As recent mining changes have shown quite conclusively, sometimes you do have to force players to broaden their Horizons, and that makes for a better game, otherwise the devs wouldn't do it!
Make it so rank-up missions can't be the same type again.
- Thread starter DemiserofD
- Start date
Sure, like I said, I want things to be better, but in the short-term, this is an easy and quick solution that could make the process more memorable and interesting for your average player.
TBH, I can't even remember what missions I did to rank up.
But the progression of missions in FE2, FFE? Ingrained into me.... low security couriers into high security couriers which usually had interdictions, into assassinations, into reconnaisance, into bombing runs.
If your goal is to make the process more interesting and memorable, you're out of luck considering the rank missions are identical in function and task to everyday missions. That's the crux of the issue... the ranking gameplay is not distinct and unique..
And that is your opinion. Keep it like that. Forcing anyone to do anything is not the right thing to do for many reasons...
In the GalMap if you click on the System it tells you if you need a Permit and who from (or Unknown) and you can guess at how to get it from whomever gives it if known. Some just say Federal Navy / Imperial Military or similar. You usually get an inbox message when you do unlock one as well, as well as in your rhight hand panel under Reputation / Ranks (cant remember what its called) on one of the tabs down is the Permits you have unlocked.
Vast areas of space are locked off for various reasons, known and unknown by anyone.
There is nowhere in game that specifically lists the Permit Locked to go find them, and I dont recall anything in the Codex either mentioning them at all....so unless you stumble across them or need a Permit for another reason coz something or someone led you there, theres no real way to find out in-game that they exist I dont think.
That IS a problem, but a lot of people (myself included) can finish the rank grind without even TRYING many types of mission. This would change that, and since it would be tied to the rank grind, it would make the whole process more memorable.
Actually, the game already demonstrates that's perfectly okay! Examples include Juri Ishmaak, Todd Mcquinn, Broo Tarquin, and Lori Jameson, Guardian Technology, Thargoid Technology, CQC, Triple Elite, Combat Community Goals, Wars, BGS Modification, and, of course, the vast majority of player interaction!
Probably why they are all optional then, whats your point?
I proposed a similar thing with making specific missions give specific encoded/manufactured materials for the scope of offering a consistent alternative to HGE RNG boring fest and give new purpose to the many types of missions but no one payed any attention.
Those engineers are combat related. I don't need them. As a trader and explorer I do not have any need to install any sort of weapon on my ship. Hell, I do not even use Guardian stuff as it takes slots in the ship, and those slots are more valuable for something else then combat related stuff. And I do not care about FSD booster, can play w/o it...
Then surely you can also play without the federation or empire ships, right?
So are the Fed and Imp ships? So that's exactly my point.
Why?? Are saying that I am not good enough of a player to fly what I WANT?? Do you suggest that I have to play your way?? Do you really think that Cutter or Corvette cannot be good trade ship?? I suggest you stop embarrassing yourself once and for good. Your idea is not good. It is not even reasonable. FULL STOP.
Of course not, I'm simply furthering your own logic. You are already a perfectly fine playing the game without some elements, so what're a few more? It should make no difference to you at all. Right?
OK, since you want to present as selectively obtuse, I'll play along.
By requesting 20 unique missions for each player, with an already defined, but now out of date, value of 3 million accounts, you are asking Frontier to create a database of 60 million data elements, not including the linking element back to a player which must be included to attach those elements just to keep track of whether a player has used a specific mission type to advance. This means that, for a feature of questionable value, you want a database that contains a minimum of 120 million fields. That means that you want Frontier to invest in a significant amount of storage for something with zero Return on Investment due to lack of associated revenue because you are conflating enforced game play with challenge.
I also notice that in your attempt to divert the conversation, you didn't answer whether you have already completed the grind wall you want to modify.
The simple fact of the matter is that, while the relationship with the Powers needs massive revision, your proposal isn't even a band-aid because it doesn't make the game fun, it merely adds tedious requirements in the same fashion as farming for specific varieties of USS. One uses the grind to release ships, the other releases more advanced equipage.
If you really want Rank to have meaning, create a proposal for a career path instead of this... grind wall squared.
The amount of data storage required would be less than that for a single engineered weapon. I get the feeling you don't actually know how coding works. Suffice to say, the amount of data storage FDev would have to pay for would be less than that of a single flash drive , to store the data for every single player in existence.
I ignored it because it's irrelevant. If you really care that much, I'm currently doing it for the second time on my new free epic alt account. It's boring as heck, and I wish it were the way I am proposing.
I disagree, and in fact think it's exactly the opposite. The current implementation is virtually identical to USS farming. You sit there, repeatedly farming until you get a result that you want, just like USS farming. The new implementation would be similar to the replacement I proposed for USS farming; namely, removing old signal sources as they are completed, and replacing them with newer, more interesting ones as the system becomes more depleted.
And in much the same way, by forcing players to expand their Horizons, and engage in new content they might not otherwise have tried, it makes the game better as a whole.
Taken to its logical conclusion, your approach to game design would result in a game with no challenge, no variety, and, in short order, no players.
You are right, makes no difference to me. You should however think about new players. Why should they have to do things they may not like?? Combat is very specific activity. require different ship loudout, hell, different ship even. There is a group of players here that do not shoot at anything as a matter of principal. Why would they be forced to do something that is against their choice. What you're trying to do is limit their choice. It is a good thing FDev did not and hopefully this will not change...
...because the current system is obviously on the verge of dying.
I notice, when you want to attack me, you ignore all of the pertinent bits of the argument, but hey, admitting that attaching actual content to the rank ladders would improve the game denies you the ability to make ridiculous accusations like the one quoted. Extrapolating behavior from a universe of one may give you Unity, but it certainly isn't good Logic.
While we're discussing game design, forcing players to do things they aren't interested in usually just results in criticism of the game and an abandonment of the undesired content as soon as possible. By the standard you have used to discard my arguments, you'll soon have YOUR ideal game and no one that wants to play it. You might consider World of Warcraft and their insistence on removing flying every time they release a major expansion as an example; people start flying again as soon as they get the ability in spite of the fact that they might miss minor elements of the game.
As to the lack of knowledge, you are correct, I don't know how Frontier handles their character profiles, but there are certain requirements inherent in your proposal that cannot be reduced including the data I mentioned and the ongoing interaction with the rank system and the additional processing that requires. That may or may not be significant, but it does add to the load. In any case, you ignored the principle fact that you want to add an element to the game that has statistically significant resistance for no ROI, not even intangibles.
As a final thought, the "logic" you are forwarding would be equally applicable to forcing people to go to Deciat in Open over and over to be blown up by the PaP (against, as versus implies competition they don't want) crowd until you have either been reduced to a Startwinder for lack of funds, or until you have experienced every possible variation of the Gank crowds' ships. I am willing to bet money that you won't do it, though.
So one of two things:
1 Why doesn't your avatar show as a Frontier logo nor your post have a "dev post" tag?
2 Will you please share with the forum the winning numbers for this week's £159M jackpot so we can all get a share?
Please don't assume that your experience matches the majority - I can assure you it won't - making such wild assumptions just shows what you do.
In the dim and distant past of the Elite Dangerous experience we did have specific missions to go through on our promotion path. I well remember trying to make sure I was going to be at an outpost when I received the illegal ones - smuggling and assasination spring to mind. None of your wishy-washy fliping the board to get a cushy mission! I really don't think it would be a good idea to revert to that.
P.S. I can assure you that if a promotion mission had to be a massacre one I would never get promoted.
Oooh man, you just reminded me that other one was a CZ massacre! Thanks to the buggy ranking of the time I did that one several times.
No, the current system is acceptable if imperfect. It's only when you take your logic(players should have freedom to do whatever they want to do! It's only a game!) to its logical conclusion that things quickly degenerate into nothingness. It's a fundamentally flawed approach to game design, I hope you realize that. RESTRICTIONS are what make a game fun and interesting, not the opposite.
I find it ironic that you accuse me of doing this, while doing exactly the same thing yourself. But please; if I've in any way misrepresented your argument, point out WHERE and we can discuss it.
But you can't just say "That's misrepresenting my argument!" in a vague and undefined way and act as if that means anything.
That is absolutely, 100% wrong. Players have a fundamental resistance to doing anything difficult or different. Take Gwent, for example, in Witcher 3. Many players never bothered to do it, and were somewhat annoyed when they found themselves pressured to do it.
But the annoyance was very minimal in the grand scheme of things, and many players, who found themselves forced outside their comfort zone, actually discovered, to their surprise, that they loved gwent! By 'forcing' players outside their comfort zone, they actually made the game far better for a huge number of players!
If you never take the risk of forcing players outside their comfort zone, you'll end up with a bland, uninspired, unmemorable game.
The reason I regard this as ridiculous is because the game already transfers a large amount of data back and forth. The addition we're talking about here would be so small as to make an indistinguishable difference in the quarterly report.
If your house were moved one foot further away from your workplace, 20 miles away, would you notice? Would anyone notice? Maybe, but only as a curiosity. It's a completely irrelevant sidetrack that has no purpose other than to distract the discussion from its primary focus, game design and balance.
The principal difference is that going to deciat as a noob is a death sentence. Doing these pve missions is eminently possible, even by unskilled players.
Gameplay balance is an equally important distinction. Throwing noobs into a pvp zone is never going to be balanced, while pve missions are designed and balanced around the player in question and their rank, bypassing this issue entirely.
Last edited: