the first time i got fined by brewer was because i docked at the construction site, so it doesnt really matter what you do in all honesty, you will be caught and its entirely up to RNG
Elite Dangerous | System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback
- Thread starter Paul_Crowther
- Start date
Than there are a lot of lucky people around or you are just very unlucky...
Can we please get the ability to set apostrophes back to names of stations?
Even the random generated names have them, yet I can not set them for my custom names, which is annyoing me to no end.
I especially do not understand why this has been taken away when it already worked previously.
Even the random generated names have them, yet I can not set them for my custom names, which is annyoing me to no end.
I especially do not understand why this has been taken away when it already worked previously.
There was a huge boost in player numbers when colonization was introduced. Now that the shine is off of the new car and numbers have dropped to near pre-colonization mechanics levels, I think it could be made new again if there were other means to build or acquire materials at a construction platform. It is time to allow mission rewards include station material building. Both for Odyssey and core game missions.
dunno if your reading this thread anymore, but why are orbital stations so close to the bodies they are orbiting? it doesnt matter what slot you pick they always are super close, super fast and in the case of stars, super hot.
will this be addressed at all?
I have constructed a Surface Settlement Agriculture Tier 2 but I can't land and dock because the "request docking" option does not appear in contacts.
On a different planet I have constructed a Surface Settlement Research Bio Tier 2 and I can land and dock just fine. Not much of a commodities market but at least I can dock.
Any ideas why?
On a different planet I have constructed a Surface Settlement Research Bio Tier 2 and I can land and dock just fine. Not much of a commodities market but at least I can dock.
Any ideas why?
I have the same problem, not sure if it will be fixed or not. Though you'll probably get the better settlement output with a tier 1 surface Colony port that has a proper market if you have room to build such a one on the same planet as you have the surface settlement on.
After giving things a decent whirl. As colonisation stands at the moment I do not like it.
The game loop is insanely repetitive and even worse if you're not using a carrier. Almost all the resources come from a single economy type. Spend the vast majority of your time docking at the same port loading the same goods and navigating back to your construction site.
All the primary ports use the same goods. You can't even change up the loop by choosing a different variant or tier. You deliver the same stuff from the same place. You may choose is how long you do it for. No progression from low to high tier. No development curve just the same stuff over and over. You can see this on the breakdowns of what's built as there's a heavy slant towards that one economy which is only needed in that quantity for colonisation. Break it up a bit. Use basic goods for t1. Use far more industrial goods for t2 and use far more high tech goods for t3.
There's very little value in having a colony. It does less than a fleet carrier. Takes more time to create and doesn't move. There's no real benefit to being architect. I can just as easily store my ships in someone else's station and use their markets as I can my own and then I don't need to fly to a refinery 200 times. Most systems are utterly generic and the cool ones are a fight to see who's online at the correct time to click claim first after outposting over to it. The only thing it's got going for it is that you can offensively teleport factions and you get a token yearly payment that you could make in a single cargo load from a CG or booze cruise.
At the moment this feature lets me go places I don't want to go to build systems I don't need using a gameplay loop I don't enjoy. There is a type of player that'll enjoy it but it's not me and without serious adjustments to the costs or the functionality of having a system. The one thing I was hoping for was that we could replace the player tritium depots with colonies and even that is currently impossible. I'm not going to hold my breath on that ever being possible.
The start of the beta asked for feedback on the costs and that seems to be the one thing that hasn't changed. Please change them. They don't need to go down but please use the non refinery economies more and planetary landings less. Even just some of the options having a reduced requirement for planetary goods would be a positive.
Lastly. I hope that at some point when the beta ends you let us nuke colonies. I've got colonies that aren't worth keeping they've no value to me or anyone else not even for the paltry yearly income.
The game loop is insanely repetitive and even worse if you're not using a carrier. Almost all the resources come from a single economy type. Spend the vast majority of your time docking at the same port loading the same goods and navigating back to your construction site.
All the primary ports use the same goods. You can't even change up the loop by choosing a different variant or tier. You deliver the same stuff from the same place. You may choose is how long you do it for. No progression from low to high tier. No development curve just the same stuff over and over. You can see this on the breakdowns of what's built as there's a heavy slant towards that one economy which is only needed in that quantity for colonisation. Break it up a bit. Use basic goods for t1. Use far more industrial goods for t2 and use far more high tech goods for t3.
There's very little value in having a colony. It does less than a fleet carrier. Takes more time to create and doesn't move. There's no real benefit to being architect. I can just as easily store my ships in someone else's station and use their markets as I can my own and then I don't need to fly to a refinery 200 times. Most systems are utterly generic and the cool ones are a fight to see who's online at the correct time to click claim first after outposting over to it. The only thing it's got going for it is that you can offensively teleport factions and you get a token yearly payment that you could make in a single cargo load from a CG or booze cruise.
At the moment this feature lets me go places I don't want to go to build systems I don't need using a gameplay loop I don't enjoy. There is a type of player that'll enjoy it but it's not me and without serious adjustments to the costs or the functionality of having a system. The one thing I was hoping for was that we could replace the player tritium depots with colonies and even that is currently impossible. I'm not going to hold my breath on that ever being possible.
The start of the beta asked for feedback on the costs and that seems to be the one thing that hasn't changed. Please change them. They don't need to go down but please use the non refinery economies more and planetary landings less. Even just some of the options having a reduced requirement for planetary goods would be a positive.
Lastly. I hope that at some point when the beta ends you let us nuke colonies. I've got colonies that aren't worth keeping they've no value to me or anyone else not even for the paltry yearly income.
And, always on the wrong side...
So... do you like it or not? Just joking. And you do make some good points. But if you could design it, what would colonization be "for"?
In a "real" galaxy it would support the endless desire of humanity to expand and make money, but in a game? I don't have a good answer to this.
At the moment I'm just amusing myself chaining out to cool systems in the middle of nowhere in case we ever get to populate whole planets, and trying to get economies to do what I want, with varying degrees of success. Once I am satisfied with what I've got I guess I'll just tinker with it from time to time unless some cool new game mechanism is released. All of which doesn't seem wholly worthwhile but hey, it keeps me out of trouble in real life.
When you write you have the same problem, do you mean specifically agricultural settlements or is it just random?
If I was allowed to design stuff I'd have added some perks that you cannot get at other people's systems for the architect and if they're going that way for the architect's squadron. A lot of solo players have carriers because carriers provide services we cannot get from stations.
I'd like to see storage for commodities to offload our collection of goods or buffer purchases until they can be collected.
I'd like to see a player controlled market where you can set the prices and buy and sell goods from your own colony. I'd like to see mining colonies that buy plat at over galactic average because they know they can sell it off later at far over galactic average. I'd like to be able to have simultaneous buy and sell orders even if that required multiple stations which either buy or sell.
I'd like to be able to buy packaged ships from the shipyard instead of having to go into each slot each time to change stuff and hunting around for sources.
I'd like to be able to apply experimental modifications to my ships in the same place where I buy them.
You could respawn me at my closest colony instead of a prison ship if my colony was closer.
All of those are things the game can do and would give some value to my system. That's just the low hanging fruit. I'm sure we could find other more novel perks for architects and/or architect's squadron members but right now they're just a name on a bar and an NPC system in a place I don't go to.
One thing I have learned endless doing what you describe is... planetary ports are not only simpler to construct but also faster to use then orbital. Yes, at specific times orbital are a tick faster, but you can't predict when. Planetary you can build at exact place you want and it will stay there, so it will have constant predictable hauling time (if the target is on the "opposite side", the time increase is just several second in one direction).
In practice, my current hauling strategy is "use planetary till orbital is in perfect position".
But I agree with the rest. Current "colonization" is just endless and not changing hauling without goal (some do this because they like it, other to build something "nice", third in attempt to find a logic in "economy BGS" while in practice it is just random generator). With SCO/SCA, the probability NPC pirate interdict you is almost zero (and "consequences" are always zero in any case). So, that is not "Elite" nor "Dangerous" activity...
Unfortunately not really. Sure it'll be on the same spot on the planet but unless the planet is tidally locked it'll spend as much time obscured as it will available. It just usually changes slower where some orbital stations orbit many times per hour planets can be daily, weekly or longer. You can do the maths if you care to I don't. If they'd just allow us to put stations into larger orbits it'd offset the issue a lot but they've currently forced orbitals into very tight orbits which means they're obscured a lot.
Is it an Agriculture HUB? Hubs are not dockable, despite the fact that the UI says they will be. I've got a Scientific Hub on one of my moons that attacks me if I get inside the no fire zone. The funny thing is: I am 100% Allied with the faction that controls, but because it is "docking offline" they view me as an intruder. I messaged support about and they said it's working as intended, that hubs are not meant to be dockable. My personal frustration with Colonization is that there are errors in the UI, and they still haven't been corrected. I built a relay station, for instance, that is actually a comms station, because the Ichenae (sp?) template actually produces a comms station, even though it is listed under relay. That prevented me from being able to build the security station I wanted to build (had to go with Military Installation instead) and another similar issue kept me from being able to build a scientific installation. All in all, I was able to adapt my plan, and am pretty happy with my system development, but it could have been better if not for incorrect UI. They say they "cannot" change my "should have been a relay but it's actually a comms station" because it's impossible ...
There is no agriculture hub structure (certainly none I've seen) so I think that rules those out fairly safely.
If memory serves, it was a T2 industrial settlement in a now-disused system I used for experimenting early on in Trailblazers.
In the area I colonize, it is hard to find not tidally locked planet. Since we are speaking about just one specialized Refinery port, it is just rule of thumb the planet must be: tidally locked, not more then 100ls from the primary star, approximately 0.05 earth in mass, etc.
But: (a) that is predictable (unlike orbit stations, f.e. I had one orbit construction site which was "tidally locked" right behind the planet, no ideas why) (b) at the end it is not a big problem since SCA is not helpful for planet ports (or I don't know how to use it for them...) and so correcting trajectory is not a problem.
What I mean, effective "round trip" time to planetary station is very stable and close to the best I get with Coriolis, for which the time is unstable. May be masters of burst landing into Coriolis disagree, but I use (standard) docking computer. So getting inside and outside takes significantly more time then docking/un-docking to planetary (till mass lock is over). When SCA trick is usable and the entrance is at "good" direction (to fly in after drop and to jump back to destination system, these directions are rarely the same), orbital is faster. In all other cases planetary wins.
Definitely a settlement, it has a landing pad. In fact I was actually able to land and dock once but there was nothing to access on the "docked" panel. Now it won't even give me the option of docking. I also have a medium agricultural settlement with a medium docking pad but that doesn't work either.
As for it being "impossible". After 30 years in IT support you get know that's just developer speak for "We can't be bothered because it's hard or everyone will want it or we're busy doing other stuff we think is more important". I mean, come on, it's just ones and zeros in a file, how hard could it be? Actually it could be quite hard, but that's no excuse for saying it is impossible. My normal way around it at work was to say "OK, if it's too complicated for you I'll ask someone else". That usually got them on the case.