ENGINEERS V2 - Fixed module increases with small RNG variance + Module degredation

So engineers is next after C&P and I wanted to get an early start.

I always felt (and I don't know how it translates into a spreadsheet of stats nor actual gameplay)

That the engineers should do what they do.
you have the same "crafting" recipe for your grade 1->5.

However, it's the quality of the material you provide is the key element to what grade of upgrade you eventually land on (with a tiny bit of rng for kicks).

The engineer must install the original "base" grade of each upgrade. This can be achieved through collection grinds or a series of missions.

But since you are getting something extra special, each time, the module flakes out a bit more, guns jam, thrusters burn out and require a reboot, etc etc.
And the capacity of your modules wears down over time and use.

So I can have a grade 1 dirty thruster that will give me a perfect 10% increase in speed and required common metals and well-worn shield components.
but over time that grade 1 will decrease over time, 9%,8%,7,6,5,4,3,2,1 base module capacity.
But since it's been "upgraded" I can top it back up via synthesis with those same materials again, and again (with a little RNG variance for kicks).

When I get grade 4 dirty thrusters (thanks to some missions unlocks, or lots of material collection/trading) I get a guaranteed 40% (or whatever the current grade 4 max is).
over time that degrades from a grade 4 to the base module stats again.

Now I can top it up via synthesis with everything from grade 1 materials up to grade components, and you will get a mixture of those stats along the way.

The crafting recipies litterally 3 materials/ components for grade 1, and 5/6 for grade 5 (notable rares).

But you have Types, so wiring is one bucket of materials burning away, that I can top up with more wiring.
So I can replace my copper wiring with silver wiring, or lithium wiring and get noticeable increase

but in this theoretical recipe, since I couldn't find ceramic cooling tiles and I used metal copper wiring for my heat distribution bucket, I only get 37% instead of the full 40%.

This way, you MUST return to your engineer to "upgrade" to a better level (more buckets) and buckets are modified to accept higher, quality materials.
but It's a guaranteed upgrade.

However, you have to maintain and resource and craft and replace components to keep your mod that burns twice as bright, for half as long module,
So the guaranteed GOD roll as such is a fleeting state that one chases after.

This then factors into mining, prospecting, discovery and selling said locations or keeping them secret.
Hitting the mother load of grade5 materials in an asteroid field.
 
So engineers is next after C&P and I wanted to get an early start.

I always felt (and I don't know how it translates into a spreadsheet of stats nor actual gameplay)

That the engineers should do what they do.
you have the same "crafting" recipe for your grade 1->5.

However, it's the quality of the material you provide is the key element to what grade of upgrade you eventually land on (with a tiny bit of rng for kicks).

On this point I most definitely agree. For example, let's say that a recipe calls for 3 Chemical Distilleries (a standard material), but you only currently have 1. However, you do currently have half a dozen Chemical Processors (a common material). You can use 3 Chemical Processors instead, but the resulting upgrade will have a higher chance of being sub par (though still better than an unmodified module).

On the flip-side, though, lets say your commander lucked out & had 3 Chemical Manipulators (a rare material) in their inventory. You'd have the option to swap in this material, & get a guaranteed bonus on your resulting upgrade. This retains the basic RNG element, but adds in a good, solid dose of player agency into determining the final outcome.

Another thing I'd like to see is an extension of the usefulness of Engineer Favours. At the moment they are only good for weapon special effects. However, what if you went to Colonel Bris Dekker for a grade 3 upgrade to your Frame Shift Drive Interdictor-to increase its captor arc. You do the upgrade, & are happy with Facing Limit & Range.....but the Power Draw is +40% worse than before. So you call in a favour to *only* re-roll that stat, in the knowledge that you will definitely get better than +40%. On the second roll, you get a +15%, so choose to accept the upgrade.

Again, the RNG element is retained, but player agency is added into the mix.
 
I think rank should be a factor too. To use Colonel Dekker as an example again. Lets say that, via a combo of Crafting, Fed specific missions & handing in of Combat Bonds, I have managed to gain Rank 4 with this Engineer. For my latest FSD Interdictor, though, I decide that a level 2 upgrade will suffice. This should give me a +(current rank-level of upgrade x10)% bonus to the final upgrade result (or +20%). So lets say my interdictor upgrade gets me a +30% Facing Limit Bonus, a +20% Power Draw penalty & a -10% Range Penalty. Well the Rank Bonus would correct this final result to a +36% Facing Bonus, a +16% Power Draw Penalty & a -8% Range Penalty. Again, player agency is respected.

If the above changes were made, & if we got Brokerages where we could exchange materials & data (the Science & Research contact), then I also believe that there would be scope for increasing the *quantity* of each resource you needed for getting upgrades.
 
