Elite Dangerous: FSD Reward Issues [reModifications & Experimentals] Follow Up.
- Thread starter sallymorganmoore
- Start date
- Status
Thank you again
You're wonderful I really wish I am/was wrong
Of course I'm assuming easy fixes, and I think it should be an easy fix: instead of blindly denying the experimental effect the dev.team has to implement a check on which module the effect is being applied to and then deny or allow
You may well say that, you may well believe it, it might even be true - but I'm sorry to say that the actions of the programmers/developers/whoever do not seem to support it; and not just on this one issue but it is symptomatic of the whole attitude that seems to prevail with regard to the game and the player base. If they care, they have a very funny way of showing it.
There are known issues going back years in some cases, that are ignored. Logging to respawn materials at Dav's Hope and similar sites is supposedly an "intended gameplay mechanic" (how can logging out and back in be intended gameplay?) while doing the same thing on a LTD rock's surface sites is quickly hammered as an "exploit" and branded cheating, patched out within a few days. The carrier release was riddled with bugs even after being delayed for months, some of which still exist. Every new update to fix a problem breaks something else. The coders apparently didn't know how the CG reward modules worked or how the community was using them. When confronted with the current problem, it is again claimed that a game breaking "server error" message is the intended gameplay - how could it be? - and it will not be fixed, but also there are "ongoing discussions" about how to proceed. As if there's anything to discuss, the answer couldn't be simpler: the new modules should be the same as the previous ones. And we won't even start on the farce that has been the Odyssey release.
All of these actions - and more - tell a story of a "behind the scenes team" who cobble things together, don't know how the game actually works or what the player experience is, won't admit mistakes, and prevaricate endlessless over the simplest, most obvious decisions.
I'm sorry if you choose to take that personally, but that's how the actions of those "higher ups" are coming across. The only way to alter that perception is to alter the actions which cause them. Not just on this one issue, but across the board.
I did both CGs, this account in the bubble and another in Colonia. Spent about 3 hours hauling in the bubble and ended in the top 25%. Did double that in Colonia and ended, as I was aiming to do, in the Top 10 CMDRs.
Yes, I thought we'd be able to add experimentals to the FSDs, as did many of us, but not being able to do so isn't the end of the world, I still have 3 drives, on both accounts, that improve over the G5 + experimental equivalents - and cost me nothing but a few hours of play (which, as I don't join in many CGs, was also quite fun) doing something different to everyday stuff.
I'd have liked that extra option, but am not going to make any fuss because I don't have it. I'm still better off than I was, both in credits and modules
Yes, I thought we'd be able to add experimentals to the FSDs, as did many of us, but not being able to do so isn't the end of the world, I still have 3 drives, on both accounts, that improve over the G5 + experimental equivalents - and cost me nothing but a few hours of play (which, as I don't join in many CGs, was also quite fun) doing something different to everyday stuff.
I'd have liked that extra option, but am not going to make any fuss because I don't have it. I'm still better off than I was, both in credits and modules
I think it just seems that way to some people who perhaps don't know or don't care to think about how decisions might be made.
It's hard for players to understand why the Size 5 FSD can have additional modifications, but the new Size 3, 4 & 6 ones cannot. We assume that the code must be very similar, because they're very similar features that essentially do the same thing, but with different variable values.
We don't know what the technical and resource challenges are involved in this. I'm certain that decisions were made based on more factors than what the players want. But it really does seem like you guys have managed to turn a quick win into a big blunder this time.
One wonders how much backlash you'd have gotten if you'd just said "it's a tough bug to fix, we'll fix it when we can, sorry about it. To say sorry, we'll make these modules available from tech brokers when we get them fixed. We're not sure yet how long it will take to fix"
I wish I could.
This
But that would have meant owning up to a mistake, which it seems like someone somewhere doesn't want to do.
For love of god FDev...say this before the freagin CG will you.
Only pineapple.
Rude and presumptive player posts aside, I can honestly say that one of the most frustrating aspects of this is that the decision and the decision process feels opaque and doesn't really make sense overall.
And if we're not misunderstanding, that the developers hadn't been aware of experimental effects on CG reward modules going back to the 5 FSD, then ... wow. That's incredibly disheartening just from a player perspective. It feels as though they're not involved in their own game.
I don't think I'm unusual in that I look up modules on the wiki, as well as systems with discounts and material locations and Guardian sites and etc, etc. Some of us get deep into the optimization (sometimes if for no other reason than our time is limited and we're trying to make the best of our play hours). If a casual player like me is more versed on the ins and outs of game mechanics than the people making the game, that's kind of mind-blowing at the very least.
What we need more than just a concession and letting us "have what we want" or what not is a sense of what happened and why. I can live with a decision I don't agree with if getting from point A to B makes sense. I have a harder time being cool with a decision that seems weird and arbitrary. It almost feels like being punished for investing my time, and that's just not right.
Thanks for listening, @sallymorganmoore. Community management is never easy. I hope this comes out all right.
And if we're not misunderstanding, that the developers hadn't been aware of experimental effects on CG reward modules going back to the 5 FSD, then ... wow. That's incredibly disheartening just from a player perspective. It feels as though they're not involved in their own game.
I don't think I'm unusual in that I look up modules on the wiki, as well as systems with discounts and material locations and Guardian sites and etc, etc. Some of us get deep into the optimization (sometimes if for no other reason than our time is limited and we're trying to make the best of our play hours). If a casual player like me is more versed on the ins and outs of game mechanics than the people making the game, that's kind of mind-blowing at the very least.
What we need more than just a concession and letting us "have what we want" or what not is a sense of what happened and why. I can live with a decision I don't agree with if getting from point A to B makes sense. I have a harder time being cool with a decision that seems weird and arbitrary. It almost feels like being punished for investing my time, and that's just not right.
Thanks for listening, @sallymorganmoore. Community management is never easy. I hope this comes out all right.
Reading through this thread, there are a few points well made and worth pursuing, however, I want to join the group of players thanking you again for doing such a great job of interfacing between FDev and the player base. Regardless of how thick-skinned and reptilian you might feel that you are, it is obviously a job that requires a TON of patience. I couldn't do it, I'd be raging at what a basic, ignorant and dispassionate bunch some of us are. I hope that you are well appreciated on FDs side of the work as you are by the more philosophical players.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect is very strong among gamers and bo matter the level of personal dissatisfaction some find with the game (and I am not always patient and affable about some changes), some of the assumptions about the attitude of the developers, FD and Mr DJB himself are clearly and laughably crass and offensive. You don't have to be a game dev to see how ridiculous, hurtful and baseless some of the comments are. I don't know anybody that has met many of the team and has any doubts or bile to spew at them personally.
Sorry to interrupt the flow of complaints and accusations and take your time with points that have already been made and require no answer. However, putting myself in your position for a millisecond, I think it is important to hear from those who maintain excellent enthusiasm for the mission, despite teething problems and the necessary debate in order to resolve problems that crop up.
We're very glad you returned and the realistic, upfront and reasoned communications you and FD are maintaining now is very valuable and welcome. I hope the team is maintaining their optimism and excitement for the game and process, despite the issues that crop up, controversy and the often thankless work which they do.
I look forward to the eye of the hurricane and I hope the ever spiralling storms in teacups subside soon. Perhaps then we can get back to discussing the wonders of the game, more than niggles which - frankly - get more negative airtime than they are worth, by a country mile.
It's the weekend soon. Yay!
Jim
I really wish FDEV would consider having a dedicated Test server where players can be invited to try out and test the functionality of coming features. There is a huge wealth of experienced and dedicated players at all levels who I am sure would love to be involved. No one can realistically expect the Frontier staff to play the game with the kind of dedication many of us do, it is a significant resource that feels like a wasted opportunity and it's a shame there isn't some way we can come together and help the game improve
Nope.... toppings only allowed on pineapple pizzas. So if you ordered salami you can't have extra cheese because the devs say, that it's not healthy. Extra cheese is only for pineapple pizzas... brrrrrr.... but on pineapple pizzas every topping is healthy.
Last edited:
Hello Sally,
Here are a few thoughts on the subject.
I personally work in an area where I have to deal with a lot of people and their problems. These are not only work-related but also partly very private. What I have learned over the years is that a certain point is very important. This includes the exchange of information on both sides, which is half the battle of my job. Many of my clients do not have the insight into my professional field and therefore I have always tried to integrate them as much as possible in the actions and processes. Many of them got a better understanding.
Here I also have a small idea in relation to FD and the community.
In Germany there is something like an "open day". Here relatives, friends or family can visit the company of the employee and get a deeper insight into what is happening in the company. (ka. whether there is something like that in England?) Many have thereby a better understanding to the respective occupation and their field of activity.
(small bsp. I was with my brother to the "day of the open door", he works with the DB=Deutsche Bahn. At the end of the day I drove a 2500 PS strong diesel locomotive, about 300m (it was a mega-hot feeling)).
Now for the idea, how about a video on Elite Dangerous with a look behind the scenes. Interwies with employees of the respective areas, development, modes of operation .. etc..
Personally, I'm interested in these little things of the staff and your work. The programmer who desperately tries to find the CODE of Raxxla in the game, the graphic designer who manually sets each pixel, the intern who stumbles 12 times a day over the server cable or the community manager every morning desperately looking for your coffee mug
Could be run as a mini-series.
To the FSD GC rewards.
If you decide to keep this as they are now, so be it. Personally I would like to see the 3,4 & 6 FSD get an experimental effect. The dream of my 100 LY Jumpconda would get closer and closer
In an amount said that the ingame players who do not read a forum. Have no info on why, why, why the experimental effect does not go.
Also for this a small proposal, so that this also fits ED:
A small message via message in the game, which would contain e.g. the following.
Message from engineer XXX, due to the more complex production of the new modules of the FSD 3,4 & 6, there are difficulties in applying an "experimental effect". Timestep.
Something like that
How to avoid such problems in the future?
More detailed description of the module in the GC text.
Finally, I want to thank you and the team of Elite Dangerous for your great work and horny game
Ps. How about polls/votes in the forum for certain topics/contents of the game's?!
Here are a few thoughts on the subject.
I personally work in an area where I have to deal with a lot of people and their problems. These are not only work-related but also partly very private. What I have learned over the years is that a certain point is very important. This includes the exchange of information on both sides, which is half the battle of my job. Many of my clients do not have the insight into my professional field and therefore I have always tried to integrate them as much as possible in the actions and processes. Many of them got a better understanding.
Here I also have a small idea in relation to FD and the community.
In Germany there is something like an "open day". Here relatives, friends or family can visit the company of the employee and get a deeper insight into what is happening in the company. (ka. whether there is something like that in England?) Many have thereby a better understanding to the respective occupation and their field of activity.
(small bsp. I was with my brother to the "day of the open door", he works with the DB=Deutsche Bahn. At the end of the day I drove a 2500 PS strong diesel locomotive, about 300m (it was a mega-hot feeling)).
Now for the idea, how about a video on Elite Dangerous with a look behind the scenes. Interwies with employees of the respective areas, development, modes of operation .. etc..
Personally, I'm interested in these little things of the staff and your work. The programmer who desperately tries to find the CODE of Raxxla in the game, the graphic designer who manually sets each pixel, the intern who stumbles 12 times a day over the server cable or the community manager every morning desperately looking for your coffee mug
Could be run as a mini-series.
To the FSD GC rewards.
If you decide to keep this as they are now, so be it. Personally I would like to see the 3,4 & 6 FSD get an experimental effect. The dream of my 100 LY Jumpconda would get closer and closer
In an amount said that the ingame players who do not read a forum. Have no info on why, why, why the experimental effect does not go.
Also for this a small proposal, so that this also fits ED:
A small message via message in the game, which would contain e.g. the following.
Message from engineer XXX, due to the more complex production of the new modules of the FSD 3,4 & 6, there are difficulties in applying an "experimental effect". Timestep.
Something like that
How to avoid such problems in the future?
More detailed description of the module in the GC text.
Finally, I want to thank you and the team of Elite Dangerous for your great work and horny game
Ps. How about polls/votes in the forum for certain topics/contents of the game's?!
Last edited:
Oof.
I'm someone who has spent a fair amount of time playing Elite (~1200 hours) and someone who got one of the very first double-engineered 5A FSDs from a CG around 2 years ago.
Since then, I've acquired a couple more of these drives (both quite a long time after that initial CG) by purchasing at a tech broker - when that was added, some time ago.
Back to when I first got this FSD: I was obsessed with it. The very first thing I did was apply Mass Manager to it. With the double engineering and MM, my Phantom went from 68LY to 76LY. I was beaming; so happy that I could do less jumps and save much time getting around. I dreamt about other size FSDs and being able to use them on my other ships. It was one of the best feelings I had in Elite.
I remember at the time there was great debate over exactly what the description of this first DE FSD implied. Was it going to give more range than a standard engineered FSD? Did it imply that it was going to charge faster? No-one in the playerbase had any further indication of the answers until they recieved the reward and fitted it to their ship.
I feel like there are echoes of this here. Is it possible Frontier didn't know what the effects of the first DE FSD were actually going to have? As I said before, no clarification was offered to players before we received the reward. I have to admit to being shocked to read that Frontier didn't realise I had been putting MM on these drives for 2 years without their knowledge. And boy am I not alone. Surely every dedicated Elite player knows this fact about their DE 5A FSDs as surely as they know the back of their hand.
As for what I think the solution should be. Well, as I said already, I think it takes too long to get around in Elite and every ship could do with a ground-level boost to jump range. The way forward in my opinion for player satisfaction is to allow EE on all sizes of this double-engineered FSD. I can't see how this could be bad at all.
The game is not in a great place right now for veterans. Console veterans especially are in the dark ages. Frontier, you should be throwing us all the bones you can. And to whoever decides who sits in the boardroom at Frontier: You are employing people who simply don't understand this product or how to use it's potential to make a lot of money.
It's a sad state of affairs that it's people who think like that who are in charge and not people with passion for Elite. Hardly exclusive to Frontier, though.
I'm someone who has spent a fair amount of time playing Elite (~1200 hours) and someone who got one of the very first double-engineered 5A FSDs from a CG around 2 years ago.
Since then, I've acquired a couple more of these drives (both quite a long time after that initial CG) by purchasing at a tech broker - when that was added, some time ago.
Back to when I first got this FSD: I was obsessed with it. The very first thing I did was apply Mass Manager to it. With the double engineering and MM, my Phantom went from 68LY to 76LY. I was beaming; so happy that I could do less jumps and save much time getting around. I dreamt about other size FSDs and being able to use them on my other ships. It was one of the best feelings I had in Elite.
I remember at the time there was great debate over exactly what the description of this first DE FSD implied. Was it going to give more range than a standard engineered FSD? Did it imply that it was going to charge faster? No-one in the playerbase had any further indication of the answers until they recieved the reward and fitted it to their ship.
I feel like there are echoes of this here. Is it possible Frontier didn't know what the effects of the first DE FSD were actually going to have? As I said before, no clarification was offered to players before we received the reward. I have to admit to being shocked to read that Frontier didn't realise I had been putting MM on these drives for 2 years without their knowledge. And boy am I not alone. Surely every dedicated Elite player knows this fact about their DE 5A FSDs as surely as they know the back of their hand.
As for what I think the solution should be. Well, as I said already, I think it takes too long to get around in Elite and every ship could do with a ground-level boost to jump range. The way forward in my opinion for player satisfaction is to allow EE on all sizes of this double-engineered FSD. I can't see how this could be bad at all.
The game is not in a great place right now for veterans. Console veterans especially are in the dark ages. Frontier, you should be throwing us all the bones you can. And to whoever decides who sits in the boardroom at Frontier: You are employing people who simply don't understand this product or how to use it's potential to make a lot of money.
It's a sad state of affairs that it's people who think like that who are in charge and not people with passion for Elite. Hardly exclusive to Frontier, though.
But then you get the whole 'I want it now, why are Frontier so slow' brigade piling in.
The developers are only accountable to their line managers and they are only accountable to the business. You, as a player, have no reason to expect anything from them. The fact that Sally &Co spend time and energy keeping you in the loop, should be applauded. To be clear; if you don't like some minute speck of a small facet of the game then don't let that 'get to you' so that you lose the holistic view of the game. Plainly, if it was a bad game you wouldn't be playing it.
Thank you again
I really wish I am/was wrong
Of course I'm assuming easy fixes, and I think it should be an easy fix: instead of blindly denying the experimental effect the dev.team has to implement a check on which module the effect is being applied to and then deny or allow
Tinfoil Hat mode on:
1) Update 7, hitting the shelves September 22nd, introduced some really weird bugs to engineering modules, mostly weapons.
So some changes were performed that were affecting the engineering.
The bugs were fixed eventually - which may imply some other changes instead of a simple fix, since it took some time
2) The CG regarding the attempt to capture Yuri Grom, scheduled to end on October 9th, gave us double engineering seekers (high capacity and increased fire rate)
The interesting thing is those double engineering seekers threw an error when trying to add experimental
3) Here comes the new double engineered FSD, that also threw an error when trying to add experimentals
Before Update 7, all double engineered modules that could take experimentals, did it with no issues
After Update 7, both double engineered modules throw an UI error when trying to add experimentals
Could the events leading to the bugged engineered modules in U7 (or the way the bugs were solved) be the root cause we cannot apply experimentals to the last 2 sets of double engineered CG rewards?
/Tinfoil Hat mode off
I'll add my thoughts too, just because.
I personally don't mind that I can't add experimental effects to those new FSDs. I'm not a fan of power creep in general. Apparently I have two of those class 5 unicorn FSDs with MM applied to them - Frontier could take the effect off of those too for all I care. Just please have some consistency in the game.
I think people are upset because Frontier altered the deal. The players put in the time (a lot of time, because everything takes a lot of time in Elite) and now feel like they've been "bait and switch"-ed.
And it didn't help at all that the first reply was "we didn't alter the deal" when the community knew that wasn't true since we've been doing this for over a year now. The fact that we got some obscure "server error" is another sign that clearly Frontier did not quite know what was going on and something got lost on the internal communication highway. I simply don't believe that all of this was intentional. That's obviously just my opinion, I don't know what Frontier looks like from the inside.
Add to that that the last years for Elite have been... well, what they have been and you get a nice little powder keg. That's why a seemingly small issue can conjure this perfect storm.
Oh, and out of personal interest, just do an Engineering balance pass/overhaul. That would make this whole thread obsolete.
I personally don't mind that I can't add experimental effects to those new FSDs. I'm not a fan of power creep in general. Apparently I have two of those class 5 unicorn FSDs with MM applied to them - Frontier could take the effect off of those too for all I care. Just please have some consistency in the game.
I think people are upset because Frontier altered the deal. The players put in the time (a lot of time, because everything takes a lot of time in Elite) and now feel like they've been "bait and switch"-ed.
And it didn't help at all that the first reply was "we didn't alter the deal" when the community knew that wasn't true since we've been doing this for over a year now. The fact that we got some obscure "server error" is another sign that clearly Frontier did not quite know what was going on and something got lost on the internal communication highway. I simply don't believe that all of this was intentional. That's obviously just my opinion, I don't know what Frontier looks like from the inside.
Add to that that the last years for Elite have been... well, what they have been and you get a nice little powder keg. That's why a seemingly small issue can conjure this perfect storm.
Oh, and out of personal interest, just do an Engineering balance pass/overhaul. That would make this whole thread obsolete.
Since Horizons, engineering has become the bread and butter of Elite Dangerous. I find this recent trend back towards modules with fixed stats and no customization options rather confusing. Double engineering should mean that modules have two slots for blueprints, and we get to choose the combination we want. Instead we now get more and more modules with pre-applied blueprints that cannot be changed. And soon we can't even choose the experimental effects? It appears that the design team regrets the introduction of engineers.
I think the vast majority of players would prefer waiting and testing new features rather than having them released with bugs that introduced other bugs or breaks in the game
Never questioned any of this just suggested offering the players a constructive way for both sides to improve the game
Has been and continues to be appreciated and applauded
Never said it was a "Bad Game" and pointing out inconsistencies in game issues and offering suggestions isn't getting to me at all, I love this game and will continue to do so but I also want it to improve
- Status