Delivery missions to outposts require far too much cargo space.
- Thread starter askavir
- Start date
Mind-blowing concept, amirite?
Well, right, you aren't making an argument I haven't. Just throwing it out there because it gets thrown out there. Should still probably utilize the depot though, seems strange to exclude delivery but have it for fetch.
This + T6-small, T7-Medium. Job done.There should be regular places with small landing pad only
settlements
I don't know if delivery missions are only for pythons or not, cos I never see any. Wing Assassination, Wing Mining, Base Assaults, base assault assassination, stupid level massacre, all by the bucket load.
This trivial gripe, is just that in the steaming pile that is the mission board.
This trivial gripe, is just that in the steaming pile that is the mission board.
[haha]
Isn't the simple solution just to go to an Outpost and take the Fetch missions which allow you to do multiple trips.
No, because the issue described is with delivery missions. Ignoring them and doing fetch missions doesn't bring attention to the issue. Using work arounds are great, but the issue still needs to be brought up to determine if it even is an issue and what the fix for it should be.
Just for the sake of understanding, can anybody think of a decent reason why cargo missions shouldn't just allow you to take on any mission in any ship or allow you to complete a cargo mission with several deliveries?
I can't really think of any exploits.
The only problem I can think of is related to the whole "unique cargo" thing.
If you're delivering a "unique cargo" then it seems like the game needs somewhere to "put" it immediately to create an unbroken "chain of custody" and being able to take on a mission in, say, a Sidey and then go back later in a Python to collect the cargo, or make several trips in a Sidey to deliver it, might conflict with that requirement.
Then, I suppose, you can ask whether the whole "unique cargo" thing is necessary at all.
I mean, if somebody's hauling, say, 150t of gold and a pirate demands 10t then what's the harm in the player deciding to buy another 10t of gold in order to complete the mission?
The only "exploit" I can see in that is the possibility that a player might take on a cargo mission to deliver (hypothetically) 500t of cargo to Jaques Station, take the cargo, flog it, fly to Colonia in an AspX, buy 500t of gold at the Dove Enigma and then deliver it to Jaques.
And if somebody's smart enough to do that, good luck to 'em IMO.
I can't really think of any exploits.
The only problem I can think of is related to the whole "unique cargo" thing.
If you're delivering a "unique cargo" then it seems like the game needs somewhere to "put" it immediately to create an unbroken "chain of custody" and being able to take on a mission in, say, a Sidey and then go back later in a Python to collect the cargo, or make several trips in a Sidey to deliver it, might conflict with that requirement.
Then, I suppose, you can ask whether the whole "unique cargo" thing is necessary at all.
I mean, if somebody's hauling, say, 150t of gold and a pirate demands 10t then what's the harm in the player deciding to buy another 10t of gold in order to complete the mission?
The only "exploit" I can see in that is the possibility that a player might take on a cargo mission to deliver (hypothetically) 500t of cargo to Jaques Station, take the cargo, flog it, fly to Colonia in an AspX, buy 500t of gold at the Dove Enigma and then deliver it to Jaques.
And if somebody's smart enough to do that, good luck to 'em IMO.
It's an issue that could affect Python & Krait owners too. I've just got a Python, which I'd like to use as a general-purpose multirole mission runner. I'd like to give it a couple of C6 cargo racks and a C6 business passenger cabin (with the C5's reserved for a fuelscoop and a prismatic shield). I could handle up to 128t, but beyond that I'd have problems (and a Krait would hit that problem even without a passenger cabin).
This sort of mission ought to be designed around a maxed-out cargo T6. That would allow a somewhat larger multirole ship to take one on while still being a multirole ship.
This sort of mission ought to be designed around a maxed-out cargo T6. That would allow a somewhat larger multirole ship to take one on while still being a multirole ship.
Ultimately, I don't really see why "wing cargo missions" are a thing at all.
Why not just adapt "wing cargo missions" to encompass the entire range of possible cargo missions, call 'em "cargo missions" and let players decide whether to do them alone or in a wing?
Course, they'd have to adjust the payment method but that wouldn't be hard.
Just set it up so that there's a pop-up on the mission-reward page which allows you to allocate a percentage of the payment to everybody who's participated in the mission.
I am still new to ED, but is was wondering this too.
Mission giver: hey I have x tons of stuff to move over here. Want the job?
CMDR: sure, I can only carry a bit less than that though so I will have to make 2 or more trips. Which shouldn't be an issue since I have 24 hours to complete.
Mission giver: WHAT? 2 trips? You must be joking! Like I care if you get it there in time, I just want it all there at once. Get lost knucklehead.
Wing missions in general I think were added because of an apparently recent fixation at FD with "group gameplay".
We have both essentially are saying the same thing but with one difference. I think the depot mechanism should be added to normal cargo missions so that they can be completed using multiple trips.
Where rewards are concerned - if they allow normal cargo missions to be executed by more than one player then the rewards/penalties should be scaled by their level/nature of contribution to the mission. I do not agree with the principle of allowing players to decide the level of rewards other players receive.
Perhaps a reward penalty should be applied for delivering in multiple trips? 5%-10% per extra trip?
Isn't it lovely when almost everything in ED is upside down?
Best explorer? Multipurpose Anaconda. Not dedicated explorer, tho competition is strong with DBX and AspX. But none of those can carry so much as Anaconda and have such superior range.
Best miner? Let's see... Luxurious looking private space yacht - Imperial Cutter. Warship - Federal Corvette. And my favorite: Beluga - passenger bus. T-9 owners would probably argue but still, a Corvette?
Best medium trader? Vessel that has GUNSHIP in the name. Probably target fitted toward "secure data needs transfer" missions.
I suspect that FDEVs when designing ship rely on a magic 8-ball. Power plant? <shakes ball> "not a chance". Ok, size 2. FSD? <shakes ball> "Maybe". Aha, size 4. Role? <shakes ball>...
As a result we have AspX, exploration ship that is within top picks for cargo runs.
I agree.
If FDev made all cargo missions "multi-haul" missions then we would never again run into this problem.
Concerning the generation of "500 missions of all requirements and sizes and shapes and ranks and distances".
I believe this currently takes up too much time.
Perhaps FDev could create separate mission boards for Hauling missions, military missions, piracy missions, assassination missions, etc.
That way they would only have to generate the missions for the board the player accessed.
I realise it could be "abused" but I think it's probably the simplest way to do it.
I mean, if I'm doing a wing mission in my T9 with, say, a newbie in a Hauler and a PvP god in a FdL, who saves us from destruction multiple times during the mission, I don't really want the hauler jockey getting an equal cut simply based on a "reward=total/number of wing members" basis and nor do I want the FdL jockey getting screwed based on a "reward=total*percentage of cargo delivered" basis either.
Sure, it would allow somebody to do wing missions with a newbie and then give them most of the reward to boost their balance but, meh.
If somebody wants to give credits to a newbie, they're going to find a way to do it regardless.
It might prove interesting (in a sadistic "social experiment" sort of way) if, perhaps, a dialogue box popped up on every wing-member's screen and you could set the distribution of pay and every wing member had to agree to it before the payment was made.
That could make for some fun times.
Must admit, I'm not that fussed about how the payments would work.
Fundamentally, the first thing they need to sort out is the payments for wing missions so they're comparable with what somebody gets for shifting cargo in a solo mission.
If a mission to shift 400t of cargo pays Cr4m then a mission to shift 4000t of the same cargo should pay Cr40m.
If a player chooses to do that mission alone, they should pocket Cr40m, and NOT Cr10m because the game has arbitrarily decided on a pay-rate based on a 4-player wing.
After that, if they wanted to divide the payments up equally between every wing-member, or allow it to be adjusted manually, I'd be fine with either.
Main point is, there's really no need to have "Wing Missions" at all.
Just make 'em "Missions" and allow people to decide whether to do them alone or in a wing, dynamically, based on how tough the mission might be.
It wouldn't be an announceable feature promoting wing gameplay then, so we can't have that ;-)
For the missions I have seen so far (granted I am not very ranked or in with any factions yet) 10% seems a bit steep, but I like the idea. Maybe somewhere around 2-5%. I wouldn't mind doing a quick bit of arithmetic in my head to decide whether it was worth it.
I really hope that isn't correct, cos it'd create a needlessly fragmented game, but I do worry that you might be right.
Still, they'd just need to stick the word "integrated" in front of any new feature and it'd solve the problem.