Let's hope the process / missions / collecting is actually enjoyable...
I sure hope so. I don't mind grinding here and there. On the other side of the coin, I don't like feeling compelled to spend the majority of my play time grinding.
Engineer weapon crafting needs to be rethought (if what we suspect is true)
- Thread starter DrBo42
- Start date
I sure hope so. I don't mind grinding here and there. On the other side of the coin, I don't like feeling compelled to spend the majority of my play time grinding.
Nah we don't really need one - these guys... these guys are geniuses man. Decades of experience in game design on this thread - all professionals highly respected in their fields. We can skip it all, junk the lot and start again with something more shoot-em-up friendly. Just make it money then a few Robigo runs and every ship can have the same toys - perfection in gaming.
Kornelius Breidus's initial take on the RNG engineers and other mechanics (10:10 in)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhrSGcnDM2Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhrSGcnDM2Y
What exactly is the problem posting concerns in a discussion forum on things we've already seen in action? What do you think your post actually contributes? Take your drive-by nonsense elsewhere.
I have trouble with the whole idea that a mechanical/electrical physical system would be subject to random improvements. That's not how things work, nor have they ever worked that way.
As soon as someone invents a new/better widget, the new widget technology gets distributed fairly fast. Especially if it's a widget to do with warfare or sex. And for some widgets there is a substantial (extreme, in cases of things like chip fab plants) expense and long-term investment to invent a new widget. Intel doesn't just go roll 2 D20 to see how their next GPU comes out: they plan and invest and think about spin-off and follow-on technologies based on techniques learned, etc. I know it makes for good anime TV shows to have pops be the amazing mechanic that makes the Mach 5 full of secret technology - but compare that to the reality of F1 racing and you can see that R&D is nothing random at all.
In short, I expect the engineers thing to be stupid and cheesy. I'm looking forward to being disappointed in that regard, but I'm not hopeful.
As soon as someone invents a new/better widget, the new widget technology gets distributed fairly fast. Especially if it's a widget to do with warfare or sex. And for some widgets there is a substantial (extreme, in cases of things like chip fab plants) expense and long-term investment to invent a new widget. Intel doesn't just go roll 2 D20 to see how their next GPU comes out: they plan and invest and think about spin-off and follow-on technologies based on techniques learned, etc. I know it makes for good anime TV shows to have pops be the amazing mechanic that makes the Mach 5 full of secret technology - but compare that to the reality of F1 racing and you can see that R&D is nothing random at all.
In short, I expect the engineers thing to be stupid and cheesy. I'm looking forward to being disappointed in that regard, but I'm not hopeful.
Last edited:
Wild ridiculous speculation driven by misunderstanding and assumptions of total stupidity on the part of the devs aren't contributing much either, but that doesn't stop anyone. Have you seen some/many of the complaints?!?!?
Lots of this is just ridiculous and utterly unanswerable until the beta arrives, so what's does getting so wound up contribute?
edit> You see ^^^^ like that post right there. Fails to read 'experimental' and then how is the rest contributing?
Last edited:
I don't see what in the OP is wild ridiculous speculation. We have videos of the modification process. You appear to be one of the very few getting wound up, lol.
Getting responses from other players on what they think about what we've seen or getting them in a state of mind to test specifically for what's in the OP isn't a bad thing. The only thing that's useless is coming into a thread and claiming it's not worthy of discussion. That's the moderation team's job to decide. Posts like that are disruptive and toxic, friend. Honestly makes this place look bad.
Getting responses from other players on what they think about what we've seen or getting them in a state of mind to test specifically for what's in the OP isn't a bad thing. The only thing that's useless is coming into a thread and claiming it's not worthy of discussion. That's the moderation team's job to decide. Posts like that are disruptive and toxic, friend. Honestly makes this place look bad.
We'll find out tomorrow.
What I do know is that what we've been shown (and some has already changed), will change again during the beta. I'm almost positive of that.
What I do know is that what we've been shown (and some has already changed), will change again during the beta. I'm almost positive of that.
