Is The Game Rigged Or Is It Just Me?

You guys need to get rid of the feature that prevents a player from accepting a mission just because his ship is too large.
Because the moment I change ship, that mission is gone. Flipped. Changed.

Just let the onus of the mission failure fall upon the player if he can't dock.

Should be a fairly easy change to make, no?
It wasn't so long ago that we were all whining about being able to accept missions in a ship that was too large for the destination...

To be fair, I do agree with you, for what it's worth, we should be able to accept any available mission presented to us in any ship. The game should simply have a check that prevents loading of any ship too large for the location. It should also advise the player why they can't load up their ship (not that it will be payed any attention, people gotta whine and mine salt).

I can guarantee if FD make the arbitrary change as you are suggesting it will simply lead to more salty threads here on the forum from players whom either forgot, or simply didn't bother to pay attention to the size of their ship and the size of their landing pad...
Re the earlier posting from the Dev, if I land at a station in my T10 which is equipped with purely defensive weapon levels, why then do I continually see a plethora of Kill, Kill, Assassinate etc. etc. missions. Not interested. If I'm flying a trading ship, then I want cargo runs. Likewise, I only run in Solo, so I have less than zero interest in forming up with a wing to deliver 5000 or 6000 units of a commodity. Tailor the demand to the capacity of my ship, or at least what can be done in a couple of round trips.
This is why I made this suggestion:

tl;dr even if I can't definitively show that econ/gov/state have minimal to no impact on individual mission types.... it's basically unarguable that "Combat", "Trade", "Illegal" and "Specialist" missions are available in any econ/gov/state combo.

It just makes sense to split the mission board down to smaller subgroups of missions in different boards, like the Passenger Board. Currently there's at least 18 different types of missions hosted out of the "Mission Board", but only 4-6 different types (depending on your definition) on the Passenger Board. It's too much. It needs to get broken down to more discreet "career" groupings.

It wasn't so long ago that we were all whining about being able to accept missions in a ship that was too large for the destination...
Yeah, this is one of those "everybody will never be happy" situations. So many people already complain about taking missions in a medium ship, loading up a large ship, then unable to deliver... that would just make it worse.

The "Cargo Depot" now lets us accept delivery/source missions when we don't have capacity, and this has been an overall positive result... but when I suggested this sort of change 4 years ago, I was met with unexpected negativity from forum users... go figure.
Last edited:


Volunteer Moderator
Hi there,

People have asserted it, but it's not a thing.

The mission system is not and has never been aware of your ship or cargo while generating missions.

All it knows about any particular player before the mission list hits the client is their ranks, reputations, and unlocked engineers.

After it hits the client, it makes missions available or unavailable due to the player's ship, but it doesn't typically hide anything, it just stops you from accepting the mission (e.g because the ship is too big to land at the target market).

Thanks Dom! You're a shining beacon of hope when it comes to level of insight and developer interaction with the community :) (y)

Dominic Corner

Dangerous Programmer
Off topic: How much of the game is written in Delphi?
Hi there,

None of it.

While I quite like Delphi, the game client is pretty much entirely C++.

I don't think Delphi (Or any other flavour of pascal) is used here at all, but we use other languages like c# and python for tools and developer efficiency and we use lua for scenario scripting.

Just wanted to come back here with some very initial stats on mission board generation, and the effects of State, Economy and Government Type. It's a work week and I actually like to spend my time doing things I like rather than just waiting for boards to flip.

Reason I'm dumping this in so early is that I think even though my stat collection is in it's very elementary stages (only six different board generations) and the sample size is barely statistically significant, I think it's already building a narrative to support the idea that if Econ/Gov (leaving State aside for now, [1]) are meant to influence what missions get generated, it's not significant enough. Notes about what I've done so far:
  • A Board ID represents a single generation of a board, that is, all the factions I've listed the missions for were generated at the same time. It's a single click on the "Mission Board" button.
  • I'm grouping wing and non-wing missions together as the same type... coz individuals do wing missions anyway
  • All factions are in a None state except a couple expansions... basically I'm planning to target particular states when I record them, and I'm in a quiet area so almost everything is in None, so I consider these stats focusing on the effects of Econ and Gov on available mission types
  • I don't do sequential mission boards (i.e every 10 minutes), instead I break records it up by an hour or so at least, so I get a proper, full refresh of the board, as missions can carry through to subsequent boards which would skew the stats.
  • I'm ignoring anarchies, as I acknowledge they have very unique board generation algorithms... personally I think each ethos should differ more like this.
  • The different gov ethos of Authoritarian, Social and Corporate are represented across three different economies, with stats grouped by economy.

I can't see much particularly significant between economies or government type in these results so far... only things I'd flag are:
  • Planetary scan missions are more prevalent in Agriculture economies
  • Mining missions are less prevalent in Extraction, probably owing to the fact most minable commodities are available from the station anyway.
  • You might observe "Terraforming economy doesn't have surface scan missions", but that's just because this isn't a very significant survey. A sequential board I looked at afterwards had surface scan missions for the corporate faction.
Beyond that, even this small amount of stats show that there's a non-zero chance of getting virtually any mission type, from any government ethos/the subset of Economies i've generated boards for... and that's the point I'm trying to get at; if these are primary determiners, it's not obvious what those effects are.

[1] I'm leaving state aside for two reasons... one: I think while it doesn't preclude any type of mission, it does influence the chance of particular missions appearing, and two: I'm less convinced state/economy have any real impact other than flavour text/content e.g shipping biowaste from colony, and gold from extraction.
Last edited:
Top Bottom