ANNOUNCEMENT Community Update (22/10)

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

Didn't seem to want an address to provide a digital retro thargoid hologram to go on my dashboard(s) so you should be safe to reinvest one (1) "free" ARX into that, if the offer is still available. I already have a PO box but that's not the point. I deliberately use cash to buy Steam credit for it's (apparent) anonymity.

The only reason I can think of for this move is to conjoin a physical address with activity on the forums so they can start sending out link tax invoices if the EU ever figure out how to enforce their new rules, at which point I'll happily trawl through every single post and un-link them, and probably delete the account.

The game was good enough to invest over 11,000 hours in, but not enough to be bullied.

I don't think its that nefarious (frontier also have physical products on sale and don't have the functionality to split the concepts, or they want it for fraud checks because they do the payment processing etc).

But never compromise your principles because some website asks you to. Be happy with that and they miss out, simple as that.

If you also have a itch from 11thousand hours though, another roundabout way could be to buy a new account.. new accounts since april use steam authentication apparently.. i hope you don't have to put your address in when making one of those... (worth checking though). Just on that on a recently good humble monthly elite was also on sale so i got another horizons account for peanuts including their free store credit for subscribing.. it was an old account key so so happy about that. Elite is missing from humble bundle atm so i think they finally worked it out. And completely raged at how they only received at most a few dollars for a full horizons key, lol.

 

[Six6VI]

I don't think its that nefarious (frontier also have physical products on sale and don't have the functionality to split the concepts, or they want it for fraud checks because they do the payment processing etc).

But never compromise your principles because some website asks you to. Be happy with that and they miss out, simple as that.

If you also have a itch from 11thousand hours though, another roundabout way could be to buy a new account.. new accounts since april use steam authentication apparently.. i hope you don't have to put your address in when making one of those... (worth checking though). Just on that on a recently good humble monthly elite was also on sale so i got another horizons account for peanuts including their free store credit for subscribing.. it was an old account key so so happy about that. Elite is missing from humble bundle atm so i think they finally worked it out. And completely raged at how they only received at most a few dollars for a full horizons key, lol.

It could be that nefarious, this is still the 21st century after all and I already had to link my Steam account to the game because they introduced the email code verification and made it so difficult to log in to play the game, by failing to send emails in a timely fashion that I tried the 'link' and it suddenly became easy.

I don't want to reset my progress, or divulge my personal information to Steam, or the other games in my library so once again we see FDev failing to consider the wishes of their customers and trying to railroad them into giving up data they don't need, aren't entitled to and consumers should be very wary.

For now I'll just withhold my funding, if they insist on this entrapment I'll go play something else.

[Note: I have no interest in their physical products, and I'm rapidly losing interest in their digital.]

 

[Reven]

On the current conversation, might just be because I've had the game less than a year (December last year I bought it) but I don't remember ever putting my address into FDev stuff to play. In fact I had a relatively easy time getting my Steam copy going.

As for the contents of the post itself:
I'm not super bummed about fleet carriers, but that's probably because of my comparatively little play time compared to others. I'd rather see the bugs get fixed so the base is more solid for the new attachments. That said I'm also going to propose the following to FDev taking this decision into consideration.

FDev, you made this announcement pushing back a wanted feature by 3-6 months or possibly more so you can focus on bug fixes. I know it takes a bunch of guts to make a post like that but I'm not going to give you a blind pat on the back, instead I give this advice and idea. Keep this transparency going. I'm not gonna say something like "Tell us everything you're planning" but with this period of bug fixing time you decided to go with, especially considering the idea to do beta testing with the patches, make sure you are as transparent with the process as possible. So here's an idea:

I get a newsletter in my inbox fairly regularly about Elite Dangerous, take advantage of this, add a new segment to it. The contents? In the email, a brief summary of the biggest issues being worked on at the time of the newsletter's publication for the next patch. Provide a link in the newsletter to a pdf or a forum post or even a text file listing every bug either fixed or being worked on at the time of the newsletter's publication, and update it upon each newsletter's release, keeping the list of bugs fixed/worked on updated so by the time the patch enters beta players have a complete list of bugs worked on between patches to test themselves, and what areas are still being worked on. I personally feel that something like this would help at least a little bit with the very negative feeling people seem to have around this game. I know I'd read that section of the newsletter.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Can´t see how it does. If anything PP is probably one of the best examples of the basic principle I referred to above and why it may be downprioritized.

I don't agree. Even at the back of the line, as the lowest priority, it has to have some substantial update eventually. Its coming up to 5 years (i.e. nearly 90% of EDs commercial lifetime) and its had no new gameplay added to it at all- the updates its had are anti 5C and changing NPC rules (making them less aggressive).

 

[Viajero]

I don't agree. Even at the back of the line, as the lowest priority, it has to have some substantial update eventually. Its coming up to 5 years (i.e. nearly 90% of EDs commercial lifetime) and its had no new gameplay added to it at all- the updates its had are anti 5C and changing NPC rules (making them less aggressive).

Hey I hear you. As you prolly know by now, I am quite supportive of anything that may strengthen PP/BGS and/or make the territorial struggle component of Elite more compelling.

But my personal preference does not change the simple fact that resources are limited and are usually assigned in priority to those endeavours which the developer think have the most bang for buck. In some cases projects (or parts therein) only have one chance to make it because any resources required for an eventual second or third chance have already been booked or committed to other priority activities.

This does not mean PP will not get a new pass, I simply do not know, just that at the moment it is clear resources are obviously being employed in other priority tasks.

 

[sollisb]

I don't agree. Even at the back of the line, as the lowest priority, it has to have some substantial update eventually. Its coming up to 5 years (i.e. nearly 90% of EDs commercial lifetime) and its had no new gameplay added to it at all- the updates its had are anti 5C and changing NPC rules (making them less aggressive).

I don't think that's entirely fair.. We've had planetary landings, Engineers. I say those 2 because they stand out as major updates/additions. The rest was pretty much fluff I agree.

I think the over-riding problem is that each and every time of a release or major update, they've managed to look like a bunch of muppets.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Hey I hear you. As you prolly know by now, I am quite supportive of anything that may strengthen PP/BGS and/or make the territorial struggle component of Elite more compelling.

But my personal preference does not change the simple fact that resources are limited and are usually assigned in priority to those endeavours who have the most bang for buck. In some cases projects (or parts therein) only have a chance to make it because any resources required for an eventual second or third chance have already been booked or committed to other priority activities.

This does not mean PP will not get a new pass, I simply do not know, just that at the moment it is clear resources are obviously being employed in other priority tasks.

Its plainly obvious that FD don't want to spend much time on PP- break down Sandros last proposal and you'll see that its all mathematical, rule changes and menu tweaking. It amounts to a third of Aprils update- in other words its tiny. If FD after 5 years can't even do that then its an insult to the people who use that feature.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I don't think that's entirely fair.. We've had planetary landings, Engineers. I say those 2 because they stand out as major updates/additions. The rest was pretty much fluff I agree.

I think the over-riding problem is that each and every time of a release or major update, they've managed to look like a bunch of muppets.

The problem is FD never update the features they introduce previously. PP was introduced, and almost instantly forgotten. CQC was the same. Multicrew. Codex. Galnet Audio.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That's the elephant in the room for you but I think that's more or less true for any aspect of the game. The more you focus on one single aspect of the game the more you see it's shortcomings. Quite natural that everyone wants to get his pet activity fixed or improved as soon as possible.

But 5 years? For six formula tweaks? I'm not talking about making new ships, art, assets or anything. Its pure numbers and UI.

 

[Viajero]

Its plainly obvious that FD don't want to spend much time on PP- break down Sandros last proposal and you'll see that its all mathematical, rule changes and menu tweaking. It amounts to a third of Aprils update- in other words its tiny. If FD after 5 years can't even do that then its an insult to the people who use that feature.

I would not take it so personally. Elite is a complex game with multiple elements and resources are limited. If they spend them in PP and not in, say, feature B then the fans of feature B would find a reason to also feel “insulted” etc.

 

[sollisb]

The problem is FD never update the features they introduce previously. PP was introduced, and almost instantly forgotten. CQC was the same. Multicrew. Codex. Galnet Audio.

I would think that's down to innefficiency of design, and probably limitation of the engine..

PP: Huge amount of resources and effort
CQC: A separate game really?
Multicrew: Limited by their engine and choice of networking. ie; rubbish
Codex: never use it so can't comment.
Galnet: Never use it so can't comment.

On the flip side, they did update mining, and to me it is much better. Even with the bugs. They updated exploration, ham-fisted approach, but it does work? They updated engineers, again ham-fisted but working 'ish..

In one foul swoop, I'd update this game with combat zones in systems (tiered res, high-res, haz-res (as they are) and add, dangerous and very dangerous (Those 2 having much tougher ships and not just be ammo wasters). I'd also remove the run-away mechanic. Then I'd add non-pvp to secure space and make anarchy PvP centric. I'd also remove the current crime and punishment and replace with something that makes sense to humans rather than muppets.

And none of the above would take 6 months in it's entirety to do.

EDIT: I'd also balance the combat and exploration returns to match mining returns. Doesn't make sense to be able to make .25 bn credits mining while you can barely make 10m per hour in combat res's.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I would not take it so personally. Elite is a complex game with multiple elements and resources are limited. If they spend them in PP and not in, say, feature B then the fans of feature B would find a reason to also feel “insulted” etc.

You have eleven main player groups, plus multiple squadrons who never feature on FDs radar who keep it going. After the massive carrot that was dropped a year ago people still wait while the ongoing feature crumbles and people simply stop playing. There are powers that are zombies now that have no-one bothering to play as them, being used as cost free weapons against groups and powers who do play properly. Its a right mess.

Its FDs own fault for not doing small, point updates for features they introduce but instead go for costly monolithic updates years down the line when its far too late.

 

[Rubbernuke]

It's not 5 years since Sandro's proposal. And believe it or not, the game is full of age old blatant nonsense. You just need to bother with as many different activities as possible and see for yourself. If only the devs would follow this advice...

Its 1 year since Sandros proposal, and nearly five years (well, 4.5 years) since 1.3 when Powerplay was introduced.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I would think that's down to innefficiency of design, and probably limitation of the engine..

PP: Huge amount of resources and effort
CQC: A separate game really?
Multicrew: Limited by their engine and choice of networking. ie; rubbish
Codex: never use it so can't comment.
Galnet: Never use it so can't comment.

On the flip side, they did update mining, and to me it is much better. Even with the bugs. They updated exploration, ham-fisted approach, but it does work? They updated engineers, again ham-fisted but working 'ish..

In one foul swoop, I'd update this game with combat zones in systems (tiered res, high-res, haz-res (as they are) and add, dangerous and very dangerous (Those 2 having much tougher ships and not just be ammo wasters). I'd also remove the run-away mechanic. Then I'd add non-pvp to secure space and make anarchy PvP centric. I'd also remove the current crime and punishment and replace with something that makes sense to humans rather than muppets.

And none of the above would take 6 months in it's entirety to do.

The frustrating thing is all of FDs woes have solutions that are in the game right now, just applied in the wrong places.

 

[Viajero]

After the massive carrot that was dropped a year ago people still wait while the ongoing feature crumbles and people simply stop playing.

I am afraid the only semi reliable data we have for concurrent players playing suggests quite the opposite.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

I am afraid the only semi reliable data we have for concurrent players playing suggest quite the opposite.

Then give us the real data.

 

[sollisb]

The frustrating thing is all of FDs woes have solutions that are in the game right now, just applied in the wrong places.

Totally agree... I blame the designers and management. Devs normally just do what they're told.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I am afraid the only semi reliable data we have for concurrent players playing suggest quite the opposite.

I mean numbers in Powerplay by that.

 

[sollisb]

I am afraid the only semi reliable data we have for concurrent players playing suggest quite the opposite.

Hmm.. Steam charts says differently... Down 15.5% over the past 30 days.. While I take on board Steamis not the be-and-end-all of metrics, it is still very indicative..

 

[Rubbernuke]

Totally agree... I blame the designers and management. Devs normally just do what they're told.

An example: Powerplay uses old combat zones as combat expansions. These can be farmed using away from keyboard turretboats. If FD used the new CZs they'd be almost immune to this. Loophole closed, plus an opportunity for PP NPCs to have scaled difficulty (for example 30 merits a kill in high intensity, 10 low).