Rank is something we fail to associate with progress and perks in the game.
In game messages at say a federal station should "inject" Your federal rank instead of using "commander".
Actually this might actually happen, I just haven't looked properly. :)
There is a whole scope of military careers, contracted missions,
hanging with a fleet,
putting down uprisings/local factions bullying you ally,
mini CG that should reflect the military need and is not visible to the public if you don't have the correct rank.

With the alliance putting ships together that we need to rank for?? "now" would be a good time to toss these concepts into the bucket list.
 
Last edited:
Rank is something we fail to associate with progress and perks in the game.
In game messages at say a federal station should "inject" Your federal rank instead of using "commander".
Actually this might actually happen, I just haven't looked properly. :)
There is a whole scope of military careers, contracted missions,
hanging with a fleet,
putting down uprisings/local factions bullying you ally,
mini CG that should reflect the military need and is not visible to the public if you don't have the correct rank.

With the alliance putting ships together that we need to rank for?? "now" would be a good time to toss these concepts into the bucket list.

Hmm, maybe getting a bit off the beaten track I'd say. My key issue at the moment is that gaining access to, or rank with, an Engineer should be achievable via more than a single pathway. Calling in favours with a Faction liable to be in contact with an Engineer (via shared Super-Power affiliation, perhaps) might allow you to short-cut the existing means of learning of, or gaining access to, an Engineer. Calling in favours with other engineers could help in this respect too. We especially need, however, a range of ways in which we can gain rank with the Engineers.....beyond the "Craft & Trash" approach. Gaining rep with Factions affiliated to a Super Power they're affiliated to would help-as would cut-down versions of the tasks needed to gain access to them in the first place-like Bounties for Tod McQueen, or Combat Bonds for Colonel Dekker.....as two obvious examples.
 
Not sure about degradation but most decent crafting systems are based on the type and quality of materials used.

So instead of the exposed grades for upgrades, the result is based on the type of material and the formula is a bit more open.

e.g. An upgrade might require - 2 Heavy Metals + 1 Refinery component
For heavy metals, you might use Iron but that is low quality and Tungsten would be better.
For refinery parts any Chemical something would do but Manipulators would be the best.

Based on this I'd prefer the Primaries to be more deterministic and the RNG element restricted to the Secondaries but with smaller variances.
 
Not sure about degradation but most decent crafting systems are based on the type and quality of materials used.

So instead of the exposed grades for upgrades, the result is based on the type of material and the formula is a bit more open.

e.g. An upgrade might require - 2 Heavy Metals + 1 Refinery component
For heavy metals, you might use Iron but that is low quality and Tungsten would be better.
For refinery parts any Chemical something would do but Manipulators would be the best.

Based on this I'd prefer the Primaries to be more deterministic and the RNG element restricted to the Secondaries but with smaller variances.

I see no need to overly "reinvent the wheel". As long as blueprints contain sufficient flexibility to allow player agency to impact the final outcome, & as long as other examples of player agency are brought in too, then I am happy to keep the current RNG system largely intact.
 
I must not be totally alone in wishing there was no RNG with engineers at all, gathering the components in the first place is enough of a task. In my view gameplay should really be teaming up with my friends (guild when it comes), doing powerplay, having fun with dogfights, exploring... or whatever I feel like. Anything that reduces/removes RNG in engineering is good by me.

p.s. Yes... I understand that the concept with engineers is that they are dabblers and tinkerers... I just think it would have been better if they had been proper engineers (working to proper requirements and tolerances).
 
Hi CMdr

I don't think the change you expose is quite easy to implement but all suggestions with "less" RNG god is always better than the current. But use more common materials to generate less powerful roll is maybe not easy to balance or so.

Maybe a simple buy/exchange components system is more realistic. You exchange 2 iron for 1 metal for example. Then you can roll your recipe.

I just want to share an idea I have requested few months ago regarding engineer. If devs can see it or more players feel comfortable with it, maybe they can do something for it. It's a way to make the "grind" more enjoyable and fun (or at least I think so).

1) Engineer base is boring like hell and useful as much as a death rat ... I mean ... what's a beautiful base with no need except go there, buy a module and shuffle the engineer roulette and then ... bye.

I would suggest to make these "bases" more enjoyable and useful for all horizon players base without breaking the balance with horizon owner and non horizon.

First on all, please make all modules "engineer able" by the engineer available to buy at that station.
Make a special mission board available. Which will include materias and "flavor" and reputation as rewards. (remove the rewards of item from normal mission if CMDRs want it). No credits for those specific missions. So no imbalancing fight and glitch.
These target's missions will be generated for the planet itself or the system if needed. No more fare away.
 
