Combat Completely Ruined for Non Engineered Players

[Ydiss]

I don't buy the idea of an 'end game' or that Engineering is mandatory for anything except being able to compete with CMDRs and certain very optional NPCs on equal footing. One can experience the overwhelming bulk of what the game has to offer without touching any of the Engineers.

Regarding Engineering itself, it's far more inflationary that needed to be. It could have, and should have, been a collection of side-grades. There should be times when an non-Engineered part is the best option, and even in a best case scenario for Engineering, the difference between a fully Engineered and completely unEngineered vessel should be a matter of degrees, not an order of magnitude.



Personally, I didn't need any of this hand holding. Give me a game and I will try to do anything and everything that can be done within the mechanisms available in the first week I have it. ED was no exception. I played the tutorial until I had control binds I liked and could do all ten waves of Incursion (including destroying that Anaconda with an E rated Sidewinder with a fixed beam laser and eleven railgun shots...which took about a dozen attempts), then I dove into Open and started taking missions, shooting people, and trying to push for the edges of that beta bubble.

By the time Engineers dropped, I had over 2k hours on my CMDR who had: fought in every CZ CG there had been; participated in hundreds of PvP engagements; took an FDL to Sag A* and back; traveled 10000km in the SRV (on worlds from the smallest to the largest landable ones in the bubble); traded most every rare; smuggled more slaves than I could count; had owned and flown every ship in the game; and had mined enough to know I didn't want to mine any more.

Engineering was a giant pile of busy work that was essentially mandatory to continue to do the sort of activities I had been enjoying since my first day playing (a lot of PvP, most of it organic, with and against some of the best CMDRs of the day). And after getting it out of the way the experience I had been having a blast with for almost two years was so radically altered that it had lost much of it's appeal. Balance was damaged beyond repair, and though things gradually got better, it never approached what I had from 1.1-1.4.

The current process of Engineering isn't any where near as tedious as it was and as of 3.0 is scarcely a barrier (my CMDRs materials are almost constantly full, just from farting around), but the problem is with the end result...the ultimate effect is, ironically enough, something that is more bland than the stock options ever were...still can't do without it if I want my CMDR to be competitive.

It changed pvp from something I'd have been quite happy to engage in on a casual, organic level, to something similar to Eve online (though not that bad) where the investment required isn't worth it for the payoff unless it's your sole driving force.

The few pvp encounters I experienced before engineers were genuinely fun (never more fun than in beta when everyone I fought also flew Vipers and Cobras though ). Just zero point bothering now. Not for me.

PvE is another story. It's not that you need engineers to "see everything the game has to offer". But if you refuse to do engineers, you're likely making quite a lot of the game much slower.

My choice is eat the big frog so, for the remaining time I play, everything I do offers less resistance.

 

[Vedmo]

I don't buy the idea of an 'end game' or that Engineering is mandatory for anything except being able to compete with CMDRs and certain very optional NPCs on equal footing. One can experience the overwhelming bulk of what the game has to offer without touching any of the Engineers.

Regarding Engineering itself, it's far more inflationary that needed to be. It could have, and should have, been a collection of side-grades. There should be times when an non-Engineered part is the best option, and even in a best case scenario for Engineering, the difference between a fully Engineered and completely unEngineered vessel should be a matter of degrees, not an order of magnitude.



Personally, I didn't need any of this hand holding. Give me a game and I will try to do anything and everything that can be done within the mechanisms available in the first week I have it. ED was no exception. I played the tutorial until I had control binds I liked and could do all ten waves of Incursion (including destroying that Anaconda with an E rated Sidewinder with a fixed beam laser and eleven railgun shots...which took about a dozen attempts), then I dove into Open and started taking missions, shooting people, and trying to push for the edges of that beta bubble.

By the time Engineers dropped, I had over 2k hours on my CMDR who had: fought in every CZ CG there had been; participated in hundreds of PvP engagements; took an FDL to Sag A* and back; traveled 10000km in the SRV (on worlds from the smallest to the largest landable ones in the bubble); traded most every rare; smuggled more slaves than I could count; had owned and flown every ship in the game; and had mined enough to know I didn't want to mine any more.

Engineering was a giant pile of busy work that was essentially mandatory to continue to do the sort of activities I had been enjoying since my first day playing (a lot of PvP, most of it organic, with and against some of the best CMDRs of the day). And after getting it out of the way the experience I had been having a blast with for almost two years was so radically altered that it had lost much of it's appeal. Balance was damaged beyond repair, and though things gradually got better, it never approached what I had from 1.1-1.4.

The current process of Engineering isn't any where near as tedious as it was and as of 3.0 is scarcely a barrier (my CMDRs materials are almost constantly full, just from farting around), but the problem is with the end result...the ultimate effect is, ironically enough, something that is more bland than the stock options ever were...still can't do without it if I want my CMDR to be competitive.

I wouldn't call the engineering unlock process hand holding, unless by hand holding we mean brushing the edges of two pinkies together for a brief moment just to make sure everyone knows they are there, but I see your point and we certainly had different experiences with it that understandably lead to different opinions of it. I started with Horizons, so it is all I have know.

I do agree it is far too much power creep that trivializes much of pve combat, but I thoroughly enjoy the process of engineering different ships and trying different stuff out. I doubt it will ever happen, but if they ever opened a vanilla server, I would love to have the chance to play as it was pre-Horizons.

 

[znôrt]

It changed pvp from something I'd have been quite happy to engage in on a casual, organic level, to something similar to Eve online (though not that bad) where the investment required isn't worth it for the payoff unless it's your sole driving force.

The few pvp encounters I experienced before engineers were genuinely fun (never more fun than in beta when everyone I fought also flew Vipers and Cobras though ). Just zero point bothering now. Not for me.

pretty much my sentiment too.

upgrades are nice but the gameplay didn't get one iota more fun or better because of them, instead it got buried below a senseless grind and a wall of artificial complexity. good riddance. not that it was a first class game in the pvp aspect to begin with, but it sure was fun. imo, engineers cost almost a year to implement and was a net loss for the game, it was better before it.

kill all inginerz!

 

[HrafnKolbrandr]

Sounds like your DM only understood combat. Maybe you are in the same boat.

I'm talking trade offs, like lightweight guns for ship speed vs heavy hitting ones. Or heat reduction vs armor or jump range.

If you haven't figured out why one would be better than the others in different situations then to probably also think the game is shallow and that's a bummer.

I assure you, in my DnD games your dumped CHA would come up and it would be hilarious for everyone else, but also cause wonderful problems.

You're comparing engineered vs engineered. And you're also looking at it outside of the scope where it actually matters, within a build.

When you engineer a module or weapon for a particular build, you are not making any appreciable tradeoff. It is basically a pure upgrade on that build. You have no appreciable vulnerability in exchange for that upgrade that the non-engineered version of that build would not have. What vulnerability you do have (some reduced module integrity?) is akin to the barbarian dump-statting charisma. The player built his barbarian to be good at melee combat; he doesn't care that he will suck in social sitiations if/when it comes up, because that wasn't the point of the build, and it won't come up that often anyways.

When it comes to engineered vs non-engineered, there is no appreciable tradeoff. Engineering a build is always an upgrade.

 

[Brrokk]

I can see that engineering may not make combat more interesting, but I think it makes the process of
ship building much more engaging. Rather than just choosing the vanilla ship for a purpose from 30-odd alternatives, I can tinker with a huge variety of variations, combining various grades and mods to get the interactions I want subject to power management, heat management, weight, integrity etc. trade-offs. EDSY becomes a game in itself. To me, engineering is a big part of ED.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

CZs are END GAME, they are top-tier warships against top-tier warships with the best engineering. Try Res sites if you don't want to engineer.

Nonsense.

 

[NorthernDevo]

Sigh - OK, while YOU guys are arguing both sides of this, I'll just be in ED simply enjoying combat rather that making notes with a pad and pencil recording in precise detail just why it is not perfect for you.
For the "Engineering makes un-engineered combat impossible" guys: I fly in Low-CZ's all the time and if I am not DOMINANT, I am neither dominated. Perhaps just being a normal pilot among others in that instance and NOT a hugely powerful murder-machine is not your thing? Be honest now - do you want actual equality or do you want to WIN? Because EVERYONE screaming that the CZ's are unbalanced are saying they get killed quick. I mean...duh. Do you want equal combat or do you want to WIN?
An A-rated Cobra can withstand a low-to-med CZ IF the pilot is aware of their surroundings. If they know their strengths, weaknesses, know how to link up and fly with their allies, then they can do well in a CZ. If all you want to do is WIN, you're going to get murdered because you are neither a team player nor a smart fighter.
CZ's are NOT cheap dakka. They demand caution, awareness, knowledge and skill. They are COMBAT ZONES. People who engage in combat (I speak as a vet) want to be alive at the end of the day so engaging in combat is TRULY the toughest, most bitter fighting you can imagine.
Nobody EVER says "I'm totally useless and have Styrofoam armour so I'm gonna attack that anaconda!"
YOU know - like in a RES.
So if you're not UP to a CZ, don't complain about it. Just don't go INTO a CZ and you'll be fine.

 

[Ydiss]

Sigh

^^ Sums this all up nicely.

 

[Globusdiablo]

...Engineering was a giant pile of...

 

[Losondoky]

I am sort of a new player that only had the game for, I think less than a month. I gotta say engineering really makes your ship super strong. In the past, fight against a pirate NPC Anaconda usually means losing your shield and taking a bit of hull damage before taking him down. After a little bit of engineering, like give grade 1 resistance boost to shield boosters, grade 3 reinforced fastcharge bi-wave shield gen, grade 3 dirty drive drage drive thrusters, grade 5 power distrubutors (which I think you can get with the first couple engineers), I ended up only losing maybe about 25% to 50% of my shield after engaging those NPC Anacondas... which the shield will likey recharged to 80% to 90% after I collected the engineering materials from their remains. Engineering made a huge difference I'd say, I mean, at least I really need the FSD engineering to make my gameplay more confortable.

That's been said, I am not really against the idea of engineering, I just wish it is less grindy... I just managed to unlock most of the engineers around the bubble, and the process is really grindy. Like flying back and forth to transport cargo that has a limit supply so you need to do multiple runs (which is dumb imo, like why not allowing me to wait maybe 10 minute for the supply to comeout again so I can have 50/50 required cargo rather than 48/50, and I need to fly an additional 200ly for 2 cargo?), or mining for specific mineral (becase I didn't really do mining that much, so it took me really long to outfit a ship and figure a places to mine.... and I almost felt asleep doing the process, hitting the rocks multiple times).
Collecting engineering materials is also troublesome, especially certain raw matierals. I felt the encoded and manufactured materials are not so hard to get, as you can get those during combat, missions and hitting signal sources... the raw material is somewhat troublesome for me, as I need to land on a planet and specifically farm for it... which I don't consider it to be super enjoyable (I mean, it's driving + shooting rocks). Also, sometimes you just can't get the raw materials you want, even it says it has about 1.2% reserves and the system is pristine. I literally drove for about 1 hour or something, but didn't manage to get even 1 highest grade material that I am looking for... instead, I got a tonnes of iron and sulfur...
Welp, I might just farm those from the crashing Anaconda sites since the "normal" method seems not really effective and gonna take who knows how long for me to get the materials I needed.

 

[Stelar 7]

You're comparing engineered vs engineered. And you're also looking at it outside of the scope where it actually matters, within a build.

When you engineer a module or weapon for a particular build, you are not making any appreciable tradeoff. It is basically a pure upgrade on that build. You have no appreciable vulnerability in exchange for that upgrade that the non-engineered version of that build would not have. What vulnerability you do have (some reduced module integrity?) is akin to the barbarian dump-statting charisma. The player built his barbarian to be good at melee combat; he doesn't care that he will suck in social sitiations if/when it comes up, because that wasn't the point of the build, and it won't come up that often anyways.

When it comes to engineered vs non-engineered, there is no appreciable tradeoff. Engineering a build is always an upgrade.

Translation,

If you ignore the downsides there are no downsides.

Bravo, good tautology.

 

[Ydiss]

Translation,

If you ignore the downsides there are no downsides.

Bravo, good tautology.

All downsides can be negated though.

His analogy isn't accurate. It's more like getting a massive buff to strength, adding magic damage on top, with a downside that all attacks use lots of stamina.

Then another upgrade that gives a massive buff to stamina but reduces your poison resist.

Then a weapon that makes you immune to poison with the only trade off being you could have chosen a minor buff to damage.

Engineers is a complete upgrade across a full build. It totally negates the need for power management, mass management and heat management. All penalties are either irrelevant or can be 100% mitigated. In terms of power, heat and mass management, a g5 ship exceeds in all 3 areas, despite these usually being the penalty stats.

I understand some like engineers completely and don't think it should change but can we stop pretending it's anything but power bloat, please?

 

[Stelar 7]

All downsides can be negated though.

His analogy isn't accurate. It's more like getting a massive buff to strength, adding magic damage on top, with a downside that all attacks use lots of stamina.

Then another upgrade that gives a massive buff to stamina but reduces your poison resist.

Then a weapon that makes you immune to poison with the only trade off being you could have chosen a minor buff to damage.

Engineers is a complete upgrade across a full build. It totally negates the need for power management, mass management and heat management. All penalties are either irrelevant or can be 100% mitigated. In terms of power, heat and mass management, a g5 ship exceeds in all 3 areas, despite these usually being the penalty stats.

