News Implementation of a dedicated mission server

[Arguendo]

Are mission board instances shared between commanders? or does each commander get their own mission board?

eg if two players are in the same station in the same instance, and commander 1 chooses missions will they become unavailable to commander 2?

In my experience, without doing any scientific testing on the subject, the answers are Yes, No, and No respectively.
I've helped a relatively new player faction with some missions, and we did get the same missions on the board when doing it. I could still accept the mission they accepted as well, and vice versa.
Whether this will change with the new system hasn't been made clear. It would be a bad implementation of the mission board if you sit in a busy station and see your missions disappear one by one, as other players accept them. Realistic, yes, but very bad for a game.

 

[SentineI]

Luck is a factor in real-life, why shouldn't it be a factor in the game?

Maybe because games are supposed to be fun? And unpredictable & unfair factors make a game NOT fun:

Take platform games for example. Really old games from the 1980s (especially on home computers) often had a high chance of you dying because of something happened at random (i.e. you could not predict) which you could no avoid (and so you died). That's extremely frustrating, and (except for die-hard gamers) not fun. By the 1990s games developers had started to learn that frustrating players due to random unpredictable & unavoidable events was a really bad idea, and by the 2000s it was pretty much accepted by most developers. The same applies to types of games, not just platforms (it's just platformers were one of the few game types that old computers could do well).

Sure, we're not talking about dying in Elite Dangerous, but unfair, unpredictable & unavoidable events in games are still not fun.

 

[Sysmon]

Maybe because games are supposed to be fun? And unpredictable & unfair factors make a game NOT fun:

Take platform games for example. Really old games from the 1980s (especially on home computers) often had a high chance of you dying because of something happened at random (i.e. you could not predict) which you could no avoid (and so you died). That's extremely frustrating, and (except for die-hard gamers) not fun. By the 1990s games developers had started to learn that frustrating players due to random unpredictable & unavoidable events was a really bad idea, and by the 2000s it was pretty much accepted by most developers. The same applies to types of games, not just platforms (it's just platformers were one of the few game types that old computers could do well).

Sure, we're not talking about dying in Elite Dangerous, but unfair, unpredictable & unavoidable events in games are still not fun.

There were no randomness in the old games. They all relied on patterns, to the point that if you learned the patterns, the games became easy. Randomness was introduced and indeed became a bit crazy at times, with some games ending up overly harsh. Frontier (Elite II) bears mention here, as a perfectly simple flight from X to Y could go from a dreary slog (flying within, say, Alpha Centauri) could end up a nightmare simply by being intercepted by a gang of Eagles moving at relativistic speeds, hence being impossible to fight. Time would crash to normal speed and you'd be watching the eagles flicker by over and over and over... But going back a few saves and you'd eventually manage to avoid that encounter entirely.

The impact of randomness was smoothed out in later years, to reduce the impact on gameplay. But it is certainly still there or most games would become boring in no time at all. Random lookup tables are common as dirt, but the best games hide it quite well.

I would go as far as to say that in any game emulating nature or events outside the players control need randomness. It can be hidden better than, say, using a casino-like interface for an equipment modification workshop.

S

 

[Rick Bravo]

I think the fundamental flaw in Fdevs logic is that they equate time in game doing anything with player retention. In reality it is true up to a point but when that point is reached the player just quits the game entirely and moves on. Fdev should be shooting for player satisfaction instead because this clearly results in player retention. This is a far more difficult task however. It requires more than just adding more grind to the game, in fact most of the time, in means removing grind. Clearly there are players who;s goal is to get every ship in the game but this is a small percentage. The vast majority have one or more aspects of the game they love and they want to spend their time doing that. If Fdev got out of the way of players enjoying the game the way they want the game would be healthier and the player base much happier.

 

[Konan]

I hope to goodness fdev doesn't listen to all the whiney board flippers on here. I have no problem with the boards and I'm a trader/bgs player. Sometimes the missions are not optimum and that is fine. I take what is there and goto other stations. That's part of the gameplay, finding systems with good trades. I never board flip and consider it a form of cheating. Systems should be dynamic and different according to what is happening there. Please Fdev, Please, disregard the cries of these whiney crybabies who want every action they take to be a positive money making, influence creating experience. Games need adversity, things that don't go according to the plans of a player. Players need to learn to adapt to difficult situations or when things don't go there way. As a matter of fact, I'm going to be one of those players who quit if you DO listen them. Damn crying whiners ruin good gaming experiences every single time.......Keep up the good work Fdev and continue to make a challenging, diverse game dedicated to players who love the experience of flying in a dangerous and unpredictable universe.....

 

[jonesskill]

I hope to goodness fdev doesn't listen to all the whiney board flippers on here. I have no problem with the boards and I'm a trader/bgs player. Sometimes the missions are not optimum and that is fine. I take what is there and goto other stations. That's part of the gameplay, finding systems with good trades. I never board flip and consider it a form of cheating. Systems should be dynamic and different according to what is happening there. Please Fdev, Please, disregard the cries of these whiney crybabies who want every action they take to be a positive money making, influence creating experience. Games need adversity, things that don't go according to the plans of a player. Players need to learn to adapt to difficult situations or when things don't go there way. As a matter of fact, I'm going to be one of those players who quit if you DO listen them. Damn crying whiners ruin good gaming experiences every single time.......Keep up the good work Fdev and continue to make a challenging, diverse game dedicated to players who love the experience of flying in a dangerous and unpredictable universe.....

IF you and all the supporters leave, the game will "lose" 3-4 players.
If all the people that don't want the changes leave, the game will lose 50-60% of the playerbase.

i can't speak for Frontier Tho, but in my opinion this matter is already solved, just have a question: Can i have your stuff?

 

[Rick Bravo]

I hope to goodness fdev doesn't listen to all the whiney board flippers on here. I have no problem with the boards and I'm a trader/bgs player. Sometimes the missions are not optimum and that is fine. I take what is there and goto other stations. That's part of the gameplay, finding systems with good trades. I never board flip and consider it a form of cheating. Systems should be dynamic and different according to what is happening there. Please Fdev, Please, disregard the cries of these whiney crybabies who want every action they take to be a positive money making, influence creating experience. Games need adversity, things that don't go according to the plans of a player. Players need to learn to adapt to difficult situations or when things don't go there way. As a matter of fact, I'm going to be one of those players who quit if you DO listen them. Damn crying whiners ruin good gaming experiences every single time.......Keep up the good work Fdev and continue to make a challenging, diverse game dedicated to players who love the experience of flying in a dangerous and unpredictable universe.....

Actually, its forum dads, like you who ruin games. Wasting time doing what you don't like so you can do something you do like is not good game play. Creating significant obstacles and planned inefficiencies in player progression relating to credits or engineering is not good game play. That is not what the game should be about, the game's focus should be on allowing as many players as possible to experience anything they want to do in game. This is not real life, people don't have unlimited time to grind in a game. Most of us have real lives. The ones that don't beg Fdev to fill their vacuous life with meaningless tasks.

 

[Hooplah]

How about a Google search?

You go to Google and do a search. Google remembers where you went to. The next time you do a search Google offers you alternatives that you might be interested in.

How about the Devs implementing this so you accept missions in ED. ED remembers them. The next board refresh it offers you missions that you would be interested in. This of course would change slowly per say going from cargo deliveries to other mission types. Also makes sense in the virtural world as suppliers would be more interested in offeriing you missions per your status and rep as well as reducing the number of multi-crew cargo missions etc.

Having a Type-9/Cutter trader and waiting an hour fill it up with missions tells me why bother? Might as well convert them to combat and stick with a Python trader.

 

[Billkwando]

I don't hate everyone who board flips apart from the specific and unequivocally negative effects that it has had other people. I don't care about other commander's ranks or success. I hate the argument (that seems to come from a lot of sock puppet accounts, fwiw) that tries to normalize and justify using an exploit. Just own up, cheater dudes.

It is an "exploit" yes, but one that has always been there, and tacitly allowed by Frontier....ostensibly to prop up a game that is woefully lacking in content and originality. Missions in this game remind me of one of those old beat em up games, where there are basically like 2 or 3 bad guy character models, and all the other bad guys are just palette swaps of the same guys, in different colors. This game is like a mansion where the contractors walked off the job after building the framework and maybe one floor.

Calling people sock puppets seems like a cheap way to invalidate other peoples' opinions. I assure you I, for one, am real. Google me, bruh.

 

[StefanOS]

I hope to goodness fdev doesn't listen to all the whiney board flippers on here. I have no problem with the boards and I'm a trader/bgs player. Sometimes the missions are not optimum and that is fine. I take what is there and goto other stations. That's part of the gameplay, finding systems with good trades. I never board flip and consider it a form of cheating. Systems should be dynamic and different according to what is happening there. Please Fdev, Please, disregard the cries of these whiney crybabies who want every action they take to be a positive money making, influence creating experience. Games need adversity, things that don't go according to the plans of a player. Players need to learn to adapt to difficult situations or when things don't go there way. As a matter of fact, I'm going to be one of those players who quit if you DO listen them. Damn crying whiners ruin good gaming experiences every single time.......Keep up the good work Fdev and continue to make a challenging, diverse game dedicated to players who love the experience of flying in a dangerous and unpredictable universe.....

Regardless of any arguments you should think about 2 things.
1. Calling basicly everyone who doesnt like the current system a whiney crybaby is wrong
2. Saying that you will quit the game if some things are changed in a way you dont like is not convincing anyone here. Do you really think FD will see that as argument?

 

[Billkwando]

Regardless of any arguments you should think about 2 things.
1. Calling basicly everyone who doesnt like the current system a whiney crybaby is wrong
2. Saying that you will quit the game if some things are changed in a way you dont like is not convincing anyone here. Do you really think FD will see that as argument?

That too. "If you don't like the changes, you're a crybaby or a sockpuppet." Calling us cheaters, fair enough, but the mildest form of cheating ever.....like, "the cops don't arrest you for spitting on the sidewalk, even though an old obscure law from 1801 says it's illegal"-type cheating. FDev obviously knew it was going on and never took a strong stance on it. By their rationale, shouldn't Dav's Hope/Crashed Conda only ever work once? Is that what you want, folks?

If you don't agree with someone's views, that's fine, but that doesn't make them bad/disingenuous/troll/fictional/whiner/lazy/notaTRUEfan/etc. It may make them a forumdad, but that's an onion that I am not sufficiently qualified to peel.

 

[Riverside]

2. Saying that you will quit the game if some things are changed in a way you dont like is not convincing anyone here. Do you really think FD will see that as argument?

Have you heard of 'influencers'?

Stating a valid concern is more important than how it is stated. If that concern turn out to be unwarranted it can be put aside by the Devs (who have access to more information on this than the customers). Silencing one player isn't going to change their mind, placating them might reassure many who share the concern.

 

[Sysmon]

How about a Google search?

You go to Google and do a search. Google remembers where you went to. The next time you do a search Google offers you alternatives that you might be interested in.

How about the Devs implementing this so you accept missions in ED. ED remembers them. The next board refresh it offers you missions that you would be interested in. This of course would change slowly per say going from cargo deliveries to other mission types. Also makes sense in the virtural world as suppliers would be more interested in offeriing you missions per your status and rep as well as reducing the number of multi-crew cargo missions etc.

Having a Type-9/Cutter trader and waiting an hour fill it up with missions tells me why bother? Might as well convert them to combat and stick with a Python trader.

This is something that is being recognised as damaging and dangerous in general now, be it for news feeds, online searching, anything. It is slowly forcing us into bubbles and isolating us from the general diversity of the world. It is making us generate opinions in echo chambers, so just telling us what we want to hear and not what there is to hear.

Maybe if there were even more and more varied missions, at least in systems with populations to justify a large number of missions, it would make sense to have filters to drop out missions that are not of interest at the moment (too low rank, wing missions for solo players, too high rank, combat for traders, etc.). At least filters we can turn off an on. The search algorithms of Google etc we can't really do much about.

S

 

[Kaocraft]

Sheesh. Let the devs fix the basic infrastructure of their game, people. You can STILL complain about insufficient mission variety/incentives/stacktothemaxability whether the logoff-refresh is there or not. The only difference is that now, without the workaround of board-flipping, you'll have MORE people on your side to back you up since if the balance is wrong they'll have no choice but to speak up.

Part of the reason mission payouts, variety, and structure has been such hot trash is because Frontier have to balance it for you board flippers.

If Frontier ever try to fix combat logging, these forums ought to be a lot of fun.

 

[Chainguns]

Sheesh. Let the devs fix the basic infrastructure of their game, people. You can STILL complain about insufficient mission variety/incentives/stacktothemaxability whether the logoff-refresh is there or not. The only difference is that now, without the workaround of board-flipping, you'll have MORE people on your side to back you up since if the balance is wrong they'll have no choice but to speak up.

Part of the reason mission payouts, variety, and structure has been such hot trash is because Frontier have to balance it for you board flippers.

If Frontier ever try to fix combat logging, these forums ought to be a lot of fun.

I remember when missions were not generating ANY biotech conductors, cracked industrial firmware etc and how many weeks it took for Fdev to stop saying "we don't see any problem, all our spreadsheets seem OK" to fixing the (very real) problem. On the other hand when missions/passengers are generating loads of credits and you can finally do PvP with 8-9 mins to recover rebuy, the earnings get "fixed" within a day or two.

That's why unless I see the specific workings of the target fix in advance of removing the work-around, I have very limited confidence it'll be balanced (much less fun). The fact that the stated "fix" of +10% completely and laughably misses the wider point seems to validate all the concerns.

Board flipping is one of the crutches this great but deeply flawed game relies on to be playable. Removing it would be like disabling the API that inara/eddb/coriolis rely on because players shouldn't be relying on third party tools.

 

[fu9ar]

Actually, its forum dads, like you who ruin games. Wasting time doing you don't like so you can do something you do like is not good game play. Creating significant obstacles and planned inefficiencies in player progression relating to credits or engineering is not good game play. That is not what the game should be about, the game's focus should be on allowing as many players as possible to experience anything they want to do in game. This is not real life, people don't have unlimited time to grind in a game. Most of us have real lives. The ones that don't beg Fdev to fill their vacuous life with meaningless tasks.

Playing a game is supposed to be about overcoming significant obstacles to player progression. Figuring out how to overcome those challenges is what separates the good players from the scrubs. That is literally what good game play means. Maybe your problem is actually that you aren't good at this game.

Here is a game that might be more to your liking.

http://progressquest.com/

 

[Billkwando]

Playing a game is supposed to be about overcoming significant obstacles to player progression. Figuring out how to overcome those challenges is what separates the good players from the scrubs. That is literally what good game play means. Maybe your problem is actually that you aren't good at this game.

Here is a game that might be more to your liking.

http://progressquest.com/

Person makes perfectly reasonable argument, and you reply with "git gud" and belittle them. This is exactly what I was talking about before. You guys can't rebut the substance of folks' arguments so you make an overly simplistic, obvious statement, and try to shame them into going away.

By your rationale, ET for Atari 2600 is a good game, because it has obstacles, and an experienced player can overcome them (for a while anyway, until they finally throw up their hands and walk away, kinda like ED). Guess what? It's not a good game, nor does it have good gameplay. Maybe your problem is actually that you aren't aware that games are supposed to be fun.

Here's a game that might be more to your liking:

https://www.emuparadise.me/Nintendo_Entertainment_System_ROMs/Battletoads_(USA)/54899

 

[fu9ar]

Saying that a game should give you whatever you want without any obstacles to progression is not a reasonable argument...

 

[Konan]

A good video that some here may need to watch.
https://youtu.be/7L8vAGGitr8

And this one while you're at it.

https://youtu.be/hbzGO_Qonu0

https://youtu.be/hbzGO_Qonu0

 

[Brian of Ardagh]

A good video that some here may need to watch.
https://youtu.be/7L8vAGGitr8

And this one while you're at it.

https://youtu.be/hbzGO_Qonu0

https://youtu.be/hbzGO_Qonu0

What are they about and what’s the relevance to this thread? Do you have an opinion regarding the videos?