News Implementation of a dedicated mission server

[Ian Skippy]

Yeah, I could do that. But it's not the way I like to play the game so I shouldn't have to play the game like that. You know, what with Elite being a space sandbox and all. All professions should be equally viable.

What does that even mean? Just because a trader combines trade missions with independent trade runs doesn't mean its 'more viable' than another trader. It just means its a better, smarter trader able to use opportunities better. Traders relying on missions offered on a platter take the easy route and get a bit less results. They still progress, its absolutely 'viable' and a perfect choice if you want to do it. But it has consequences. As choices should have. Sandbox doesnt mean 'do whatever, whenever and however you want while getting the results you want.'. It just means you have a tremendous amount of freedom, and it is on you to use that freedom in a way that is fun.

You can be a fighter in Skyrim. It is perfectly viable in that sandbox. You can chose what kind of fighter you want to be. You can claim you like to just kill chickens, and you can then proceed to just kill chickens. Its possible, its your choice, if you like it thats cool. But its daft to complain that 'you dont like to kill non-chickens, and Skyrim is a sandbox, so Bethesda should make chicken killing more viable.'

 

[OldSchoolPlayer]

This is a fantastic step in the right direction !

 

[Shinji Ikari]

No, that's not broken. Game tries not to allow you to minmax that's all.

Why?

 

[Evazan]

Gotta say I'm not keen on this idea. I like to be able to get delivery missions going to the same place, as flying with an half empty cargo hold feels like a waste. 10% increase on all missions, huh? So would I be correct in thinking that the single mission payout cap of 5o million credits is also going to be increased by 10%?

 

[Ian Skippy]

Respectfully, you're making a bunch of assumptions.



I've played roughly 300 days out of the last year. Am I a daily online player? I haven't been on every day.

I haven't flipped the board for missions in probably 3 months. But I have done maybe a dozen missions in the last 3 months, maybe even less.

The point I was making is that throwing out a number like that means nothing at all without studying what methodology was used to come up with that number. And that's true for any statistic you ever read anywhere. I like a post I saw much earlier in this thread... said "Numbers don't like, people use numbers to lie." While I like that quote, I will say I don't think FD is "lying" per se, they do have an interest in making it appear like very few people flip the board from a PR standpoint.

Oh, I absolutely agree that the number they gave cannot be interpret at all. But to take what FD said and turn it into an analogy about the complete destruction of the global economy is a bit... off. In the end, board hopping is absurd. Its not part of the design of the game, its a band-aid used by players to bypass other things they dont like. And as a result balance is thrown wildly off in a way that is near impossible to fix for FD, which has all kinds of gameplay consequences. Board hopping needs to be fixed, and the mission system reworked so people dont feel the need to board hop in the first place. I have made some suggestions in the past, so have many others. In any case, the current system is far from good and needs to go.

And doing so wont result in the annihilation of the global economy.

 

[Luftwaffle_]

It is a game still though and sometimes way you used to play is noy best way in the game.

If I understood correctly, you're making the assumption that I try to optimize everything I do. But I don't. This isn't about credits (got enough already), materials (easy enough to get) or BGS (not interested), this is about convenience. When I just want to do a quick cargo run because I'm bored or don't have much time to play, I don't want to mess with the galaxy map or online tools to figure out what items I should trade. I just want to go to a station, accept a bunch of courier missions going to the same destination, deliver them and be done with it. I do not think this is an unreasonable request.

Edit:

What does that even mean? Just because a trader combines trade missions with independent trade runs doesn't mean its 'more viable' than another trader. It just means its a better, smarter trader able to use opportunities better. Traders relying on missions offered on a platter take the easy route and get a bit less results. They still progress, its absolutely 'viable' and a perfect choice if you want to do it. But it has consequences. As choices should have. Sandbox doesnt mean 'do whatever, whenever and however you want while getting the results you want.'. It just means you have a tremendous amount of freedom, and it is on you to use that freedom in a way that is fun.

You can be a fighter in Skyrim. It is perfectly viable in that sandbox. You can chose what kind of fighter you want to be. You can claim you like to just kill chickens, and you can then proceed to just kill chickens. Its possible, its your choice, if you like it thats cool. But its daft to complain that 'you dont like to kill non-chickens, and Skyrim is a sandbox, so Bethesda should make chicken killing more viable.'

That's a really poor analogy. Killing chickens is pointless. Shipping companies and airlines, on the other hand, are one of the cornerstones of our modern society. Without them, international trade and travel would grind to a halt. UPS, FedEx, Maersk, Delta, American Airlines, Emirates Lufthansa, you name it. All of those companies are on the Fortune Global 500 list, and all of them were founded for the sole purpose of transporting other people or other people's stuff from one location to another. There's no reason things would be any different in the Elite universe - in fact, considering the number of ships we see flying around (not a lot) and comparing it to the population of stations (starports can have hundreds of thousands or even millions of people living in them, and the total population of the galaxy is measured in trillions), it should be a very profitable business.

 

[an93lofdeath]

Will this change, fix things like like this?

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Why?

The intent of the mission board isn't really to allow you to completely stack your ship with the most profitable thing in the game.

What it should do is offer a wide range of things to do based on the type of system, its factions, their states, the population, etc.
That's where it fails.

E.g. In Lave with a 25 Billion population, there should be thousands of missions to choose from, but out on the frontier where the population is 2500, there might only be 1 or 2 missions available.

Once the server is in place, then hopefully missions will be generated appropriately, and the the rewards balanced accordingly.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I do not accuse them of lying. But would like to know what the figure means.

Truthfully, it means nothing to us. We dont know how they selected the players used in the sample ("daily players"), and we dont know how they defined ("used the boards in this way"). It does suggest FD was 'honest' in using active players, rather than all accounts ever used (including ones from people who stopped years ago). We dont know during which period this was measured, and what was happening in ED at the time. It does suggest many active people don't board hop, possibly a large majority, but that is as broad a statement as you can get. Its also not even that important: something should be removed if that leads to a better game, regardless of what people are currently doing. If everyone was board hopping it would hardly mean board hopping is awesome, it would just indicate something else is horribly broken and everyone feels forced to do it.

We do know that nobody likes board hopping in and of itself, some just endure it to get something else they enjoy. That is stupid. People should spend their time playing ED actually playing ED, not logging in and out for minutes. To fix this you need to remove the option to board hop, and have a mission system that offers enough and varied missions to allow people to have fun, in a way that is sensibly connected to the BGS and encourages 'looking for opportunities', while still make independent activities a sensible (additional)
activity.

 

[CMDR _BigJay_]

Oh, I absolutely agree that the number they gave cannot be interpret at all. But to take what FD said and turn it into an analogy about the complete destruction of the global economy is a bit... off. In the end, board hopping is absurd. Its not part of the design of the game, its a band-aid used by players to bypass other things they dont like. And as a result balance is thrown wildly off in a way that is near impossible to fix for FD, which has all kinds of gameplay consequences. Board hopping needs to be fixed, and the mission system reworked so people dont feel the need to board hop in the first place. I have made some suggestions in the past, so have many others. In any case, the current system is far from good and needs to go.

And doing so wont result in the annihilation of the global economy.

Yeah, we're on the same page. Except for maybe the balance part. There's a LOT of things in this game that are way out of balance. Removing board flipping will eventually help FDev get more control over balance, but this is certainly not a 1-stop solution. And honestly, the biggest argument against "balance" is that FDev have been 100% willing to make things easier if people complain about it. So "balance" only holds up until enough people complain.

My post was mainly because I saw a lot of arguing over a number that means nothing. There's no point in arguing about that.

FDev really screwed the pooch by saying "We're buffing credits 10% since we're cutting board flipping". They really should have said "We're cutting board flipping and revamping the mission system in multiple ways to make it easier to get the missions you want to take."

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Also question: This doesn't solve the exploit of relogging at the same guardian sites to re-enable the obelisks so we just sit there to scan it all over again after each relog?

 

[operant]

Truthfully, it means nothing to us. We dont know how they selected the players used in the sample ("daily players"), and we dont know how they defined ("used the boards in this way"). It does suggest FD was 'honest' in using active players, rather than all accounts ever used (including ones from people who stopped years ago). We dont know during which period this was measured, and what was happening in ED at the time. It does suggest many active people don't board hop, possibly a large majority, but that is as broad a statement as you can get. Its also not even that important: something should be removed if that leads to a better game, regardless of what people are currently doing. If everyone was board hopping it would hardly mean board hopping is awesome, it would just indicate something else is horribly broken and everyone feels forced to do it.

We do know that nobody likes board hopping in and of itself, some just endure it to get something else they enjoy. That is stupid. People should spend their time playing ED actually playing ED, not logging in and out for minutes. To fix this you need to remove the option to board hop, and have a mission system that offers enough and varied missions to allow people to have fun, in a way that is sensibly connected to the BGS and encourages 'looking for opportunities', while still make independent activities a sensible (additional)
activity.

Not quite sure why you quoted my post. But agree with most of what you say. Which was the point behind the original post.
Very quickly this thread turned into 'board flipping is done by bad people for bad purposes and is destroying the game' type thread.
When for me the real issue is the mission system per se. Not 10% more credits, which if that is the sop for removing 1/3 to 2/3 of missions then it is a disaster.
The 2.8% obviously needs context. (Lies, damn lies and statistics as the saying goes. And to be clear, I am not accusing of FD of lying.).

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

FDev really screwed the pooch by saying "We're buffing credits 10% since we're cutting board flipping". They really should have said "We're cutting board flipping and revamping the mission system in multiple ways to make it easier to get the missions you want to take."

I think follow up sentence confirms they will keep looking into numbers and see how they play out. At the moment it is hard to see cases player say it is "too low", because they keep using board flipping. When it is gone, after some time, it will be possible to re-evaluate all other numbers. And good thing it doesn't need client update, it can be done with server change.

 

[Riverside]

Also question: This doesn't solve the exploit of relogging at the same guardian sites to re-enable the obelisks so we just sit there to scan it all over again after each relog?

It doesn't fix all instance refreshing, no. But as That90'Skid highlighted earlier, it is a step in that direction. I'm an advocate of playing the hand you're dealt, but I play regularly & for long periods so I am probably more able to see how it all evens out over the longer term.

I think the desire to refresh instances (and mission boards) stems from wanting to maximise productivity which is understandable.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Not quite sure why you quoted my post. But agree with most of what you say. Which was the point behind the original post.
Very quickly this thread turned into 'board flipping is done by bad people for bad purposes and is destroying the game' type thread.
When for me the real issue is the mission system per se. Not 10% more credits, which if that is the sop for removing 1/3 to 2/3 of missions then it is a disaster.
The 2.8% obviously needs context. (Lies, damn lies and statistics as the saying goes. And to be clear, I am not accusing of FD of lying.).

I think no one saying min maxing is bad thing. And it is not exactly problem. People say board without flipping / changing modes doesn't provide ways to maximize profit/effect for a trip. What I and others are saying that it is *intended* behavior, it is all about situation. It shouldn't always provide all the things you want, however there should be "enough" of them to make things interesting. I can agree however that after 'fixing' this they need to take a pass for big ships, because complains that it is hard to fully utilize big ships might be completely legit.

Overall this will be first step. After this it is highly possible available missions will be much, much more. I personally think that besides wing missions - mission board need some nice filtering system, def - missions are quite a nice selection, at least I get what I want most of the time.

So long story short, while in the end min maxing still might require waiting or traveling to different station, hopefully it will be some corner cases due of mission increase because of having dedicated server.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Also question: This doesn't solve the exploit of relogging at the same guardian sites to re-enable the obelisks so we just sit there to scan it all over again after each relog?

No, it doesn't. Although I wouldn't rule out such improvement with providing persistence in Q4. Said that, obviously after that FD will have to decrease required materials quite considerably.

 

[Ethaidan]

Hands up if you've worked in the logistics industry?

1) Small, urgent, local, one off deliveries - Send it on a bicycle, it's quicker.
2) Medium, urgent, short range deliveries - Use a motorcycle or small car.
3) Larger, more awkward long range loads - Van, small truck or semi trailer.

Spoiler

Urgency, range and how awkward the item is to move, all add premiums to the price the driver, or the courier, common carrier or freight forwarding company they work for are going to charge you to do it. We're part way there with the mission wrinkles asking you to hurry up but finding the types of jobs that are suited to the ship you're in is more difficult than it should be. This is one reason why people board flip. Yes, some do it to spawn a full load of those sweet deal pax missions to remote stations, but not all.

If I'm sitting in any given station, and I know I'm going to the current CG system for example, why is it so difficult to quickly and efficiently fill my hold (if I have any space) and remaining mission stack (of 20) with a bunch of jobs going from here to there or some combination of jobs to be dropped off on the route I've already plotted in the galaxy map?

Lets say I'm at the CG station and I've just parked my bounty hunting ship and switched to my T9. I know exactly where I'm going because I checked eddb.io for quantity of supply, since the galmap trade enhancements still don't show that information. I want to fill my hold with something for the return trip and this station has nothing cheap.

So, do I fly back empty? That seems like a waste, even though that's the only place I'm intent on going. How great would it be to open the mission board and see NPC's that are slightly better at their "sales" job than the current disorganised rabble, falling over each other to utilise my cargo hold to make sure they don't get fired for missing KPI.

FDev have this mission system back to front. The Pilot's Federation are the service providers. We have the tonnage to move urgent goods around the galaxy, the firepower to get the wetworks done and the flexibility to do it now, if the price is right. You want 1000 tons moved, I can move 750. The other 250 really isn't my problem, find another pilot.

If I get back here in half an hour and you still haven't found another pilot to take that 250 tons, I'll take it, but you better find me something to fill the other 500 tons of space as well or it's not worth my time. Flipping the board to try and spawn enough missions to the right place to fill my ship isn't worth it, I may as well just do the return trip empty.

Returning empty is not a thing in logistics. Fill the truck please, in both directions.

In the opposite of this scenario, I'm taking my bounty hunting ship, with no cargo racks to the local hi-res to help the cops kill wanted ships. I don't want any cargo on board to get attacked for, but I don't mind taking a stack of data missions to drop off at the closest system with an IF. I have that system locked in in case I shoot one of the cops and need to run somewhere to pay the fine already and I'll need to go there eventually to collect all the kill warrant bounties.

These examples are win+win. I get to do what I was doing anyway, and I make a few bonus credits / rep / materials / etc at the same time while making the local factions happy getting some of the problems off their overflowing plates without spending hours board flipping to do it.

The mission system should complement gameplay, not hinder it.

That's all very nice, but once again, people are misunderstanding our role in galactic supply logistics. We are not massive transport companies with access to a centralised dustribution system that will maximise our return per run, that wiil ensure our cargo bay is always full whenever we are going to wherever we choose, that will coordinate and customise deliveries from multiple factions on demand... we work outside of the main logistics, we pick up the dregs, the extra short-term one-off demands... that is our place in this system.

If you want to be part of galactic supply logistics to ensure your hold is always full, petition Fdev to introduce a contract system alongside the missions - sign up for the same A-B run over and over and over on the same schedule... and if you miss a deadline, you're sacked. But that sounds like a different game

As it stands we are Serenity - heading off in a general direction stopping to try and fill our hold, pick up some passengers, etc. with the very real possibility that we may need to drop someone/something off along the way.

PS I cannot count the number of times a car or van delivery has done a run, with multiple stops, with nowhere near a 'full load' - and given the size of the Megaship transports... that's exactly who we are bicycle couriers, independent car delivery guys, man with a van, etc.

 

[Six6VI]

Here's a wrinkle suggestion that might work...

I'm on a planet, looking for elements in my SRV. Typically I'll ignore the cargo canisters, but I'll usually go investigate if the scanner indicates escape pods. Since big brother at the Pilot's Federation is peering over my shoulder in real time they should know when I call the ship down and load all eight pods, download the barcode data as they come aboard and instantly know who's in them, what ship they were on, where and when it went missing and if they're deceased.

**Incoming mission critical message**

CMDR, we've been advised you've found a couple of escape pods we're very interested in getting our hands on as soon as possible. We don't care what you do with the passengers, but we are willing to offer you a one million credit bonus, EACH for the captain and first mate. The condition is, you must get them to station x in system y within one hour.

------
Accepting this mission marks two of the eight escape pods in your hold "Mission Haulage", adds destination text and a countdown on the inventory item itself, as well as adding a confirmation in the comms panel and a mission entry in the transactions tab with the same timer, destination details and a show on galaxy map button for easy route plotting.
------
**Incoming mission critical message**

CMDR, we've intercepted your comms and would like to make a counter offer on all eight of the pods in your hold. The two you've heard about are wanted human traffickers that kidnapped one of our science teams with the intention of... Well, you probably don't want to know. We can match their bonus, 250,000CR for each pod returned to us at x in y...

------

Accepting the second mission cancels the former, and annoys them enough to send a couple of cleaners after you.

Cancelling the second mission and proceeding with the first spawns supercruise NPC's trying to intercept / hyperdict and otherwise stop you getting to the delivery on time but if you make it to the right system the cleaners mentioned above will spawn and help you fight off the second party and provide some dialogue on punctuality or lack thereof.

Rewards for making the delivery just after the hour could drop by 5% each minute to a minimum 50K after 20 minutes

Rewards for the science team may be increased by the first party, due to what the second party said about their value

Alternatively, both missions could be cancelled at initial offer and the local military might show up to try and terminate the pair of wanted criminals you're harboring, unless you eject them.

Salvaging any mission class item that you don't already have a mission for could trigger incoming dialogue, fleshing out the search and rescue dynamic while still making use of the current hand in window. Some items may only pay a surprise bonus when handed in, regardless of where. Commodities could also spawn missions, especially if you stole unique haulage.

It's not just the missions that show up on the board that need some love and attention.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I think first steps first and won't expect too much in the beginning. I'm no developer and have no clue for instance how tricky the technical part of this change actually could be. I'm ducking already awaiting a rain shower full of new and 'interesting' bugs...

To be fair, stability will definitely improve - it has been very common after patch release to load into busy servers and get dropped out when mission system falls on it's face. That will be gone. Other than that, nothing hugely changes, just having it's own process on server, so I doubt there will be that many bugs. Although during beta it will be fun to test all this of course.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Did you just say Beta? There will be a Beta? You just suppose or was it already announced somewhere?

It isn't announced, but only Q2 and Q3 were indicated as not having betas. Q4 with all big sweeping changes will definitely have one.