Does anyone else think the concept of engineers is terrible?

[Morbad]

The concept was flawed and the execution was worse. They only got to the increased customization premise before immediately breaking an axle, derailing, and dragging the player base through the smoldering contents of the firebox.

Might want to accept that games are gamey.

Some things are too gamey for some kinds of games.

The amount of time you need to invest for only marginal improvements is way out of whack.

One of my main complaints about Engineering is that it's effects are far too extreme, as well as being almost purely inflationary, rather than having to manage trade-offs.

 

[Astaran]

One of my main complaints about Engineering is that it's effects are far too extreme, as well as being almost purely inflationary, rather than having to manage trade-offs.

Once you've reached G5 (and compare that to unengineered modules) I agree. I was thinking about the individual rolls you need when upgrading from, let's say' G3 to G4. You pay X amount of material (or worse: scan data) for the next roll and only get another few percent increase (if even that). Worst case scenario: You might even have the material to go all the way from G4 to G5, but you lack one material to finish going from G3 to G4 because RNJesus said "Nope"

Either way, the gameplay loop for engineering itself is no fun at all

 

[Crank Larson]

As an engineer, I have no problem with the concept of engineers.

 

[zimms]

As an engineer, I have no problem with the concept of engineers.

But why do you demand to be paid in literal tons of tobacco and alcohol?

 

[Muzz UK]

Good idea needs improvement but things like FSD upgrades and improved power plants really make the game so much better and grinding early engineers is pretty simple as long as you just play the game.

As I always say on these threads engineering forces you to play elements of the game you may not like. The game ethos has always been take a ship with some credits and go where you want and do what you want, however in order to earn engineering upgrades you need to mine, explore, combat and trade... engineers just need a rework to so you can obtain all upgrades via your chosen careers. Maybe limit grade 5 or top tier stuff to make it more niche otherwise let a trade commander earn grade 1-4 across all engineers by buying, selling and transporting goods.

Why do we not have bad guy criminal engineers yet or engineers for extra special good guy commanders?

 

[Crank Larson]

But why do you demand to be paid in literal tons of tobacco and alcohol?

I'll admit it. I may have a problem. I'm using it to counteract the onionhead.

 

[CMDR Jayce MacLeod]

Nope - I've always enjoyed systems that allow for customization and tweaking. I can spend a good time theorycrafting ships with engineering. The more engineering the better. Pre engineers, all ships were pretty much the same - everyone just A rated their ships and that was it.

Engineers added a whole level of complexity to the mix.

With all that being said: I definitely think they should have gone about collecting the materials and the mechanics of engineering differently. The Material grind can be quite a chore for some. They might want to look at this in the future.

 

[Greasetrap42]

There are 3 things that I find weird about the engineering concept:

1. The "cost" is the same regardless of the size class of module.​

​

2. The value of the ship does not increase. Rebuy remains the same.​

​

3. Insurance includes the replacement of engineered modules.​

I don't think the OP would like it if I was the lead designer of ED.

 

[Slamdance_Kozmopolis]

Normal games require the player to invest time & effort to advance, by doing the activity you WANT to advance in.

In MechWarrior 5/BattleTech, for example, if I want better equipment I go hunting bigger and better mechs and I take the equipment from my defeated enemies. It's just a simple loot system the same as in Skyrim, Fallout & numerous other games. It's so common because it's fun and it works to keep the game progression properly paced.

The main problem with engineering is that the activities you need to spend time doing to unlock engineers and gather materials is mostly disconnected from the activity you want to improve--that being combat (in my case, anyway).

Being forced into an unwanted game loop like this is TERRIBLE design & not necessary at all.

I think a lot of this was caused by a need to justify planets and SRV's back in the day.

This could all be easily fixed by making ALL materials and engineering unlocks obtainable via mission rewards.

Then people could invest time & effort to advance in the game on their own terms, in their own play style.

 

[dannysquid]

I think that because the game doesn't have a story or something to guide you in one direction, people (me included) latch onto trying to fulfil engineering requirements to give themselves tangible short term goals, which then turn out to be less short-term than we'd hoped and a bit of a lottery! We're trying to race to an end that isn't actually going to be very meaningful or satisfying.

