Right it touches all ships to fix a "perceived" problem with engineers though which is the same difference. Lets move on already....
How to fix Engineers powercreep without upsetting those who grinded for it?
- Thread starter babelfisch
- Start date
Right it touches all ships to fix a "perceived" problem with engineers though which is the same difference. Lets move on already....
Power creep is not just a problem about Engineers. Take a look at the new Chieftain variant. Or guardian weapons. Each update will add more powerful modules and ships. Since they need to be worthwhile every update will add stronger stuff than the update before. The difference between stage 2 and 3 might be marginal but the difference between stage 4 and 1 is so big that 1 becomes useless. This can be fixed (if it needs to be fixed) by rebalancing the earlier stuff.
My replies are in context to your OP. You mention balance in regards to engineers and want to fix that by increase stats of ship by 1.5 which will not change the balance between ship as they ALL will increase...it would just lower the increase that engineering gives you thus my posts.
Also it's silly to try and balance things so stage 4 doesn't make stage one useless....stage one SHOULD be useless by the time you get to stage 4...lol
Last edited:
True. Now what about power creep in general?
PS
Maybe it's a bad idea, I'd just like to see some good arguments against it. So far I've seen:
- They just redesigned engineers, don't touch it!
- I don't understand the proposal
- I want to have a huge benefit over those who didn't bother with the newest stuff and that's where my fun comes from
There must be some better reason against it!
Last edited:
What is the problem then? The only power creep that makes any odds is PvE / PvP.
True. Now what about power creep in general?
PS
Maybe it's a bad idea, I'd just like to see some good arguments against it. So far I've seen:
- They just redesigned engineers, don't touch it!
- I don't understand the proposal
- I want to have a huge benefit over those who didn't bother with the newest stuff and that's where my fun comes from
There must be some better reason against it!
Welp power creep has always been a big problem with mmo and to be frank I haven't really thought about it much in this game past DO you have horizons or not?
That said it's not really possible to balance non horizon with horizons since engineers is more in the nature of adding a system on top of an existing one so I don't really believe it's possible to balance non H and H owners in that regard as it's an all or nothing kind of thing. I mean even for those that only pve not having horizon is kind of nerfing.
Now if you look past what each person owns, Horizons or not, if someone works in game to acquire xyz and it makes them have a rather big benefit over another that just can't be bothered to acquire this new stuff then well I have to say so sad too bad.
It's in the nature of game to "grind" or play hard to git gud both by skills and advances in "equipment" so if you can't be bothered to do that then that's your own fault really.
It's not like this is a moba or some such...
Last edited:
One problem (only looking at PvE here) is that the game gets increasingly difficult to balance. If you have maxed out all your modules NPCs no longer provide a challenge. This gets solved by more powerful NPCs until engineering your ship will become mandatory. More modules and ships will be added like the Chieftain and the even more powerful new variant and old ships and modules get obsolete. I believe there is merit to the idea to make the gap smaller. If you take a look at how Engineers was handled the increase in power is quite drastic. Initially only few people had so called god rolls because it took insane amounts of grind, luck and time. Because FDEV didn't want to take their toys away but give everyone the opportunity to reach the best modules available the new system was created with even better G5 mods which became the defacto equipment. If this trend continues it just means that everything will get stronger and better and I fear that this will be their way of providing new activities and content as timesinks (like the guardian modules) while it would be better to actually add some interesting and engaging stuff rather than more of the same grind. It's just a pretty cheap way to keep us busy by adding more shallow mechanics to the game. I know that I am pretty far away from the initial point I tried to make, but I feel that it's somehow connected...
PS
Since I get drawn into a discussion about powercreep (which I wanted to avoid since I don't really care, I just know that these are some of the arguments) I see that I started the thread wrong. I should have said that *if* you want to fix power creep this would be a simple solution. I know that not everyone sees it as a problem and that's just fair. Sometimes I just get carried away antagonizing...
Last edited:
The way the whole engineering system was implemented was a mistake from the start. It's too late to fix it now. Just get on with grinding and know that whoever has more time to grind than you do will have a vastly more powerful ship than you can get. It's been a long time since ED stopped being about skill and turned into a competition based on how much free time you've got to play.
Lots of chat, but nobody has mentioned the real problem (for me at least).
It is ground, not grinded.
irrelevant, but important none the less.
Engineers are here to stay so if you decide to not use then it's entirely on you. If a "better" ship is released and you don't use it then it's entirely on you. Why should the game cater to people who can't be bothered?True. Now what about power creep in general?
PS
Maybe it's a bad idea, I'd just like to see some good arguments against it. So far I've seen:
- They just redesigned engineers, don't touch it!
- I don't understand the proposal
- I want to have a huge benefit over those who didn't bother with the newest stuff and that's where my fun comes from
There must be some better reason against it!
![[VR] M4st0d0n](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/182/182772.jpg?1569064854){kind=avatar}
TTK on the higher end is simply broken. It's even boring to watch. Let's hope CQC gets played and strteamed again so we can have something else from Elite on video than those big bois roleplaying spacepirates in gimballing whales as an excuse for consensual PvP.
Not entirely true.
While ground is the correct in general as the past tense of grind sometimes grinded is the proper way to say it, it depends on what the subject is. For example in sports, video games and dancing the proper past tense is grinded not ground as grind does not mean to crush etc etc or rub/polish with an abrasive surface etc....
It's not that I don't want to Engineer or that I want to remove it from the game. I simply provided a potential solution for those who think the the differences are too big. The idea is not to make Engineers useless but to flatten the curve a little bit.
It's interesting to see how many people are against the proposal even though they wouldn't lose anything
There is nothing wrong with Engineering ships and making them more powerful in my opinion. I even think that everyone should Engineer their ships. For that to work the feature needs to be more accessible though. I suggest to add grade 1-3 engineering to basic station services based on economy type and keep special effects and grade 4 and 5 at the Engineers.
Your lack of skill isn't an engineer issue. Either practice and get better or dont but don't use engineers as an excuse.
I can think of multiple legiamate complaints with the solution you propose, the first two that come to mind:
Making everything 1.5 times better only exacerbates certain major issues with combat that have developed since Engineers. Namely engagement ranges keep getting larger, which negates much of the advantage and feel of that increased manuverability, with things like 'permaboost' further depreciating much of the formerly nuanced flight model and mechanisms.
Also, many people that feel a sense of accomplishment from their 'grind' are going to complain when their efforts are devalued, directly or indirectly. Making "the gap smaller" is taking something away.
The 1st two aren't arguments at all. The 3rd makes sense. If you do all that engineering it's because the advertised benefit is desirable to you. Everyone has the freedom (maybe not the time though) to do exactly as anyone else does where engineering is concerned. So nerfing the high end benefits just cheats the most dedicated of players out of their payoffs. I feel like you've added your own hyperbole to it to sensationalize the actual take. I doubt anyone said "I want to have a huge benefit over..." Instead I'd move more toward the middle and say "I want what I worked for, which is a power differential between me and low end ships of the same type"True. Now what about power creep in general?
PS
Maybe it's a bad idea, I'd just like to see some good arguments against it. So far I've seen:
- They just redesigned engineers, don't touch it!
- I don't understand the proposal
- I want to have a huge benefit over those who didn't bother with the newest stuff and that's where my fun comes from
There must be some better reason against it!
If FDev doesn't want the "power creep" they shouldn't work so hard to institute it, but nothing makes me shelve a game faster than developers who move the goalposts time and again, and make all your in game efforts amount to nothing more than someone who did less than half of what you did. I can imagine some of the hard core traders feel this way about passenger missions, and explorers about sightseeing missions. Now if you take the Nth degree engineered ship owners and force them into a lower rated version of their ship, that's not going to solve the underlying issues.
Power creep means that old modules are underpowered. If you rebalance them it's no longer power creep.
I'll keep serving you my idea of renting pre-engineered ships.
I think it would be a good idea to have missions that provide you with a pre-engineered ship for the task ahead.
Also there could be a ship-rental at the shipyards which would let you rent different high-end G5 eingineered ships.
And last but not least, powerplay could allow for pre-engineered high end ships as reward for ranking up - for the time being pledged.
This way everyone could use engineered high end ships without having to grind for it. But it would cost credits, or be tied to powerplay ranks or to single mission purpose. Also this rental-ships would not be able to be modified. So if you want to have your unique ship, you'll still have to grind it out.
I think it would be a good idea to have missions that provide you with a pre-engineered ship for the task ahead.
Also there could be a ship-rental at the shipyards which would let you rent different high-end G5 eingineered ships.
And last but not least, powerplay could allow for pre-engineered high end ships as reward for ranking up - for the time being pledged.
This way everyone could use engineered high end ships without having to grind for it. But it would cost credits, or be tied to powerplay ranks or to single mission purpose. Also this rental-ships would not be able to be modified. So if you want to have your unique ship, you'll still have to grind it out.
Last edited: