Personally I am not sure this is all that bad a thing, but my mileage varies on the mission concept.
News Implementation of a dedicated mission server
Personally I am not sure this is all that bad a thing, but my mileage varies on the mission concept.
Well agreed on that man !
Thank God a dog fart have 1000X more value than your opinion in this matter, if you ever develop a game then you can put your rules =)
While I'm thinking about it, a clarification...
Mission board refresh 'spam' button: Bad idea
Mission filters that refresh the board: Also bad idea.
The increased server load could be immense. Don't do it.
No, the way I'd do it, as already mentioned several times would be to generate a stack of missions with a priority variable. If the display is only capable of presenting say, 60 missions at any given time to the player, push the highest priority missions to the top to simulate how busy the station is and the competitive spirit of the NPC's trying to get their contracts filled and show LESS of them so they're ALL at least partially relevant to the current ship to improve engagement and choice, while still enough to offer a full selection of reward options so the player can choose what they actually want to do, and get out of their play time. I'd also consider REDUCING the current mission stack, down from 20 across all mission classes. You may not be able to stop players trying to fill their stack, but you can make it twice as easy to fill, by halving the size of the hole.
So, you can scroll through 60 missions, pre-filtered based on the ship you're in but in the background there could be literally thousands of available jobs, either client or server side, or some low overhead combination thereof. If you narrow the selection by changing the filters you should still be seeing the highest priority contracts, because those are still the ones the NPC's are competing with each other to have filled. Changing the filters should not allow the player to regenerate the board ad-infinitum and overload the mission server. All the filters do is bring missions that 'fit' what the player wants to do or achieve, and preferably both, from the priority stack, into the visible list, in priority order.
When you ACCEPT one, then the board is refreshed, with newly available missions being added to the existing priority stack. Using the same server transaction that logs the acceptance is going to reduce traffic and give a more real-time interaction. The parameters of the ACCEPTED mission(s) should be used to refine the filters and automatically present similar missions to the player so they can fill their hold more quickly and efficiently and carry on with their game instead of being forced to sit there, bored. Developers no longer have the luxury of limited competition, or extra-goldfish attention spans. There are plenty of other games that don't make you twiddle your thumbs for 15 minutes and people will simply tune out, and play something else. Or worse, actively come up with ways to get around what they now perceive to be a problem worth circumventing. Games don't take 30 minutes to load from an audio tape any more, even though some of us remember when they did.
Yes, it may be a little confusing for some players to begin with, but ED is notorious for it's steep learning curve anyway and many players have already accepted that it's worth keeping an eye on a certain handful of youtubers for tips and hints, even if there is an official tutorial video from FDev which, if they were accessible in-game would be a big improvement for on ramping new players. And, if the videos could be converted into actual gameplay tutorials, even better.
The bottom line is this: Gamers are not stupid, they have agency, and will use it to 'game' any system with a reward on the other side of it. Some of them have been doing it their entire lives, so they're very good at it. Accepting this and instead, offering them what they want so they stop breaking your s*it to get it anyway must be a smarter move instead of chasing them around trying to put the fires out. They significantly outnumber you FDev. They also have access to military grade, instant communication systems and will band together to make your life difficult if you upset them, and often when you don't. Who'd have kids, eh?
Reality check: They will not stop! How many times does this need to be made blindingly apparent before some notice is taken and another mitigation tactic considered? Don't give them everything 'instant win' style, but there must be a happier medium where they don't feel like their time is being wasted, and you still get hours and hours of engagement.
[Edit: Something else I'd seriously consider, despite it being wildly unpopular, at first, is to significantly REDUCE the individual payouts on any given mission, such that they don't overwhelm the trade economy. If you make it MUCH easier and quicker to fill a stack of half as many missions while reducing the payout on all of them, such that the player still ends up with a net gain of 10% more profit per hour invested due to less 'wasted' time trying to build an efficient stack of missions, then you might be onto a winning formula.
If reloading the game becomes more of a time sink than simply accepting a mission you want and instantly having another relevant, yet slightly less attractive option popping up from behind it, it's easier to take that one too and see what's next than board flip. If the RNG is also adding new missions every three or four times you accept one, pushing the reward back up to optimal you might find players are more willing to 'try their luck' on getting the gems and get less upset about it being near impossible to find a set of them that logically go together to make a coherent and efficient "run".]
Mission board refresh 'spam' button: Bad idea
Mission filters that refresh the board: Also bad idea.
The increased server load could be immense. Don't do it.
No, the way I'd do it, as already mentioned several times would be to generate a stack of missions with a priority variable. If the display is only capable of presenting say, 60 missions at any given time to the player, push the highest priority missions to the top to simulate how busy the station is and the competitive spirit of the NPC's trying to get their contracts filled and show LESS of them so they're ALL at least partially relevant to the current ship to improve engagement and choice, while still enough to offer a full selection of reward options so the player can choose what they actually want to do, and get out of their play time. I'd also consider REDUCING the current mission stack, down from 20 across all mission classes. You may not be able to stop players trying to fill their stack, but you can make it twice as easy to fill, by halving the size of the hole.
So, you can scroll through 60 missions, pre-filtered based on the ship you're in but in the background there could be literally thousands of available jobs, either client or server side, or some low overhead combination thereof. If you narrow the selection by changing the filters you should still be seeing the highest priority contracts, because those are still the ones the NPC's are competing with each other to have filled. Changing the filters should not allow the player to regenerate the board ad-infinitum and overload the mission server. All the filters do is bring missions that 'fit' what the player wants to do or achieve, and preferably both, from the priority stack, into the visible list, in priority order.
When you ACCEPT one, then the board is refreshed, with newly available missions being added to the existing priority stack. Using the same server transaction that logs the acceptance is going to reduce traffic and give a more real-time interaction. The parameters of the ACCEPTED mission(s) should be used to refine the filters and automatically present similar missions to the player so they can fill their hold more quickly and efficiently and carry on with their game instead of being forced to sit there, bored. Developers no longer have the luxury of limited competition, or extra-goldfish attention spans. There are plenty of other games that don't make you twiddle your thumbs for 15 minutes and people will simply tune out, and play something else. Or worse, actively come up with ways to get around what they now perceive to be a problem worth circumventing. Games don't take 30 minutes to load from an audio tape any more, even though some of us remember when they did.
Yes, it may be a little confusing for some players to begin with, but ED is notorious for it's steep learning curve anyway and many players have already accepted that it's worth keeping an eye on a certain handful of youtubers for tips and hints, even if there is an official tutorial video from FDev which, if they were accessible in-game would be a big improvement for on ramping new players. And, if the videos could be converted into actual gameplay tutorials, even better.
The bottom line is this: Gamers are not stupid, they have agency, and will use it to 'game' any system with a reward on the other side of it. Some of them have been doing it their entire lives, so they're very good at it. Accepting this and instead, offering them what they want so they stop breaking your s*it to get it anyway must be a smarter move instead of chasing them around trying to put the fires out. They significantly outnumber you FDev. They also have access to military grade, instant communication systems and will band together to make your life difficult if you upset them, and often when you don't. Who'd have kids, eh?
Reality check: They will not stop! How many times does this need to be made blindingly apparent before some notice is taken and another mitigation tactic considered? Don't give them everything 'instant win' style, but there must be a happier medium where they don't feel like their time is being wasted, and you still get hours and hours of engagement.
[Edit: Something else I'd seriously consider, despite it being wildly unpopular, at first, is to significantly REDUCE the individual payouts on any given mission, such that they don't overwhelm the trade economy. If you make it MUCH easier and quicker to fill a stack of half as many missions while reducing the payout on all of them, such that the player still ends up with a net gain of 10% more profit per hour invested due to less 'wasted' time trying to build an efficient stack of missions, then you might be onto a winning formula.
If reloading the game becomes more of a time sink than simply accepting a mission you want and instantly having another relevant, yet slightly less attractive option popping up from behind it, it's easier to take that one too and see what's next than board flip. If the RNG is also adding new missions every three or four times you accept one, pushing the reward back up to optimal you might find players are more willing to 'try their luck' on getting the gems and get less upset about it being near impossible to find a set of them that logically go together to make a coherent and efficient "run".]
Last edited:
To use a poker analogy, the poor offerings of the mission board are like seeing a bad "flop" in Texas Hold'em. You fold your hand, and go to the buffet.
I go exploring.
I go exploring.
So once again it comes down to that "you are playing the game wrong".
I am really tired of hearing this because we all know that ED has it's faults and issues but no, every time something is not to someone's liking is because he is playing the game wrong.
Limiting yourself to one type of mission? Why do you think that is?
Because the rest of the missions are way too much work (for people who have a life outside of ED) for way too little reward. Many times it's not even worth it when you check youy rebuy cost.
Flying to different systems and stations and trying to fill up my Conda's/Cutter's cargo hold?
Again, way too much wasted time. I want to play games for fun, not to have it as a second job. FDEV value the player's time, right?
Best thing would be (as most of the people agree here) to FIX the problems with missions and then there would be no need for board flipping.
But telling someone he is playing the game wrong when the game itself has problems is just ridiculous.
I am really tired of hearing this because we all know that ED has it's faults and issues but no, every time something is not to someone's liking is because he is playing the game wrong.
Limiting yourself to one type of mission? Why do you think that is?
Because the rest of the missions are way too much work (for people who have a life outside of ED) for way too little reward. Many times it's not even worth it when you check youy rebuy cost.
Flying to different systems and stations and trying to fill up my Conda's/Cutter's cargo hold?
Again, way too much wasted time. I want to play games for fun, not to have it as a second job. FDEV value the player's time, right?
Best thing would be (as most of the people agree here) to FIX the problems with missions and then there would be no need for board flipping.
But telling someone he is playing the game wrong when the game itself has problems is just ridiculous.
I just hope you guys (FD) fix the problem that caused people to board flip in the first place... That being that there is not enough missions offered per board.
You are playing the game wrong.
Why are you using a Cutter to be a biowaste delivery boy (or girl, idk) ? You should be making your own deals and setting your own trade networks up at that stage. It's not like EDDB doesn't have a multi hop trade tool (if you don't feel like doing your own legwork) available for you to fill your hold to the brim and profit to your heart's content. If you are really into trading, you should be linked up with the rest of the EDDN so that you all can share the best prices so that everyone can profit. You can fill up your cargo hold every time, but not through the mission board, through the commodities market! There you go, problem solved.
Oh, and if you are too afraid of losing your Cutter to pirates, there is a wide range of other ships you can use to practice with that don't have 24 million credit rebuys until you get good enough to feel confident undocking in a Cutter.
How many years will it take to earn enough credits to buy reactive armour for a corvette now?
I though we were talking about missions and their quality (or lack of). I am not discussing trading.
I am trying to work for the local faction. How is jumping to other systems helping me in this case?
I am double elite and I am being offered missions for 600k?
I am playing solo, why am I seeing so many wing missions?
Just a few examples why the missions generation needs to be changed no matter your playstyle.
All of this can't be just the player's fault.
And there is no wrong way how to play a game where you can "blaze your own trail"...
All we are asking for is to have a mission system that could fully utilize ALL of our ships with various meaningful objectives and not only the small ones.
One last edit: I would very much like to play ED "the right way" but the current mission system does not allow me to do it without board flipping.
I will probably repeat some things but how come a system with a population of 18,1 million (which is 8,1 million more than my whole country) has so little missions on offer?
When I check the job offers in my country's region (population of regions ranging from 500 000 to 1 mil) there are hundreds of offers for each region.
Don't tell me 3 delivery missions, 2 data transport missions is all the station can do.
I am trying to work for the local faction. How is jumping to other systems helping me in this case?
I am double elite and I am being offered missions for 600k?
I am playing solo, why am I seeing so many wing missions?
Just a few examples why the missions generation needs to be changed no matter your playstyle.
All of this can't be just the player's fault.
And there is no wrong way how to play a game where you can "blaze your own trail"...
All we are asking for is to have a mission system that could fully utilize ALL of our ships with various meaningful objectives and not only the small ones.