And I think the stop-start nature of instancing between supercruise/settlements/stations etc makes if a bit too easy to imagine how many times you're going to have to do it!

 

[Slamdance_Kozmopolis]

Big deal, good for you.
There's also posts on here from players with 6000+ hours who also agree with the OP.
I have over 1300 hours, so what?

I enjoyed a lot of it, but a lot of it was also busy work non-fun grind.
It's not like it's the only game that's like this either, and likely won't be the last.
But that doesn't mean we can't critically analyse this particular experience.

It's a continuum of user experience across many people that needs to be considered, and ultimately player numbers will tell you how the continuum feels about that, not a narrow minority.

Just saying.

Yeah, I play the game in spite of the grindy nonsense BECAUSE it is the best space combat experience I've ever had... the minute I find another game that does that without grinding, I'll NEVER play this game again.

I really love building, engineering & fighting ships. My old play loop was:
1. Buy/outfit a ship.
2. Take it around to get engineered.
3. Test in combat.

Then, once I'm happy with the results, I name it and BUY it a custom paint job.

I don't do that anymore, and until there's a way to engineer ships without grinding, I won't do it again.

 

[Slamdance_Kozmopolis]

But why do you demand to be paid in literal tons of tobacco and alcohol?

Yeah, BUT you must grow the tobacco and distil the alcohol yourself.

 

[jojje]

EDO doesn't sit in a vacuum, it has to compete for player attention from many forms of entertainment, not just games.

This.

I've downloaded the updates for 14 now, but am stuck staring at the launch screen and crunching the numbers.

Ok, rebind controls: 1h of experimentation. Take a ship out for some core mining, how many intercepts? Last time was by 3 engineered NPC ships which meant DoA. So probability of reaching the mining site: 50%? Ok, double the travel time: 40 minutes. Find a core asteroid: 30 mins. 10 minutes more to set charges, and then the pay-back. The first oh-so-sweet Boooom as the rock breaks beautifully. 2h 20 minutes for one Booom. Need to pick up kids in 1.5h. Ok, so make a post here and watch an ep of Tulsa King instead. That fits into the available time-slot. <closing game launcher>

 

[Gun Star]

Remember back when engineers first appeared and you also had to bring commodities to engineer stuff.

Pepperidge Farm remembers....

I dont mean to unlock them. You had to have them in your cargo hold too engineer stuff.

I think buying engineering mats is a good option to implement though.....with escape pods.

 

[Frankymole]

As I wrote in another thread, if we started listing the things that didn't make sense we'd be here forever. Might want to accept that games are gamey.

These are just the engineers known to you, and to other Pilot's Federation members. Most of the galaxy's denizens will know others, which you don't encounter in your career.

And the Navy's ones aren't freelance, so only regulars meet them...

 

[GloatingSwine]

I don't think the concept is bad, I think the execution is bad.

Specifically the fact that the ratio of materials required to materials awarded by almost all in game activities are so out of balance with each other that players who want to engage with the system in a reasonable amount of play time are forced to use highly artificial methods to acquire them.

It should take maybe 2-3 average play sessions (and FD can figure that out from their metrics) to get enough material rewards from doing missions and choosing them as the reward to fully engineer one module.

Also, nothing that stacks should also be engineered. So hull and shield boosters should just be what they are with no engineering. (I recognise that this would be a significant change to the combat meta, but it's a shakeup that would be worth it, given the scale of difference between how much you can engineer durability and everything else). This would also make the Guardian and Meta Alloy hull reinforcements more attractive.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Personally i just played the game, did all the aspects i liked and then upgraded when i felt like it. If i was missing something id go do an activity or just traded the materials.

Still don't understand folk who ploughed through stuff they don't like just to get an upgrade and then complain how hard done they were.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Having said that they should have gone all Forza on the game and made tuning a thing.

 

[Brrokk]

I like engineering. I enjoy theorycrafting ship builds with many more options available than there would be with vanilla modules.

 

[Endealon]

As I always say on these threads engineering forces you to play elements of the game you may not like.

Which I find to be horrible, poorly designed game design.


Forcing myself to do all those things I don't want to do, to get the things I do want, makes me want to play less and less.

in fact, I'm playing less and less.