ED game mechanics that are now pointless :(

The thing is, a lot of the changes you are complaining about were made due to feedback from players.
Yes, I realise that. All I am saying is that FDev went *slightly too far* in those cases, simply because it definitely stopped the complaints in the short-term (but in the longer term it dumbed-down the gameplay so much the overall game suffers).

Since FD have improved their ability to nerf or buff things in small increments, rather than "all or nothing" increments, maybe they should revisit some of the old sledgehammer nerf/buff changes...?
Yes, that's what I'm asking for.
 
Upcoming:
Autopilot for EVERYTHING, even launching the game and watching Netflix.

Instead of fees and fines, you gain CR from doing crimes.
Insurance cost is increased even more because dying is the only thing giving us fear. ( Instead of the good approach of removing it but letting us lose our modifications ).
 
The two I weep for most are Supercruise and the Economic Sim.

In the case of Supercruise, the way mass altered FSD performance was much greater, which meant that if you wanted to get anywhere in a hurry, you had use careful navigation and clever breaking maneuvers to get anywhere in a hurry. It still matters, but the benefits of good Supercruise piloting is a savings of about two minutes, not the five minutes plus seen before the great mass shadow nerf.
I don't think FDev could put it back to how it used to be, because that was way too harsh for most players (and would make it impossible to watch YouTube while SuperCruising, lol)... but I do think they could make it a LITTLE MORE tricky.

Super Cruise times are very controversial, but one way to avoid a player backlash would be to make it so that the *typical* times in Super Cruise are unchanged, but careful piloting could reduce the times from what they currently are. Surely no one could complain about that?

The second is the nerf to the Economic Sim. Yes, this game simulates the economy, but you only see it's effects during CGs, when thousands of players descend upon nearby systems looking for commodities. Before the nerf, a single player in a T9 could deplete the supplies of a station in one or two visits, and it would take days for that station to build up its stockpiles unless players supplied the necessary raw materials. Thanks to player complaints, Frontier greatly increased the rate of resupply.
It would certainly be nice to see slightly more volatility. They really ought make these tweaks at every point release, and so they can see if it starts to cause problems for players. Incremental adjustments, rather than big all-or-nothing changes.
 
Last edited:
* Fuel costs. At one time these were a significant worry (particularly for traders trying to make a profit), but some complained about the cost, so now they are trivial except to newbies just starting out in a Sidewinder. You can run out of fuel, but the cost of buying fuel might as well be zero at the moment.

I suggest that the big ships should require much more fuel (so that the costs become significant), while small starter ships would still be able to afford fuel.... although that might require unrealistically large amounts of fuel, so maybe it's not so easy to fix? So what about larger ships requiring a higher "grade" of fuel (which would cost more)?

* Spacestation docking fees. At one time these were a meaningful amount, but now they are effectively zero. (Actually, I'm not even sure they exist anymore, without checking the game. They are THAT low.) Larger ships should be charged a reasonable sum for docking.

And docking at an Ocellus or Orbis spacestation should cost much more than a Coriolis, which should cost much more than an Outpost, which should cost much more than a planetary Surface Port. That way we'd actually have to weigh-up the cost-benefit of visiting an expensive station against the services we need/etc.

* Ship wear & tear due to usage/travelling. Originally ships wore out quickly, just from a handful of jumps/etc, but players disliked having to frequently repair each ship component individually. So FDev massively reduced wear & tear, and then later added a quick "Repair All" button on station menus. So now (I assume) everyone just taps this Repair All button as a reflex, every time they dock, making wear & tear meaningless (except for explorers). FDev even spent a lot of effort making exciting malfunctions randomly occur at lower ship health, but now we only see these in PvP battles aimed at making them happen... 'Never' do they occur from just normal ship usage.

There are many solutions to this, but the simplest one is this: Every time you dock & decide to use the station's Repair facilities, you should be charged a sizeable fixed fee (and maybe have to enter the underground Hanger?). That way you would not use "Repair All" every time you docked, so ship health would gradually degrade, until it became worth while for you to use the Repair facilities. I guess the fixed fee should be proportional the size (and complexity) of your ship, keeping things cheap(er) for newbie Sidewinders.

A more complex solution would be that you CAN still use "Repair All" every time you dock, but this gradually becomes less effective as the ship ages (effectively the ships maximum possible health declines). Eventually you would have to get your ship "Serviced" (like you do every year with your car), which would cost a lot, but restore it's maximum health back to 100%. The maximum health would never decrease below some minimum level (to prevent ships becoming unusable without servicing). This minimum level could be higher for (say) Grade A or B modules, which would allow Explorers to still explore with suitably outfitted ships.


What other 'pointless' game mechanics have I forgotten about? I was going to add "Service, Ship & Equipment limited availability at space stations" to my list, but I suppose that FDev roughly got the right balance in this case (you can't find everything at many stations, but they usually offer enough not to hinder gameplay).

All of those I quoted will have a significant impact on players starting out but be completely irrelevant to the swathes of established multi millionaires and billionaires out there. What would be the point?

Also, re; wear and tear, would you buy a car that required a service every 2,000 miles and always needed a significant amount of work doing due to everyday wear and tear? Me neither.
 
Yes, I realise that. All I am saying is that FDev went *slightly too far* in those cases, simply because it definitely stopped the complaints in the short-term (but in the longer term it dumbed-down the gameplay so much the overall game suffers).

Quoted for emphasis on the bit highlighted in red.

Disagree with the *slightly too far*, think they went way to far to appease the shortsighted forum whiners.
 
All of those I quoted will have a significant impact on players starting out but be completely irrelevant to the swathes of established multi millionaires and billionaires out there. What would be the point?
In most of my suggestions, I tried to provide a way that does not need to affect newbie players. e.g. By tying the effect to ship size.

Changes to costs are unlikely to affect billionaires, but so what? I'd consider them to have reach the "end game" of ED. There are (likely) still many players somewhere between "newbie" & "billionaire".
 
Last edited:
Also, re; wear and tear, would you buy a car that required a service every 2,000 miles and always needed a significant amount of work doing due to everyday wear and tear? Me neither.

That's such a stupid argument, have you any idea how much maintenance goes in to military and civilian flight equipment?

Even in WWII engines were completely rebuilt if the pilot used WEP in a sortie...
 
Last edited:
It's a shame, really.
I'd gladly pay the repair and refuel costs as they were back in the beta.
Made most missions a loss in profit and not even cover the repair/fuel costs, so you'd want to do the mission with the most fuel and maintenance effective systems.
This would make more people fly the small ships such as adder, eagle etc.

Back then repairing 50% hull of a python could flatten your bank account, buying a brand new one came close to the repair costs.

I would also gladly welcome an added duration to everything related to station interaction.
Filling up 64 tons of fuel in an instant? Doubt this will be possible even in 1000+ years without teleportation.
Transferring 780+ tons of skittish livest.. erm cargo in an instant? How about cargo is being filled by those small trucks that are scooting around on the stations?
5 seconds to transfer every 32tons of cargo would be nice and authentic.

Why not add a duration to all that? Refueling a modern fighter jet happens with a rate of roughly 1800l/minute, so all handwavium taken into consideration I could settle for 1 second per ton of fuel.
Would give fuel scoops a whole new meaning and stations a purpose other than just being places to dump cargo/talk to npcs
Repairing 70% hull? The coffee machine's over there, buddy. Take a shield next time.

Weapons could have some sort of durability and require maintenance/calibration after n hours of usage, which costs time and money.

The game is basically pushing credits down your throat nowadays with those ridiculous mission and exploration payouts, but you don't have to use money for anything other than buying modules and ships and yet people still complain that they're not sitting in a tradeconda after 2 weeks even if it's actually hard to avoid this...
 