Actually I love the idea FD is using and wish it wash more wide spread in the game. It has always bothered me that every single module and ship in the game has "copy and paste" stats even when built hundreds of lightyears apart. Mass production does have tolerances that are very tight but are not, nor have ever been 100% perfect from product to product. It looks like they spread the tolerances for gameplay which is just fine to me. All I hope is FD doesnt listen to all the whiners here that want just want to build the uber ship, learn variety.
They should apply that to ship hulls then. If you find you don't like that your Cutter has 10% less hull than it should, you can always sell it and buy another one.
So you just want FD to listen to whiners (as you call them) that just want the ONLY uber ship, AND these whiners are most likely not even interested in combat at all and could careless to be bothered by it. I will also add that there IS variety in weapons, ships and a commanders skill.
Last edited:
Well the whole premise of the thread is wild speculation. Everybody acknowledges that, and so far most users have been civil expressing their opinion. That's true of both sides of the matter. If you're not interested in speculation, why are you here using sarcasm to insult those who are?
It's not that your original points are bonkers - though have you noticed in the videos they've always been shooting with a pair of identical weapons? They've also specified in the live streams the stats are tied together not all random. But still 16 pages later there's still people getting pretty wound up about things already answered - that's what's not helping, not you asking the question in the first place there are always points that are confusing.
I'm not wound up - I've not started a thread in ages.
I have indeed noticed they fire a pair of weapons with the same effect but can't tell if they're identical in stats. I also understand there's some level of control in the randomness. Still doesn't alleviate any of the speculative problems I've listed in the OP. I haven't heard anything about multiple guns having the same stats or having the same roll result applied to multiple weapons.
I have a general problem with naming those tinkerers "engineers".
If it is a black art name it properly please.
Now "engineers" get your greasy hands ready for mayhem phase,
i bid you 10 tons of toxic waste for "emissive munitions".
If it is a black art name it properly please.
Now "engineers" get your greasy hands ready for mayhem phase,
i bid you 10 tons of toxic waste for "emissive munitions".
My issue with this is that when designing something, such as a laser, there should be a way to at least determine its special effect. For example, if a pilot asks an engineer to make a healing laser, they are not going to reply "....well, I'll just have to keep modifying your laser randomly until it turns out to do that..", they would learn from the way they made one last time.
I think they should set it up that once you get a particular random result or special quality (call it a discovery?), then you get a blueprint for that change, then can have an engineer repeat those steps in order to modify another item to have the same qualities.
This would remove some of the guesswork and honestly, worse, the material farming involved in creating specialized ships, like a healing platform, or heat-based laser craft.
I think they should set it up that once you get a particular random result or special quality (call it a discovery?), then you get a blueprint for that change, then can have an engineer repeat those steps in order to modify another item to have the same qualities.
This would remove some of the guesswork and honestly, worse, the material farming involved in creating specialized ships, like a healing platform, or heat-based laser craft.
Last edited:
Sounds reasonable.
I'd want to be able to name my ship first. It'd be silly if I could name my PA but not the ship it is attached to
It'd be about as official as the inara ship names, so yeah, same difference
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Actually semi-random variation is quite normal even in silicon wafers. That is how they get different chipsets sometimes, by the quality variation
Seriously the excuses here are crazy..... They should be able to craft a second, third or forth weapon to do exactly the same. Talking variations between crafting a weapon is not micro engineering by hand. Its control boards and programing with some guns. People mod guns all the time. Even in the 20th century we can make multiple weapons with the same statistics. Yeah there is variation but not enough to make the difference that they cannot make weapons with the same statistics. This is almost like saying there is no way we can find out what another station sells and what it sells for in ED. So what happened the phones in 3302 or the comms, or internet down between everything. I can have the same broadcast feed in every station in the 200 billion stars of whats going on in galnet but nope I get real trade data or sell my ship on space-craigs list from another location lol. Anyway.......we should know what we are getting and be able to match them. And we should have an engineer at most station that we just go to when needed without the runaround. But that my opinion.
Very good point.Actually semi-random variation is quite normal even in silicon wafers. That is how they get different chipsets sometimes, by the quality variation
Working with laser diodes there are many that are identically produced from identical materials and processes yet come out varying significantly. Such as the 'single mode' green laser diode, the PL520, comes in variety from 30mW to 100mW from the same line. A threefold power variation despite all attempts to make it consistent
Last edited: