Mind numbingly boring hauling
- Thread starter Peter Mannion
- Start date
- Status
So enjoyability of hauling.. kind of a subjective thing, then?
Maybe if we say it's objective enough it will just somehow become objective. Pretty sure that's how facts work, objectively speaking.
I did see that, and it is your own expression of your opinion.
It is your own opinion, so not a debate point, as, as always, opinions are 100% correct.
So, not worth bothering to discuss in any other manner than as forum posts. You are absolutely correct in your opinion, that is all that matters, isn't it?
Alright, then, lets return on topic, should colonisation remain as mechanically shallow as it is so that only the 5% chronic haulers of op IDA, or whoemever else is enjoying A -> B -> A hauling for hours, can be the exclusive enjoyers of this mechanic, or should other activities/gameplay loops be added to it so that it can actually be engaging to the wider player base?
It's possible to enjoy objectively boring things. I don't think, in your haste to fail back to a semantic argument, you understood what I was saying.
It's weird, then, that you said exactly what I said, as If I didn't say it. lol
If you like the tedium, then cool man. That doesn't mean it isn't tedious, it just means you like it.
I am not a great fan of hauling anything that isn't stolen, but made some fun in getting the first 60% of my starport commodities from various sources, the squadron jumped in at the weekend and finished it in an afternoon!
Certainly on games fora...
Agree wholesale. I've said it before. There's way too much emphasis on hauling in elite dangerous. Yes you can do other things, yes perhaps it's not always the meta. But it's definitely the single biggest gameloop in elite. That's a fact!
Wasn't it advertised as analogous to hauling CGs (which are very popular) therefore the amount of hauling that is required fits in with that?
I don't really see this as any different than if FDev set up a PvP league and people complained it was rubbish because they don't like PvP.
Other things are coming along for those that don't like hauling.
No, man... (goodness, that is so hackneyed) It means your opinion is yours, and that is all that matters, isn't it?
As I mentioned, you are 100% right in your own opinion, be proud of it, and expect others to hold their own, different, opinions, to your own.
There's definitely room for more gameplay loops in colonization than hauling.
Yes it's opinions. But we all expect fdev to see these opinions and perhaps take them into consideration when development of elite goes on. We're all here to steer the ship. But there's only one helmsman. And that's fdev.
So yes I'll continue to voice my opinions regardless if others object. And if their rude that's their choice. I won't be responding. I'll just carry on voicing my opinions to sway fdev. That's my goal.
So yes I'll continue to voice my opinions regardless if others object. And if their rude that's their choice. I won't be responding. I'll just carry on voicing my opinions to sway fdev. That's my goal.
Although I am no colonising and waiting until it somewhat settles in terms of mechanics and understanding how to influence the settled system, I would say:
- Yes, add more game loops to break the monotony (e.g. missions around colonising, passenger transport, more scouting)
- reduce the amount of transportation but balance it out with above mentioned game loops so that the same effort is necessary to be put into building a colony.
- implement the changes at a later point in time (12 months?) and invest dev effort into features first which other player groups are hoping for
Yup agree
Right now, this is the current flagship feature that has players returning to the game, im not sure there is something else more important than making colonisation not burn out players like pp1 did. Except maybe having some devs fixing the long standing bugs, like pp2 rares and escape pods being disabled, carrier transfer being glacially slow, market on em being broken....
As will we all, and, yes, others will object as our opinions differ from theirs.
After all, if another feature involved (as was given as a perfect example) exclusively PvP combat, there would be a lot of opinions expressed over that too, equally vociferously, by other groups of players.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
i get the argument against being able to hire npcs.... i dont share the opinion, but i get it.
me? I would allow us to hire npcs who fly with us when we are flying but stop at hiring npcs to work when we are not online.
BUT.............. allowing us to create a refintery state in 1 system, and then manually create and export and import request for specific products which would be passively delivered - at an incredibly slow rate initially, but increasing linked to the size of our colonies to a system within the area...
that could be cool imo so that eventually we could have export and import npc controlled loops to construction sites that would make a significant dent in our base construction that we need to do ourselves................ but it would not be something we get access to right at the start, we would need to work to earn it and to build it up, and even then i believe (gamey i know) we would still be expected to do a certain - and significant - amount ourselves if we are to earn and keep the title of architect at a system.
(perhaps if we do not show our faces and do some work the citizens revolt and kick us out as an architect)
me? I would allow us to hire npcs who fly with us when we are flying but stop at hiring npcs to work when we are not online.
BUT.............. allowing us to create a refintery state in 1 system, and then manually create and export and import request for specific products which would be passively delivered - at an incredibly slow rate initially, but increasing linked to the size of our colonies to a system within the area...
that could be cool imo so that eventually we could have export and import npc controlled loops to construction sites that would make a significant dent in our base construction that we need to do ourselves................ but it would not be something we get access to right at the start, we would need to work to earn it and to build it up, and even then i believe (gamey i know) we would still be expected to do a certain - and significant - amount ourselves if we are to earn and keep the title of architect at a system.
(perhaps if we do not show our faces and do some work the citizens revolt and kick us out as an architect)
You're right, if they added some pvp-combat-only thing, like, I dunno, Close Quarter Combat, people would definitely flip out. We'd never hear the end of it. haha
I kid, I kid. I don't think there's any reason for Fdev to add major new features that can only be participated in via one gameplay type, be it PvP combat, Hauling, PvE combat-- whatever. Focused on? Sure-- it's probably unavoidable. But it's just a lack of creativity/effort for Fdev to have hauling be the only way to participate. Even the Thargoid War had non-PvE-combat gameplay loops.
Jesus christ...
I want to have meaningful discussion here... but...
Boring is not an objective term. Fact.
If we can't agree on this, then you might as well just throw a cup onto your keyboard to respond to my posts because that will carry as much meaning.
Maybe you're not a native English speaker, so perhaps the nuance is lost here. But if not, either accept this as the matter-of-fact correction it is, or there's not much more to talk about.
Your whole premise is "I enjoy boring things" which as a sentence makes no sense because Boring is subjective. Boring is widely considered a negative term, so it predisposes any debate about this to "Well, you like things that are negative for the game", which is completely false.
You find A->B->A hauling boring.
I do not find A->B->A hauling boring. In fact, I enjoy it.
We could also say "I enjoy things you find boring"
But that does not mean "I enjoy boring things"; that's a meaningless sentence because there are no objectively boring things... only things I find boring in that context"
If you're not prepared to accept that, then any further discussion of this is pointless because I can't have a conversation with someone who just makes up the meaning of words.
If we can't agree on this, then you might as well just throw a cup onto your keyboard to respond to my posts because that will carry as much meaning.
Maybe you're not a native English speaker, so perhaps the nuance is lost here. But if not, either accept this as the matter-of-fact correction it is, or there's not much more to talk about.
Your whole premise is "I enjoy boring things" which as a sentence makes no sense because Boring is subjective. Boring is widely considered a negative term, so it predisposes any debate about this to "Well, you like things that are negative for the game", which is completely false.
You find A->B->A hauling boring.
I do not find A->B->A hauling boring. In fact, I enjoy it.
We could also say "I enjoy things you find boring"
But that does not mean "I enjoy boring things"; that's a meaningless sentence because there are no objectively boring things... only things I find boring in that context"
If you're not prepared to accept that, then any further discussion of this is pointless because I can't have a conversation with someone who just makes up the meaning of words.
Right, now that's hopefully cleared up...
I have never said additional game loops aren't a good idea. What I have said is that given a choice of:
- Haul for 4 hours to build an outpost; or
- Do a massacre stack for 30 minutes and build it instantly; or more appropriately
- Do a 30m stack of hauling missions and build it instantly.
See the problem? Your choice is: Haul for 4 hours, or haul for 30 minutes. Because the economy is a busted nut.
I don't care how other people enjoy themselves.... I care that the game makes a lick of sense... and having an option to do an activity for, say, 4 hours (which, let's face it, is the real cost here), or achieve the same outcome in, say, 30 minutes, indeed, with the same activity, that makes absolutely no sense and is a non-option.
Then there's the whole aspect where this is putting strain on the commodity market, which is causing players to take actions to deal with that challenge. But if you just magick resources out of nowhere because you've got eleventy billion credits from whatever FOTM meta FD patched out a couple years back... suddenly that all disappears.
There's this somewhat insane trend of people thinking "Oh, people want to cause themselves pain and suffering" because it's an easy way to reconciile why someone might do something you subjectively don't enjoy; there must be something wrong with that person, right? Except that's just lying to (the figurative) yourself... because it just means you can't relate. That's fine, because boring things are subjective, so we'll all have a different opinion here.
People like achieving objectives. Dopamine's a thing. Put a small amount of effort into something, get a small amount of dopamine. Put a big amount of effort in, get a bigger hit of dopamine[1]. Whether people like it or not, some people enjoy that at the end of a big chunk of effort they get that reward. So of course, turn that into a forgettable 30 minutes and is, well, complete trash from a game design perspective.
My go-to for money is usually massacre stacking. I do Colonisation because it's something different. If it was just "more massacre stacking" because that was the most effective way to get an outpost... I wouldn't be playing at all right now.
[1] Although it's not that simple... say for instance, if you found the activity itself boring.
Last edited:
- Status