it would be kinda lame to adventure out into something that is part of the expanded bubble, and yet there isn't any other means of survival other than what is already there. Is that really colonizing, is that really expanding the bubble with populated systems? It's not much different than taking your existing exploration ship out into the black.

My imagining of the term trailblazers, expanding the bubble, and colonizing is just that, and not hundreds of single outposts that are totally useless to large ships. If it persists you could change the name from trailblazers and colonization to ghost towns and colonia or bust. I think it would be cooler to have highways into the black with some pit stops on the way to facilitate further exploration of the black. I did say potential problem, not huge problem, but a very static lame problem. The cool factor drops way off as it stands now.

Because the term "Trailblazer" is a lie. They actually just made us a bunch of poorly paid gas station attendants. If we don't hammer this into Fdev I doubt anything will change for another decade.

 

[the100thmonkey]

automate hauling and delegate it to NPCs that will (using existing trading network mechanics) deliver cargo to new stations.

What existing trading network mechanics?

 

[luminous_void]

What existing trading network mechanics?

I mean trading markets in existing developed systems that already produce and consume some commodities. NPCs would be bringing necessary materials into our colony. Such NPC traders could be achievable in systems above certain population perhaps? or there will be 1 trader NPC / 1000 of population? Or per amount commodities needed by stations under construction and then be moving on to other systems. I think it is idea worth considering instead of rejecting it right off the bat just out of concern that it will make players less... invested in the game? Have some faith in people! Automation could in fact improve this because gameplay quality will be higher.

NPC would look for a commodity necessary in own system from neighbour systems (at certain range) and feed it to construction site. We see import/exports map already on the galaxy. Most of us think of automation as easing the pain of players but that's not even the main point. NPC support fits the whole story of colonising a system and the role of architect (not 'beast of burden'). With automation it will still take time to build and still Player will be able to speed things up by hauling himself - grind made optional.

Even looking from other side - is activity of Players so high that these commodities produced around are used effectively? Will it be in the future once colonisation hype is over? Is it safe to rely solely on Players' labour to develop a colony? From a narrative point of view? Colony brings population to a system, people flocking to it by many reasons, looking for better future, wealth opportunities. Currently there are stats like "development level', 'wealth', 'security' that regulate this somehow and 'colonisation effort' can be in itself a reason. Especially for well designed systems.

I simply don't think relying solely on Players' labour is good for the gameplay nor for quality of systems. Automation would allow systems to grow within a scope of goals set by architects (5 construction sites at a time), architects will have more time to think about proper system architecture instead of hauling efforts (but this privilege will not be taken from them). It makes perfect sense.

Here another idea - perhaps it does not even need to be 'NPC automation' - construction sites would (at some slow rate) gain necessary commodities with time so they can 'self-complete' - it could be a lengthy process but at least it will allow systems to grow. It is purely artificial but at least it would allow some progress instead of having thousands of dead systems. This could create some inflation though as commodities would appear 'out of nowhere' in such station.

If any of above ideas are not acceptable (perhaps there is not enough computing power for such automation), how about simply making a better hauling ship with bigger cargo. so instead of ~70 rounds of back-and-forth with Type Heavy to build Coriolis we'd need 10? I am not even mentioning bigger ports.

I think the whole point of above is to make developing a colony two dimensional in nature. Right now it is only one dimension - effort of a player. Instead there could be also a second dimension - time - with time the construction sites will get completed. It can be conditioned (amount of developed systems around, population.. etc) but it should exist.

 

[aRJay]

NPCs don’t trade anywhere.

A larger hauling ship will almost certainly be a balance issue elsewhere in the game.