Hi CMdr

I don't think the change you expose is quite easy to implement but all suggestions with "less" RNG god is always better than the current. But use more common materials to generate less powerful roll is maybe not easy to balance or so.

Maybe a simple buy/exchange components system is more realistic. You exchange 2 iron for 1 metal for example. Then you can roll your recipe.

I just want to share an idea I have requested few months ago regarding engineer. If devs can see it or more players feel comfortable with it, maybe they can do something for it. It's a way to make the "grind" more enjoyable and fun (or at least I think so).

Any system that creates an increased reliance on credits gets a huge "thumbs down" from me.
 
I personally think module degradation is a needed thing. It would add an actual REASON to spend credits. Higher end modules = more credits to "maintain"
 
Although I do like the idea of using other materials to help acheive a certain modification (you may only need a particular modification say to meet the requirements of a CG or Rank specific mission) but one thing I don't want to have to keep doing is grinding for materials.

If I've already scrubed numerous planets in order to obtain the "top" materials for a long term modification - I want that to stay that way (the modification I mean).

Also if you're in the middle of a battle and all of a sudden your mods start falling off and then your ship is taken out only to find you've now got a 30mil rebuy cost - why just because a nerf on the mods now means you have to carry around more materials which even now with 2.4 does absolutely nothing but take up space in my ship.

Final thing - enhance ship storage to include materials for modding your ship if you already have the materials and blue print on hand. Surely there's more engineers out there in the star ports who'll perform the jobs for you. Maybe in Federation or other Coriolis ports - if you're taking on a job - the job provides you with some materials to help develop your systems in order to complete the job. Once completed though the mods are removed.

Just a couple of thoughts.

V2k.
 
The only thing Engineers need is an actual NEGATIVE side for most effects... I mean seriously. If I were an engineer in Elite dangerous I'd be selling my stuff for credits... Lot's of it... instead of asking for some giggly rocks...
 
I must not be totally alone in wishing there was no RNG with engineers at all, gathering the components in the first place is enough of a task. In my view gameplay should really be teaming up with my friends (guild when it comes), doing powerplay, having fun with dogfights, exploring... or whatever I feel like. Anything that reduces/removes RNG in engineering is good by me.

p.s. Yes... I understand that the concept with engineers is that they are dabblers and tinkerers... I just think it would have been better if they had been proper engineers (working to proper requirements and tolerances).

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results...

They should be called Alchemists, not Engineers.

What really needs to happen is that there are performance sliders, and you can trade negative effects for positive effects in a controlled manner, such as increased heat for mass reduction. Then, the Engineer tells you how much it will cost and if you have the required level.

Oh, and NPC gated "repairs" is the dumbest thing to ever hit gaming, so... NO!
 
Last edited:
Player adjustable linked sliders.

Problem solved. [yesnod]

Z...

Yep. It's actually very easy to envision that.

You have lets say 2 or 3 grades for each slider.

For example. If you want to use a very easy mat, the slider would change 3 negatives for 1 positive. EG:

Third Grade: (is the worst of the bunch you trade a LOT for the change)

+DMG = -ROF +PWDraw +HeatBuild.

Second grade: ( This one is on par or slightly below the first grade )

+DMG = + PWD +Heatbuild.

First Grade: ( Have one negative effect, but it's effects is doubled )

+DMG = ++Heatbuild.



And give the slider freedom. maybe even go as crazy as +100% , But the negative effect should escalate exponentially.

To get a weapon to +100% DMG it should have an +2000% heat build on First grade.

But having a weapon to +25% DMG should not be over 100% heat build.

would be fun to see this kind of engineering roaming around... :D

They just need to make changes on the Shield boosters.
 
As far as the, hopefully sarcastic, post above goes, if you could mitigate the overwhelming initial effects by providing appropriate materials (and perhaps having levels in excess of the required also mitigate), it is actually not a bad concept.
 
Let's explore the slider suggestion.
Now having sliders means everyone will go for the same "meta" build so we have to steer the system away from that.

Even with the current V1 system this is what we saw earlier on with people spamming the system (after a grade5 unlock with grade1 materials) to get a grade5 god-roll.

Now I don't mind having sliders, i think that's where people always wanted to have engineers.
I would like the ability to tinker, but at a pre-determined cost (pretty much as the system works today, as I drag up the optimal multiplier, the negative effects kick in, but we feel like we have control).
But everyone would just look on corilios and find the perfect slider position for the meta-build you are desire.