On the Commodities Market, the option to view other stations where some items are Imported/Exported from/to is pointless. Half the time, these don't seem to be accurate, or if they are, the goods may be selling above the Galactic Average (who pays these prices, I dunno).

On the Galaxy Map, the lines indicating the flow to/from of Commodities seems useless to me. So many times I've flown to a system where those lines indicate a Commodity can be sourced, and never found it available.

And I may be wrong on this, but back in my early days I remember specifically that thermal weapons were best for shields, and kinetic weapons best for hull. Outfitting weapons was a balance between these target needs. But for a good while now, it seems like multi-cannons are the "only" choice outside of having one other weapon with a special bonus effect. And consider that multi-cannons being so much weaker vs. shields back then... and shield values were nowhere near as high as today.

I even outfitted my FdL with a full beam laser setup, and compared it to a full Cannon setup. The Cannon build will one-shot insta-kill fully shielded small ships to the point that it's absurd.

Anyway, some good points in this thread. I'm going to be watching the post 2.4 period with interest.
 
Seemed not many people read it as so many asked why 1 ton of fuel was different for different ships.

I didn't spot that, but I am one of the people that would ask why 1 ton of fuel should be a different price depending where it goes. It shouldn't, it makes no sense. If two grades of fuel are introduced, that would work fine. It doesn't cost more (per gallon) to fill up a Ferrari at a garage than it does to fill up a Mini. Unless you go for the higher octane fuel (which you certainly should do in a Ferrari :) ), in which case there is a slight increase in price. This would make sense, but charging different prices for the same thing doesn't.

Docking fees would be good too. But they shouldn't be hidden as increased fuel costs, they should be specified as a docking levy so that we know what we are paying for.
 
ED has quite a few game mechanics that originally had a big effect on gameplay, but were later heavily watered-down (either because of player outcry or new features made them ineffective). These mechanics now have such a small effect, they could be removed and it would not affect the gameplay of most people. I wish that FDev would make them have a slightly bigger effect again, as it'd make the game much more interesting, and for almost no development cost:

* Fuel costs. At one time these were a significant worry (particularly for traders trying to make a profit), but some complained about the cost, so now they are trivial except to newbies just starting out in a Sidewinder. You can run out of fuel, but the cost of buying fuel might as well be zero at the moment.

I suggest that the big ships should require much more fuel (so that the costs become significant), while small starter ships would still be able to afford fuel.... although that might require unrealistically large amounts of fuel, so maybe it's not so easy to fix? So what about larger ships requiring a higher "grade" of fuel (which would cost more)?

* Spacestation docking fees. At one time these were a meaningful amount, but now they are effectively zero. (Actually, I'm not even sure they exist anymore, without checking the game. They are THAT low.) Larger ships should be charged a reasonable sum for docking.

And docking at an Ocellus or Orbis spacestation should cost much more than a Coriolis, which should cost much more than an Outpost, which should cost much more than a planetary Surface Port. That way we'd actually have to weigh-up the cost-benefit of visiting an expensive station against the services we need/etc.

* Ship heat stealth mechanic. You used to be able to get your heat down to "0", so your ship iced-up & became invisible to sensors. This was fun/immersive, but then FDev heavily nerfed this in favour of pressing a button (for silent running) that has almost no discernible audio/visual effect. A great shame. ED's newsletter even highlighted a video demonstrating it... shortly before they effectively removed it.

* Ship wear & tear due to usage/travelling. Originally ships wore out quickly, just from a handful of jumps/etc, but players disliked having to frequently repair each ship component individually. So FDev massively reduced wear & tear, and then later added a quick "Repair All" button on station menus. So now (I assume) everyone just taps this Repair All button as a reflex, every time they dock, making wear & tear meaningless (except for explorers). FDev even spent a lot of effort making exciting malfunctions randomly occur at lower ship health, but now we only see these in PvP battles aimed at making them happen... 'Never' do they occur from just normal ship usage.

There are many solutions to this, but the simplest one is this: Every time you dock & decide to use the station's Repair facilities, you should be charged a sizeable fixed fee (and maybe have to enter the underground Hanger?). That way you would not use "Repair All" every time you docked, so ship health would gradually degrade, until it became worth while for you to use the Repair facilities. I guess the fixed fee should be proportional the size (and complexity) of your ship, keeping things cheap(er) for newbie Sidewinders.

A more complex solution would be that you CAN still use "Repair All" every time you dock, but this gradually becomes less effective as the ship ages (effectively the ships maximum possible health declines). Eventually you would have to get your ship "Serviced" (like you do every year with your car), which would cost a lot, but restore it's maximum health back to 100%. The maximum health would never decrease below some minimum level (to prevent ships becoming unusable without servicing). This minimum level could be higher for (say) Grade A or B modules, which would allow Explorers to still explore with suitably outfitted ships.


What other 'pointless' game mechanics have I forgotten about? I was going to add "Service, Ship & Equipment limited availability at space stations" to my list, but I suppose that FDev roughly got the right balance in this case (you can't find everything at many stations, but they usually offer enough not to hinder gameplay).

I remember in Alpha/Beta when cold/silent running was first shown and the depth of gameplay that eluded to...
 
* Spacestation docking fees. At one time these were a meaningful amount, but now they are effectively zero. (Actually, I'm not even sure they exist anymore, without checking the game. They are THAT low.) Larger ships should be charged a reasonable sum for docking.

And docking at an Ocellus or Orbis spacestation should cost much more than a Coriolis, which should cost much more than an Outpost, which should cost much more than a planetary Surface Port. That way we'd actually have to weigh-up the cost-benefit of visiting an expensive station against the services we need/etc.

Sounds nice but: This game is for some reason unable to tell which commodities and modules it sells. So I'll have to travel to several stations more or less blind* until I find what I'm looking for. I can see how this would cause a lot of frustration. So no. Frontier needs to brush up the information we can get ingame about stations until I would consider this a good idea.

(* Yes I can display the system economy on the galaxy map if I'm looking for some tea. Still no guarantee that it will actually have some. Same goes for high tech stations, that may or may not have what I'm looking for)
 
I didn't spot that, but I am one of the people that would ask why 1 ton of fuel should be a different price depending where it goes. It shouldn't, it makes no sense. If two grades of fuel are introduced, that would work fine. It doesn't cost more (per gallon) to fill up a Ferrari at a garage than it does to fill up a Mini. Unless you go for the higher octane fuel (which you certainly should do in a Ferrari ), in which case there is a slight increase in price. This would make sense, but charging different prices for the same thing doesn't. .

It does if it includes a fee depending on if you are using a small Medium or Large pad at a a statuion, so a Ferrari and mini might cost the same, as they go to the same pump, but a larger vehicle that needs a larger purposed built refueling stop would pay more, to off set the cost to the vendor to provide the larger purposed built refueling stop, even if they are all chungging down the same fuel.
 
Tip Off missions. The last 2 I've done payed out less then 100k combined. Next Tip Off goes directly into the garbage.
 
It does if it includes a fee depending on if you are using a small Medium or Large pad at a a statuion, so a Ferrari and mini might cost the same, as they go to the same pump, but a larger vehicle that needs a larger purposed built refueling stop would pay more, to off set the cost to the vendor to provide the larger purposed built refueling stop, even if they are all chungging down the same fuel.

Lorries don't pay more either... I can't actually think of any example where vehicles are charged different prices for the same thing. Do you have an example?
 
Lorries don't pay more either... I can't actually think of any example where vehicles are charged different prices for the same thing. Do you have an example?

Toll bridges charging one rate for private vehicles under 3.5 tons,. one rate for fare carrying vehicles under 3.5 tons, and a different rate for vehicles over 3.5 tons

Access to the bridge is the same thing
 
I would suggest that if I get exploded, my modules could be picked up, repaired and installed by other players who finds the Signal Source of my wreck.
 
Back
Top Bottom