I understand some like engineers completely and don't think it should change but can we stop pretending it's anything but power bloat, please?

I've said that engineering is generally a buff, repeatedly I think.

I mentioned the trade offs to your idea of removing the g1 -5 effects and having only the bonus effects. Then slappy jumped in and made his bizarre barbarian analogy.

The effects are situational and are meaningful choices. I'd love to have short range blaster on the rails on my courier but that would slow it down so I took light weight.

Would love to have more power on the powerplant of my ax krait but it needs the armored plant because thargs shoot for that thing.

These are real trade offs, and the choices matter.

I'm in favor of an engineered ship being better than a stock ship. In fact given the effort needed to get engineering I'd be upset if engineering wasn't better.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I've said that engineering is generally a buff, repeatedly I think.

I mentioned the trade offs to your idea of removing the g1 -5 effects and having only the bonus effects. Then slappy jumped in and made his bizarre barbarian analogy.

The effects are situational and are meaningful choices. I'd love to have short range blaster on the rails on my courier but that would slow it down so I took light weight.

Would love to have more power on the powerplant of my ax krait but it needs the armored plant because thargs shoot for that thing.

These are real trade offs, and the choices matter.

I'm in favor of an engineered ship being better than a stock ship. In fact given the effort needed to get engineering I'd be upset if engineering wasn't better.

There are not choices - just railroads to power creep without downsides.

 

[Stelar 7]

There are not choices - just railroads to power creep without downsides.

Dude,

There are choices, I outlined several. Thanks for your contribution though. I'm sure you'll change someone's mind any minute now.

 

[gorankar]

The ship has sailed on engineering. But I do regret the scope of it. If they had stopped at G1 or even G2 levels for weapons and defensive modules, I think it would have been better. And made it either experimental effect or G1/2 boost, not both.
As it is now, if you want to play in open, you better have engineered shields and or HRP, because you are almost insta dead in an unengineered ship if attacked by a competently flown G5 Rail/PA/Flack FDL/FAS/Krait II/etc.

Ship has sailed, I don't forsee them nerfing engineering. Not sure there is even a way to go about it. Take away what people already have and there would be salt, reduce what engineers are capable of doing going forward, and there will be salt and cries to nerf "legacy" modules.......again. LOL, I almost forgot about the first time I heard the "nerf legacy modules" battle cry.

 

[jonesskill]

Loved enginnering, Really want even more powerfull enginerring options tho.
The only aspect of the game that actually let you personalize your Ship, made it diferent than others.

The only problem has the DLC content thing that really made it unfair, but now horizons is free, so everyone that is not lazy can get a powefull ship to shred powerfull npcs, sounds very nice to me.
You have the option to not enguiner to, but with this option you also will be penalized tho, no reason to cry about it.

 

[Siranui]

Given how dirt cheap Horizons was - less than two hours minimum wage - I don't think it 'wasn't fair'. Nobody was seriously locked out of competitive play due to the price point.

There are not choices - just railroads to power creep without downsides.

No, those are choices. They are powercreep, but they also offer downsides. I'm not sure how you can call destroying a weapon's capability at more than 500m 'no downside'. I'm not sure how something that offers a choice of mechanical options can be described as a railroad.

At very least the choice is 'do I engage with this content?'. In the same way that in a game of snooker I can choose to never engage with the pink and black balls. ie: I'm making life harder for myself by applying artificial restrictions and not using all the tools at my disposal, but that's my choice. It just seems odd that I would then complain to my snooker-player buddies and the guy who runs a league that the black and pink ball completely ruin the game.

 

[Ydiss]

No, those are choices. They are powercreep, but they also offer downsides. I'm not sure how you can call destroying a weapon's capability at more than 500m 'no downside'. I'm not sure how something that offers a choice of mechanical options can be described as a railroad.

Some blueprints were really well designed. The example you gave just happened to be one of them. Short and long range blueprints mostly are good examples of side grades. I don't think I've ever used either and felt the result was a pure upgrade, because sometimes the downside rears its ugly head (like jitter), resulting in a flavour of weapon that I actually use for a specific reason (long range tagging and applying a debuff with the experimental).

If all of Engineers worked similarly then it'd be great. I know that the temptation is to either be like the op (totally against) or like a lot of others (totally for) but engineers does do some stuff fine. It just got way too much glaringly wrong though. Like, a whole year to attempt to revamp wrong.

Admittedly, the ship sailed now. We're not getting big changes. But the opposition to any changes just makes no sense to me.

Thankfully, at least fdev are looking to adjust some elements of the grind.

 

[Ydiss]

Double post