However for clarity Let's bring in the Balance hammer in.
I could set the slider into god-roll position and spam the system ( and that's what everyone will ATTEMPT to do, let's face it)
So how to detract from that?
1) A one-off payment that is very expensive (as it is today)
2) The build might not be successful and have a high rate of failure (as it is today) - and would that be a total failure, or did the engineer land on a lesser build?

what would be fair?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMELTING

So let's roll with the sliders,
What I'm suggesting is effectively is the smelting mechanic from minecraft to maintain that build (sorry I couldn't think of a better gaming metaphor mechanic.

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Smelting
So yeah, pvp'ers can get their ungodly grinded god-roll, but it's not permenant.


With each more complex build comes more "stoves" again this is nothing we don't already have in game.
https://inara.cz/galaxy-blueprint/2/ FSD
https://inara.cz/galaxy-blueprint/4/ Thrusters

Grade 1: v1 : 1 type of material v2 : 1 stove
Grade 2: v1 : 2 types of materials v2 : 2 stoves
Grade 3: v1 : 3 types of materials v2 : 3 stoves
Grade 4: v1 : 3 types of materials v2 : 3 stoves
Grade 5: v1 : 3 tyepes of materials v2 : 3 stoves

And this so far in version 1 of engineers this all tallies up with material drop rate correct?

http://elite-dangerous.wikia.com/wiki/Materials
Material Grade-1 Very Common
Material Grade-2 Common
Material Grade-3 Standard
Material Grade-4 Rare
Material Grade-5 Very Rare

Each build allows the stoves to accept different materials.

So again we already have the concepts in the game.
we are just tweaking them, allowing players to "feel" like they are more in control.


Grade 1 - 1 stove :
Material Grade-1 Very Common (burns slowly)


Grade 2 - 2 stoves :
Material Grade-1 Very Common (burns a little faster)
Material Grade-2 Common (burns slowly)


Grade 3 - 3 stoves :
Material Grade-1 Very Common (burns even faster)
Material Grade-2 Common (burns a little faster)
Material Grade-3 Standard (burns slowly)


Grade 4 - 3 stoves : can accept rare materials
Material Grade-1 Very Common (burns super fast)
Material Grade-2 Common
Material Grade-3 Standard
Material Grade-4 Rare (burns slowly)


Grade 5 - 3 stoves : can accept very rare materials
Material Grade-1 Very Common (burns super fast)
Material Grade-2 Common
Material Grade-3 Standard
Material Grade-4 Rare
Material Grade-5 Very Rare (burns slowly)

OR ALTERNATIVELY
THE BURN RATES ARE CONSISTANT.
But putting inferior materials into a build produces inferior results?


So Again we aren't changine the game, we are just offsetting the grind from one time-interval of the game (before the purchase) to another (to after).
Instead of grinding materials to spam the RNGeer to get the a permenant build .
You dial in the build you want in a one-off payment and grind materials to maintain that build.

So with the sliders you get to the build you want quicker (yay), but we offset this by adding burn times force material grind to maintain that build.


Additional thoughts.


You can take this is multiple ways as the stoves burn low.
1 : Does the super module decrease it's ability so if the stove is hovering above zero, should the module function is it's normal base stats?
- Would the engineer upgrade now be "dead" and you would have to buy a new one?
- or can we just pump new materials to get it back up and running again.

2: If the stove hits zero dies the super module maintain it's stuper ability, but it malfunctions a lot with general errors, flash overheating... adding a few more wrinkles. as the system can no longer function properly.

3: should the module stop functioning at all (this has always been game breaking issue within the game, it's one thing if a gun stops working but if your sensors break you can't radio space stations, if FSD breaks totally and you lose supercruise and a hyperspace jumps? That's no good.
 
Last edited:
You can take this is multiple ways as the stoves burn low.
1 : Does the super module decrease it's ability so if the stove is hovering above zero, should the module function is it's normal base stats?
- Would the engineer upgrade now be "dead" and you would have to buy a new one?
- or can we just pump new materials to get it back up and running again.

2: If the stove hits zero dies the super module maintain it's stuper ability, but it malfunctions a lot with general errors, flash overheating... adding a few more wrinkles. as the system can no longer function properly.

3: should the module stop functioning at all (this has always been game breaking issue within the game, it's one thing if a gun stops working but if your sensors break you can't radio space stations, if FSD breaks totally and you lose supercruise and a hyperspace jumps? That's no good.

No.. this is nuts... while I agree that engineering should have drawbacks... this is not a good idea...

The thing here is that they should tag draw backs where it hurts.

FSD range == Integrity

Mass == Integrity

Damage == ROF

Weapon Range == Damage

Ammo magazine == Reload time

Total ammo == Mass, reload time.


This would effectivelly make people go down the road of prioritize, do i have a super damage Pulse laser that fire once a week? or have a very long pulse that do less DMG?
 
Back
Top Bottom