One last edit: I would very much like to play ED "the right way" but the current mission system does not allow me to do it without board flipping.
I will probably repeat some things but how come a system with a population of 18,1 million (which is 8,1 million more than my whole country) has so little missions on offer?
When I check the job offers in my country's region (population of regions ranging from 500 000 to 1 mil) there are hundreds of offers for each region.
Don't tell me 3 delivery missions, 2 data transport missions is all the station can do.
Last edited:
You could go and complete uncle Rammy's ruins run five times...
Half a billion creds, just like magic!
[My record turnaround was about 5 hours, x5 = roughly one day]
[Edit: I should probably confess it took nine runs over two weeks to fully explore the entire route there and back, plus the systems with the ruins in them and a huge amount of refining the obelisk scanning order, over and over again to get it down to that speed, plus I did it before they nerfed the 100 million reward. So, my total gain was just shy of two billion for the time invested.
Now I don't worry about cash
]
Last edited:
You could go and complete uncle Rammy's ruins run five times...
Half a billion creds, just like magic!
[My record turnaround was about 5 hours, x5 = roughly one day]
[Edit: I should probably confess it took nine runs over two weeks to fully explore the entire route there and back, plus the systems with the ruins in them and a huge amount of refining the obelisk scanning order, over and over again to get it down to that speed, plus I did it before they nerfed the 100 million reward. So, my total gain was just shy of two billion for the time invested.
Now I don't worry about cash
It's a bypass...sort of. But you are playing the game wrong
But I would rather have a robust mission system with solid gameplay, fun and good rewards than resorting to repetitive tasks
It's a bypass...sort of.
But I would rather have a robust mission system with solid gameplay, fun and good rewards than resorting to repetitive tasks
lol, same, or I wouldn't have invested so much time attempting to help FDev come up with a workable solution (see above). I spend most of my time screaching around the bubble on a hi-sec filter to avoid having to scan every system while engineering my fleet. Now, if I could quickly and easily pick up missions along the route(s) instead of going empty I'm sure there would be a lot more happy factions in the galaxy.
When opportunity knocks, open the door!
No. We're discussing how you are playing the game wrong, but if you just want to come up with excuses instead of solutions that can help you right now... that's your loss.
If you are trying to influence the BGS why do you expect that you should ALSO make a lot of money at the same time? FDev recently set up a mechanic where we can choose between credits or influence for our mission rewards, suggesting that those are supposed to be mutually exclusive options.
Maybe FDev is giving you wing missions because they are suggesting that you try to make some friends to do wing missions with them instead of grinding harder by yourself?
Maybe they are doing that on purpose to reward the people who are taking the risk of making friends?
It's only your playstyle that is "suffering".
Last edited:
Have you considered using the "reply with quote" option so it's a bit easier for the rest of us to guess who you're ranting at?
You can still make plenty mucho creds in anti-SOciaL-mOde.
Been there, done that!
Will,
Not sure whether a higher payout of missions is required though I read payout would/might translate not only into more credits but also more influence/reputation gain etc..
Please consider the quantity of missions and variety of types spawning as well.
Other than that - good change.
o7
Not sure whether a higher payout of missions is required though I read payout would/might translate not only into more credits but also more influence/reputation gain etc..
Please consider the quantity of missions and variety of types spawning as well.
Other than that - good change.
o7
In my mind persistent missions across private-open means, we need just another half step to get better chained missions, winged missions or even one day, missions that are specific to open-play and has an effect on each other.
Let`s hope we will see more from this improvement, then just the obvious inability to flap the board for better missions. -> Also giving 10% increase in payout won`t make those "some" people forget about refreshing the missions... It really feels like FD never understood what was our problem with the missions... payout was just the top, and it was never about 10% anyway...
Let's hope we will end up getting a lot more love for missions and "professions" in elite.
Let`s hope we will see more from this improvement, then just the obvious inability to flap the board for better missions. -> Also giving 10% increase in payout won`t make those "some" people forget about refreshing the missions... It really feels like FD never understood what was our problem with the missions... payout was just the top, and it was never about 10% anyway...
Let's hope we will end up getting a lot more love for missions and "professions" in elite.
