[Features Suggestions] Evolution for Elite Dangerous

[Daniel Dusk]

Elite: Dangerous holds immense potential that remains untapped in several systems. I want to share a few ideas that, if implemented, could elevate the depth of gameplay, particularly for those of us invested in colonization, crew system, and the in-game economy.

1. Repurpose Stations Within the Same Category:
Colonization needs flexibility. Currently, players cannot repurpose buildings within the same category (e.g., Industrial Hub to Refinery Hub). This restriction renders minmaxing nearly impossible since every iteration requires a new system. If balance remains a concern, gate the feature behind ARX. Players already pay for cosmetics and station naming.

2. NPC Crew with Functionality and Responsibility:
NPC crew members currently contribute little while taking a sizable 30% profit share. That rate is unjustified when their impact stays minimal. Let us invest in real ships for them. Let them haul. Let them fight in wings. Furthermore, add a "Send on Venture" option enabling them to gather engineering materials while the player continues other tasks. If FDevs allowed this kind of utility, even a 50% cut would not seem excessive.

3. A Player-Driven Economy & Manufacturing/Selling Ships:
Colonization systems offer potential for a real, functioning economy. Let players manufacture and sell ships within colonized systems. This step would ground the colonization mechanic in something tangible and valuable. Let our assets, mining stations, refineries, and logistics feed into ship production and markets. Doing this would revive the in-game economy, provide progression goals, and create a cycle of player-driven resource demand.

Integrated Gameplay Loop:
These systems form a cohesive gameplay loop.

Station repurposing enables adaptable infrastructure for commodities manufacturing --> NPC crew, equipped with real ships, can support logistics, defend assets, gather needed materials, and more importantly, lose ships which requires a rebuy and drives demand --> Manufacturing ties it all together, turning player-built economies into active hubs of trade, production, and competition. Each system feeds the others with no parasitic features.

Of course, this is all just one Cmdr’s ideal vision.
Imagine selling a fully engineered ship you built from scratch...A man can dream.

 

[aRJay]

Elite: Dangerous holds immense potential that remains untapped in several systems. I want to share a few ideas that, if implemented, could elevate the depth of gameplay, particularly for those of us invested in colonization, crew system, and the in-game economy.

1. Repurpose Stations Within the Same Category:
Colonization needs flexibility. Currently, players cannot repurpose buildings within the same category (e.g., Industrial Hub to Refinery Hub). This restriction renders minmaxing nearly impossible since every iteration requires a new system. If balance remains a concern, gate the feature behind ARX. Players already pay for cosmetics and station naming.

I thought preventing min maxing was a good thing that added variety to the game?

2. NPC Crew with Functionality and Responsibility:
NPC crew members currently contribute little while taking a sizable 30% profit share.

My crew only takes 12%, no need for multiple crew now we can rebuy them.

That rate is unjustified when their impact stays minimal. Let us invest in real ships for them. Let them haul. Let them fight in wings. Furthermore, add a "Send on Venture" option enabling them to gather engineering materials while the player continues other tasks. If FDevs allowed this kind of utility, even a 50% cut would not seem excessive.

I consider this too close to automation to be a good thing for the game.

3. A Player-Driven Economy & Manufacturing/Selling Ships:
Colonization systems offer potential for a real, functioning economy. Let players manufacture and sell ships within colonized systems. This step would ground the colonization mechanic in something tangible and valuable. Let our assets, mining stations, refineries, and logistics feed into ship production and markets. Doing this would revive the in-game economy, provide progression goals, and create a cycle of player-driven resource demand.

Integrated Gameplay Loop:
These systems form a cohesive gameplay loop.

Station repurposing enables adaptable infrastructure for commodities manufacturing --> NPC crew, equipped with real ships, can support logistics, defend assets, gather needed materials, and more importantly, lose ships which requires a rebuy and drives demand --> Manufacturing ties it all together, turning player-built economies into active hubs of trade, production, and competition. Each system feeds the others with no parasitic features.

Of course, this is all just one Cmdr’s ideal vision.
Imagine selling a fully engineered ship you built from scratch...A man can dream.

I am sure he can but I prefer to dream of more pleasant things.

 

[Daniel Dusk]

I thought preventing min maxing was a good thing that added variety to the game?


My crew only takes 12%, no need for multiple crew now we can rebuy them.

I consider this too close to automation to be a good thing for the game.


I am sure he can but I prefer to dream of more pleasant things.

Appreciate the feedback, though it’s striking how some show up only to say what shouldn’t happen, rather than what could.

Vision builds depth. Fear of change builds nothing.

o7

 

[Momba Dawn]

I thought preventing min maxing was a good thing that added variety to the game?


My crew only takes 12%, no need for multiple crew now we can rebuy them.

I consider this too close to automation to be a good thing for the game.


I am sure he can but I prefer to dream of more pleasant things.

Why do some CMDRs respond just to disagree? The OP could’ve pitched free waffles and certain voices would still say “no” on principle, offering nothing in return. This mindset builds nothing. The game cannot grow under it.
I find everything the OP said reasonable and, frankly, a ton of fun!

 

[aRJay]

Why do some CMDRs respond just to disagree? The OP could’ve pitched free waffles and certain voices would still say “no” on principle, offering nothing in return. This mindset builds nothing. The game cannot grow under it.
I find everything the OP said reasonable and, frankly, a ton of fun!

If nobody posted to disagree with suggestions FDev might think the idea was universally popular.

While you might have found it reasonable and potentially fun, I didn’t.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Colonization needs flexibility. Currently, players cannot repurpose buildings within the same category (e.g., Industrial Hub to Refinery Hub). This restriction renders minmaxing nearly impossible since every iteration requires a new system.

Though conversely, being able to swap an outpost over a rocky world between Industrial, High-Tech and Colony (therefore Refinery) variants means that you can get all three economies produced for the price of a single station. The rebuild would need to cost a significant amount of cargo to do, I think, to avoid "swapping to avoid building" rather than "swapping to repurpose buildings". (Not as much as a full new build, but maybe 25-50% of that)

That said, I can't think of many cases where it isn't obvious before you build which building within a category is the correct one, if you've got an intent for the system up-front. I'd see this more as a feature of use for people who didn't know what they were doing at all / people who have been retrospectively mistaken by a rule change, rather than something anyone trying to specifically min-max a system would need.

(Not that, with the new population levels, there's all that much need to min-max anyway. You can barely avoid getting high populations, cargo volumes, etc. now)

Colonization systems offer potential for a real, functioning economy. Let players manufacture and sell ships within colonized systems.

How would this be better than the existing set up where players can build a T2/T3 port which gets a shipyard which sells ships, and the construction of other in-system facilities boosts dev and tech level to improve the quality and variety of those ships?

 

[Daniel Dusk]

Though conversely, being able to swap an outpost over a rocky world between Industrial, High-Tech and Colony (therefore Refinery) variants means that you can get all three economies produced for the price of a single station. The rebuild would need to cost a significant amount of cargo to do, I think, to avoid "swapping to avoid building" rather than "swapping to repurpose buildings". (Not as much as a full new build, but maybe 25-50% of that)

That said, I can't think of many cases where it isn't obvious before you build which building within a category is the correct one, if you've got an intent for the system up-front. I'd see this more as a feature of use for people who didn't know what they were doing at all / people who have been retrospectively mistaken by a rule change, rather than something anyone trying to specifically min-max a system would need.

(Not that, with the new population levels, there's all that much need to min-max anyway. You can barely avoid getting high populations, cargo volumes, etc. now)

I agree that any reconfiguration should carry a meaningful cost to prevent abuse. That said, the current system punishes long-term adaptability. The idea isn't only about fixing player error; it’s about recognizing that strategy/economies evolve. Gameplay should reflect the fluidity of a market. Locking infrastructure limits the ability to adapt, especially when markets shift, factions change, or new mechanics emerge. (New mechanics will undoubtedly emerge)

How would this be better than the existing set up where players can build a T2/T3 port which gets a shipyard which sells ships, and the construction of other in-system facilities boosts dev and tech level to improve the quality and variety of those ships?

Regarding shipyards, yes, players can trigger a shipyard’s presence. But that’s fundamentally different from players producing and selling ships through their own supply chains. The current model reflects influence, not authorship. A real economy needs competition (I can optimize/min-max to sell cheaper). It needs the joy of knowing that I built this, not just that a menu unlocked something. Games should not erase that human drive for ownership and competition.

Not everything must serve pure pragmatism. Sometimes, fun is the function.