Does anyone actually enjoy engineering?

Yaffle

Volunteer Moderator
Saying that, more variation would be nice. I suppose you can also get the surface materials when mining. There is one other variation.
You can indeed, or at least a fair few of them. BUT most 'new' miners won't because they don't do the surface mining, just the deep core mining which liberates only minerals. I still do the old style mining when I'm out there to easily fill materials as a by-product of the activity. A little like collecting manufactured components after a fight, or idly scanning other ships/wakes when at a station.
 
You have been missing the point all along. All I have been doing is describing my way of playing that makes me not feel any grind. I never mentioned that it couldn't get better or shouldn't be any other variations. The more variations the better.
Let me rephrase: Why would you offer something wholly irrelevant then not expect people to think it related in some way to the statement you brought it up in response to? And why would you fault THEM for you doing so? Or if it is relevant please explain how.

I think this is a matter of opinion and we just going to have to agree to disagree. I see using them to their fullest as using them the way you want to. You see using them to their fullest by putting grade 5s and experimentals (if you can) on everything. It's just a different philosophy.
I mean, they have objectively higher levels of effects. That's not really an opinion, and when I specifically state using the system to it's fullest effect and not "to one's fullest preference" I'm referring to the actual, factual full effect of the system, not how the individual might not want to pursue that full effect or be satisfied at lower levels for whatever personal reasons.

I do indirect seeking. If I see a good looking mission with the material I required then I will get that mission. What I won't do is log on, log off, log in, log off to get a missions for that material.

If I want surface materials I may be more inclined to do some surface missions and hope I stumble across what I need.

I also use the material brokers at times if I look at a blueprint and only need one other material, I may swap it out.

I am on my way back from Beagle Point at the moment, last night while exploring volcanics I picked up a load of materials. It was fun and productive. But I probably won't do that until next week, so it doesn't feel like a grind.

Saying that, more variation would be nice. I suppose you can also get the surface materials when mining. There is one other variation.

I think what's really missing are compelling reasons to do the activities (not including mat gathering) in the first place.

For exploration it would be great if we could get these bio samples, go to a tech broker and unlock some kind of bio engineered modules and things like that. Give us more reasons to do those missions and so forth. For me I think that will alleviate some of the issues with mat gathering, as I am sure it just feel like you are doing this just to get mats.

That is why I am open to optional mini PG quest/Story lines by using something like the follow on mission system, that may take you to various different parts of the game where you can also get mats.
I've avoided missions for a while, but as stated prior there are parts of the game I somewhat actively like to avoid or minimize. As such I WILL log to reset crash sites as a min/max strategy. That's because surface missions are a less effective and less enjoyable manner. Mining sucks for it though. To an extreme degree.
 

dxm55

Banned
You can indeed, or at least a fair few of them. BUT most 'new' miners won't because they don't do the surface mining, just the deep core mining which liberates only minerals. I still do the old style mining when I'm out there to easily fill materials as a by-product of the activity. A little like collecting manufactured components after a fight, or idly scanning other ships/wakes when at a station.
Surface mining is too slow.

Better to pull up a system map, go to the second tab, and find metal rich worlds with volcanic activity, and the list of materials in percentage down the page..

Mapping the planet with the DSS and then landing at a geological site reaps the most benefit in the best time possible.
 

Yaffle

Volunteer Moderator
Surface mining is too slow.

Better to pull up a system map, go to the second tab, and find metal rich worlds with volcanic activity, and the list of materials in percentage down the page..

Mapping the planet with the DSS and then landing at a geological site reaps the most benefit in the best time possible.
I think you've missed the point.While yes, that is faster, it's where 'grind' begins. 'I have to do X even if I don't want to, and I have to do it a lot' is 'grind'. However 'while I am doing X which I enjoy I also get progress towards Y' isn't grind.

It's like missions too, if you are doing missions to manipulate the BGS because you enjoy the BGS and collect materials as you go it is not grindy.
 
I think you've missed the point.While yes, that is faster, it's where 'grind' begins. 'I have to do X even if I don't want to, and I have to do it a lot' is 'grind'. However 'while I am doing X which I enjoy I also get progress towards Y' isn't grind.

It's like missions too, if you are doing missions to manipulate the BGS because you enjoy the BGS and collect materials as you go it is not grindy.
The problem with the surface mining for elements example is that I don't personally know a single player who wants to spend enough time surface mining to get enough mats to be meaningful. I do some surface mining from time to time in my all in one mining ship, but the element gains are minimal compared to the needs for a given mod after the often needed conversion at material traders.
 
Actually, collecting materials in a CZ is an interesting aspect of gameplay. If you manage to keep the heat off yourself, your limpets will just follow you around and bring you good stuff now and then. You can either position yourself so that you can lay down fire without moving much and fight with the cargo hatch open, or open it now and then to let them in. But if you get into heavy fire, your limpets can get hit and "expire" easily, needing to be replaced when things ease up. Positional play, near enough to keep fighting and with targets for the limpets "below" you is required for most efficient results. It's another aspect of combat to "git gud" at, and seems to me quite realistic.
For that I'd have to engineer my weapons first so they aren't peashooters anymore vs hardened AI. Of course it's all easy if you did your grind already. Just as helpful like the guides to getting to Anaconda here you'd need Anacondq first to make the money.
 
Let me rephrase: Why would you offer something wholly irrelevant then not expect people to think it related in some way to the statement you brought it up in response to? And why would you fault THEM for you doing so? Or if it is relevant please explain how.
I didn't fault them. Whether it's irrelevant or not is down to the individual r adding it. Some may do, some won't.

I mean, they have objectively higher levels of effects. That's not really an opinion, and when I specifically state using the system to it's fullest effect and not "to one's fullest preference" I'm referring to the actual, factual full effect of the system, not how the individual might not want to pursue that full effect or be satisfied at lower levels for whatever personal reasons.
That's what is great about ED. It is a personal game in that way. Objectively yes you can get higher results. But if those higher results make the game worse for you personally, what do you do. Do you just do it anyway because they are there. As stated the game is all about personal choice. You decide what you want to do. That is something I like in this game. The fact that I am not forced to go from G1 to G5. It givew you choices. That to me is good. Maybe not to you or others.

I've avoided missions for a while, but as stated prior there are parts of the game I somewhat actively like to avoid or minimize. As such I WILL log to reset crash sites as a min/max strategy. That's because surface missions are a less effective and less enjoyable manner. Mining sucks for it though. To an extreme degree.
Each to their own. I will actively try to avoid the the need to log off, log in. I actively avoid min/maxing. I find it boring and unenjoyable, so I play in a way I do. It won't work for everyone though. We each have our own personal preferences.
 
For that I'd have to engineer my weapons first so they aren't peashooters anymore vs hardened AI. Of course it's all easy if you did your grind already. Just as helpful like the guides to getting to Anaconda here you'd need Anacondq first to make the money.
I just played the game for 6 months, mostly running missions, trading and occasionally bounty hunting. Just had the core game then so didn't even know what engineering was, just knew I loved ED! Then I finally had enough to buy the anaconda. Man that was exciting when I bought Porkchop!

Did some core mining to make enough to A rate Porkchop. By then I had loads of materials just from doing some bounty hunting in a FDL (again A rated thru mining profits), and the mining (the secret is to take some lasers when you're core mining, when you've got all the really valuable stuff, laser the broken asteroid chunks, then pick up the mats. Clean your plate!). So now I got plenty of materials for engineering. Bought Horizons a few weeks ago, done some engineering, finding more mats on planets and thru USS's too.

Dunno why there's so much whinging about mats gathering, the stuff's just everywhere. Sure you can't get to G5 straightaway but if you just keep playing you'll have enough engineering to significantly improve your ships within a few months.

Only been playing for 7 months now, but I already have an engineered FDL, an engineered Porkchop and an engineered AspX. Some modules at G5, some @ G4 and G3, but all a f@#$ of a lot better than the vanilla versions. Loving this game!
 
I just played the game for 6 months, mostly running missions, trading and occasionally bounty hunting. Just had the core game then so didn't even know what engineering was, just knew I loved ED! Then I finally had enough to buy the anaconda. Man that was exciting when I bought Porkchop!

Did some core mining to make enough to A rate Porkchop. By then I had loads of materials just from doing some bounty hunting in a FDL (again A rated thru mining profits), and the mining (the secret is to take some lasers when you're core mining, when you've got all the really valuable stuff, laser the broken asteroid chunks, then pick up the mats. Clean your plate!). So now I got plenty of materials for engineering. Bought Horizons a few weeks ago, done some engineering, finding more mats on planets and thru USS's too.

Dunno why there's so much whinging about mats gathering, the stuff's just everywhere. Sure you can't get to G5 straightaway but if you just keep playing you'll have enough engineering to significantly improve your ships within a few months.

Only been playing for 7 months now, but I already have an engineered FDL, an engineered Porkchop and an engineered AspX. Some modules at G5, some @ G4 and G3, but all a f@#$ of a lot better than the vanilla versions. Loving this game!
Stop being so positive :)

There are those who will argue that it is impossible to pick up mats in everyday play...

... but there are those of us who play and pick up stuff, scan every ship they see and enjoy a little USS exploring as well as SRV'ing.

Glad you are having fun!
 
I just played the game for 6 months, mostly running missions, trading and occasionally bounty hunting. Just had the core game then so didn't even know what engineering was, just knew I loved ED! Then I finally had enough to buy the anaconda. Man that was exciting when I bought Porkchop!

Did some core mining to make enough to A rate Porkchop. By then I had loads of materials just from doing some bounty hunting in a FDL (again A rated thru mining profits), and the mining (the secret is to take some lasers when you're core mining, when you've got all the really valuable stuff, laser the broken asteroid chunks, then pick up the mats. Clean your plate!). So now I got plenty of materials for engineering. Bought Horizons a few weeks ago, done some engineering, finding more mats on planets and thru USS's too.

Dunno why there's so much whinging about mats gathering, the stuff's just everywhere. Sure you can't get to G5 straightaway but if you just keep playing you'll have enough engineering to significantly improve your ships within a few months.

Only been playing for 7 months now, but I already have an engineered FDL, an engineered Porkchop and an engineered AspX. Some modules at G5, some @ G4 and G3, but all a f@#$ of a lot better than the vanilla versions. Loving this game!
Way to enjoy the game!

Soon, someone will be along to tell you that what you've done is impossible. ;-)
 
Stop being so positive :)

There are those who will argue that it is impossible to pick up mats in everyday play...

... but there are those of us who play and pick up stuff, scan every ship they see and enjoy a little USS exploring as well as SRV'ing.

Glad you are having fun!
Yeah, I forgot that when you're scanning ships to see if they are wanted, you often get readings which are used for engineering. Crikey, it's actually difficult to do anything in the game without picking up something that can be used for engineering!
 
I didn't fault them. Whether it's irrelevant or not is down to the individual r adding it. Some may do, some won't.
So you're not faulting me, you're just questioning my grasp of English because I assume the responses you give are intended to address what you're responding to and I'm interpreting them as such, making them look dismissive because all they offer is the advice to engage less with engineering in response to criticism on the engineering process?

That's what is great about ED. It is a personal game in that way. Objectively yes you can get higher results. But if those higher results make the game worse for you personally, what do you do. Do you just do it anyway because they are there. As stated the game is all about personal choice. You decide what you want to do. That is something I like in this game. The fact that I am not forced to go from G1 to G5. It givew you choices. That to me is good. Maybe not to you or others.
Right personal agency is a thing. And a subset of choices within a system that's designed to be used beyond where you chose to engage it are not great to engage with. The reasons are varied and multiple why someone might do so, the question of them being done "because they are there" comes across as reductive in a conversation where their benefit has been discussed already. You don't need or want it, I get that. I've been in situations where ship loss was likely without it or tasks were more accomplishable with it. Either way the criticism brought was about achieving those levels for whatever reason and the, granted, assumption that they were put there to be used rather than be ignored until literally fallen into. The point is there probably shouldn't be decisions within the system that come across as bad to such a large population trying to engage in earnest with them, where your advice advocates a "right" decision not to engage with the deeper levels.

I know for you, your engineering may be "done," but it's clearly not to someone who's having the complaints engaging further tends to bring. And that may just come off as dismissive or arguing against a strawman when you keep tying your method to a contrast with the whole "G1-G5 in one go" notion that you introduced. Whether you indeded that or not.

No ones saying you need to or suggesting the system should be altered to force you to G5 via traditional RPG level up mechanics or the like. No one is asking for your agency to be taken away, and as such the feedback isn't diminishing that aspect of the game as you claimed earlier.

Each to their own. I will actively try to avoid the the need to log off, log in. I actively avoid min/maxing. I find it boring and unenjoyable, so I play in a way I do. It won't work for everyone though. We each have our own personal preferences.
I used to avoid min/maxing. Problematically some of the resulting time frames for functional "achievements" in the game felt not worth it. I'm not sure that should be prevalent, and it apparently is given the amount of discussion going on about the most effective way to do "x". When I can take several months to in excess of a year for certain unlocks as I was playing pre 2.1 to literally minutes using shortcuts them we have an issue somewhere, probably in both the shortcut and the lack of valid workarounds to the activity being avoided. But for now I feel the same way about surface missions and prospecting that you do about logging. And logging lets me bypass that to the point that it's not a "grind" despite not being as fun as it could be for the time it cuts out and as such enriches other aspects of my gameplay time.

But that shouldn't be an ideal for even a workaround.
 
Last edited:
Serious question. I don't mean 'do you enjoy having an engineered ship' or 'do you enjoy trying out different engineering modifications', I mean do you actually enjoy the process, the things that you do to get to that engineered module?

Acquiring vast amounts of materials, trading them when (inevitably) you don't have the one you want, at a massive loss, getting a series of lousy rolls that eat all your mats before you complete the mod you're aiming for?

I read posters on here stating that they've engineered whole fleets of ships in next to no time. I believe them- why wouldn't they tell the truth?- but I'm not enjoying anything like the same rate of progress. I decided to fully engineer my mission runner, an 'A' rated Python, back in November. I'd been tinkering with it for a while, I had what I thought was a huge amount of materials stockpiled and I'd unlocked a few engineers. I gave up half way through December and, in spite of having a whole week off at the end of the month, I didn't even flash Elite up. I just couldn't face it any more.

For most of the last four years I've put in a couple of hours a night, two or three times a week. Not exactly a power player, but not 'casual' either. Now I'm watching ED videos instead of playing- what kind of saddo does that? :eek: It's over a fortnight since I last played and I don't have any particular urge to change that.

Each completed mod has been a revelation. The Python is transformed. I really can't express how much of a difference the engineering makes- it's vastly more than finally installing 'A' class modules when I started the game.

But that's just hacking me off. It's painfully obvious just how pants stock ships are compared to engineered ones. I've got a whole fleet of vanilla ships that are a real struggle to just survive in. I don't mind running away every now and then, but the AI is balanced against much tougher kit than I'm flying. I can see where the 'git gud' crowd are coming from- my partly engineered Python is just melting AI opponents! But I'm about as 'gud' as I'm going to 'git', my fleet needs a ton of work and yeGodsinHeaven I'm burned out just getting one of them up to scratch!

I'd love to try out some of the newer ships, but I know that stock, even 'A' rated, they'll be easy pickings for dumb as a brick AI with ridiculously strong weapons and shields. It's not about skill, or lack thereof, the game's set-up is suffering from power creep. I wouldn't object to that, if engineering to the new standard wasn't such a massive pain in the posterior for me.

Am I looking at this all wrong? Is engineering actually a fun activity that I'm just not 'getting'? [uhh]
If you want a simple anwser: NO, it's just a massive grind to max out an already maxed out ship!
 
Raw mats are a breeze to get. Crystal spikes have set me for life on those, which IIRC also sets me for a lot of synthesis.
Manufactured? Eh, some grind at Dav's Hope.
Data? Eh, some grind at Jameson's crashed ship.

Less than 6 hours playtime total to be able to engineer anything, by my estimation. Manufactureds are a little harder, maybe. The grind can be fun if you like SRVs. Which I do. It's still a grind, but it's a fun, own-pace grind.
I'm sometimes too lazy to do it, though, and my attention span is too short to really get into grind for that long, but I've never really had trouble with the grind. Then again, I'm a student so I have like 8 bazillion hours of free time every year.
 
So you're not faulting me, you're just questioning my grasp of English because I assume the responses you give are intended to address what you're responding to and I'm interpreting them as such, making them look dismissive because all they offer is the advice to engage less with engineering in response to criticism on the engineering process?
It's your interpretation. You are seeing them as something they are not. Hence the reason why you are the only person replying to me like this.

Right personal agency is a thing. And a subset of choices within a system that's designed to be used beyond where you chose to engage it are not great to engage with. The reasons are varied and multiple why someone might do so, the question of the being done "because they are there" comes across as reductive in a conversation where their benefit has been discussed already. You don't need or want it, I get that. I've been in situations where ship loss was likely without it or tasks were more accomplishable with it. Either way the criticism brought was about achieving those levels for whatever reason and the, granted, assumption that they were put there to be used rather than be ignored until literally fallen into. The point is there probably shouldn't be decisions within the system that come across as bad to such a large population trying to engage in earnest with them, where your advice advocates a "right" decision not to engage with the deeper levels.
I'm not sure many think it's bad. As to being ignored, I never said that.

I know for you, your engineering may be "done," but it's clearly not to someone who's having the complaints engaging further tends to bring. And that may just come off as dismissive or arguing against a strawman when you keep tying your method to a contrast with the whole "G1-G5 in one go" notion that you introduced. Whether you indeded that or not.
Never said it wasn't. But my engineering isn't done yet and it may never be done. And that's fine by me.

No ones saying you need to or suggesting the system should be altered to force you to G5 via traditional RPG level up mechanics or the like. No one is asking for your agency to be taken away, and as such the feedback isn't diminishing that aspect of the game as you claimed earlier.
Riigghht

I used to avoid min/maxing. Problematically some of the resulting time frames for functional "achievements" in the game felt not worth it. I'm not sure that should be prevalent, and it apparently is given the amount of discussion going on about the most effective way to do "x". When I can take several months to in excess of a year for certain unlocks as I was playing pre 2.1 to literally minutes using shortcuts them we have an issue somewhere, probably in both the shortcut and the lack of valid workarounds to the activity being avoided. But for now I feel the same way about surface missions and prospecting that you do about logging. And logging lets me bypass that to the point that it's not a "grind" despite not being as fun as it could be for the time it cuts out and as such enriches other aspects of my gameplay time.

But that shouldn't be an ideal for even a workaround.
Good for you.
 
Been messing around with E Rated boosters and low rebuy builds - mostly for goofs. I built an AspX pirate boat with loaned pulse lasers, e rated boosters, ect... The goal was to get 4 re-buys for 5m. It's parked at The Rock in Carcosa, I'm constantly roaming the A-Nav, popping out to harry any commanders that happen along. Budget builds seem shockingly viable in most activities short of hardcore PvP.

It has a placeholder name. Cicada 3301. I know. I can do better.
 
Last edited:
You can indeed, or at least a fair few of them. BUT most 'new' miners won't because they don't do the surface mining, just the deep core mining which liberates only minerals. I still do the old style mining when I'm out there to easily fill materials as a by-product of the activity. A little like collecting manufactured components after a fight, or idly scanning other ships/wakes when at a station.
If I go serious mining, I do it all - laser mine, surface mine and deep core. Just deep core mining still leaves other material, even in the fragments, so why miss out?
 
It's your interpretation. You are seeing them as something they are not. Hence the reason why you are the only person replying to me like this.
I'm the only person responding to you right now because I'm the person you're engaging with.

I'm not sure many think it's bad. As to being ignored, I never said that.
You have a pretty good sample in this thread over the life of it saying it's bad. You can find more samples on any thread about HGEs, specific mat sourcing and the like. Yes, some also say they love it, but it's far from a small number saying they don't.

Never said it wasn't. But my engineering isn't done yet and it may never be done. And that's fine by me.
Great, but your situation and choice on level of engagement isn't what's being criticized by the thread or those with issues regarding engineering beyond perhaps how relevant it is to those that are.

Please feel free to point to the source of your skepticism.
 
What makes me sad about engineering is that places like the crashed anacondas were something the devs thought were needed. There is nothing--literally nothing--more time efficient for gathering mats than doing laps around an infinitely respawning yard of G3-G5 materials and then trading them around for what you need. Nothing else even comes close and that's tragic. They don't want to admit it's a grind...but they provide a far more optimal grind to address it. It's no less arduous a grind thanks to SRV mechanics, but it's far, FAR faster and more controllable by orders of magnitude. That's not players discovering better ways; that's devs slipping in appeasement mechanics and it's disheartening that THIS was the solution they came up with.

I mean, lots of things make me upset about engineering (Selene Jean, Marco F&$&ING Qwent, no G4 thrusters before Palin, etc etc.) But this particular thing is the single biggest, most complex issue I have on the topic.
 
Top Bottom