Mind numbingly boring hauling

[Greasetrap42]

Will they though? Noting that, from Inara stats, Powerplay 2.0 has slowly grown to about 40% participation with no massive spike followed by a reduction.

Powerplay participation has not declined following the release of the Trailblazers update? I am really surprised by that. How does that even get measured?
(By participation I don't mean pledges. I expect most players don't unpledge. I mean actual hours or activities of participation)

I would naturally have thought Powerplay 2.0 participation would have gone down after the initial surge of rank climbing by the general masses of active players. And then of course the alternative activities introduced from Trailblazers.

 

[CMDR Vhi]

No such claims. Noting that unspecified "exciting and challenging" changes might make the feature quite different from the trucking driven feature that it is at the moment. Not everyone plays the game with their head on a swivel eagerly awaiting the next interdiction.

This does not track. The "challenge" does not need to be combat focused; it could be that building a well-designed system (if we're ever told the rules!) makes the colonization effort increasingly easier, or that gaining rep in nearby systems lowers the amount of mats that need to be hand delivered by the player.

I don't think anyone here suggested making this gameplay loop more dangerous, except the pirate.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Powerplay participation has not declined following the release of the Trailblazers update? I am really surprised by that. How does that even get measured?
(By participation I don't mean pledges. I mean actual hours or activities of participation)

I would naturally have thought Powerplay 2.0 participation would have gone down after the initial surge of rank climbing by the general masses of active players. And then of course the alternative activities introduced from Trailblazers.

Should have used "a pledge rate of about 40%" rather than "about 40% participation" as there is no obvious measure of Powerplay activity of each pledged CMDR to be seen on Inara.

 

[CMDR Vhi]

Should have used "a pledge rate of about 40%" rather than "about 40% participation" as there is no obvious measure of Powerplay activity of each pledged CMDR to be seen on Inara.

Your reason for bringing this up was to show that I was wrong in saying that everyone would try the shiny new thing". Does the current pledge rate tell us anything about whether lots of players tried it out and then unpledged?

 

[Makaan]

• The ability to reliably hire NPC's/Players to do hauling.

We have NPC crew. It would be nice to see that expanded so we can get them doing more. After all, we have fleets of ships. I'd like to be able to order my crew member to buy x amount of commodity. I supply the credits and the ship, the NPC just does the hauling. It doesn't even have to be persistent - so your ship isn't psychically out there, it's just unavailable until you order the crew to come back or the task is complete.

Some limitations would have to be put in place, though, such as NPC Crew being unable to impact PowerPlay etc.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Your reason for bringing this up was to show that I was wrong in saying that everyone would try the shiny new thing". Does the current pledge rate tell us anything about whether lots of players tried it out and then unpledged?

It does not - however having monitored it periodically since PP2.0 launched (and Inara reset all pledges) there's been no spike / fall-off. It is of course possible that the rate of pledges / un-pledges has been similar (with a slight tendency to growth then a plateau). Not everyone has tried it though - that much is certain.

 

[CMDR Vhi]

It does not - however having monitored it periodically since PP2.0 launched (and Inara reset all pledges) there's been no spike / fall-off. It is of course possible that the rate of pledges / un-pledges has been similar (with a slight tendency to growth then a plateau). Not everyone has tried it though - that much is certain.

Are you now suggesting that when I said "everyone is trying it", you took me literally?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Are you now suggesting that when I said "everyone is trying it", you took me literally?

The use of definitive words is common while pushing a position - why would it not be taken literally?

 

[CMDR Vhi]

The use of definitive words is common while pushing a position - why would it not be taken literally?

Dude for real?

 

[Greasetrap42]

It does not - however having monitored it periodically since PP2.0 launched (and Inara reset all pledges) there's been no spike / fall-off. It is of course possible that the rate of pledges / un-pledges has been similar (with a slight tendency to growth then a plateau). Not everyone has tried it though - that much is certain.

If we were to measure the percentage of cmdrs that have guardian tech, that would not be a strong indication that visiting guardian sites is currently a major activity. It just means that a percentage of cmdrs have done this activity sometime in the past. I don't expect most cmdrs throw away their Guardian modules.

 

[Robert Maynard]

If we were to measure the percentage of cmdrs that have guardian tech, that would not be a strong indication that visiting guardian sites is currently a major activity. It just means that a percentage of cmdrs have done this activity sometime in the past.

Indeed - however that's a "once and done" activity for each unlock rather than a continuing feature like Powerplay. For some I expect that Colonisation will be another "once and done" activity if they decide it's not for them.

 

[Peter Mannion]

Why should any player haul for someone else when they could otherwise be completing their own colonisation objective(s)?

That said, I've had help from a number of CMDRs in the completion of two outposts so far and have contributed to two others. It can happen but it's likely to be driven by contacts rather than chance - and a desire to help out a fellow CMDR.

$$$

 

[Ian Doncaster]

For example, building more farms than your system needs to feed the people (which is not even a metric right now, unfortunately)

I'll wait until we know more about what the "Standard of Living" score does before commenting on whether it's a metric or not.

Maybe bump the distance limit for claiming to appease the people who want to expand to some specific far-off point, to balance out that there will be fewer (abandoned) systems being created.

From Frontier's official stats there must be at the very least 13,000 distinct system architects, and there could easily be almost double that.

Slowing down the rate at which people can claim second systems would barely have touched the initial rush (I certainly don't intend to claim a second one, given how much space this first one still has left). Yes, there are a few prominent chains - though mostly made by groups, who again wouldn't be slowed at all by a "one per architect" limitation - but most of the reason there's a lot systems is there's a lot of different people.

Will they though? Noting that, from Inara stats, Powerplay 2.0 has slowly grown to about 40% participation with no massive spike followed by a reduction.

Though - more as expected - the total number of merits over time (and the resulting rate of change of system ownership and strength) does seem to have gradually decreased. It's held up well but it's certainly not as engaged with a feature as it was on release, as is only to be expected.

Of course, if colonisation were to level off and stabilise at even 20% of its initial rate that would still be many thousands of new systems a month.

 

[Galactic Fork]

System colonisation needs some supporting features such as:

• The ability for us to setup our own missions/contracts for other players to complete (e.g We could say haul X amount of Steel to Colony ship in Y location for reward Z)
• The ability to reliably hire NPC's/Players to do hauling.

All carrier to colony ship hauling has to be done by the system architect as we cannot set sufficient price delta to incentivise other players - click here for context figures. Colonisation's grind is so high (without the necessary frameworks to support it) that it leaves system architects very little time to do anything other than hauling.

Alternatives:

• At least some long requested QoL features such as configurable key-bind for supercruise assist and faster way to load up cargo onto ship from carrier storage would ease the lobotomy inducing grind.
• A cheaper alternative (from a dev POV) is reducing the material requirements for system col ... but that will enrage certain pro-grind sections of the community

Either way - something needs to be done to balance this. System colonisation has the potential to be so much more than reskinned hauling

1) I actually agree with the concept of offering contracts to players. But not NPCs. That's ridiculous and you should feel bad for suggesting it.
2) I find ship based combat stupid and not fun and it's more of something I have to navigate around than gameplay. But never once have I been so dismissive as you over a gameplay feature that focused on it. (See title of thread). I'm glad when there's new stuff, even if it's not something I care about.
3) I think the requirements are a bit low for most of the buildings. Ports are super high but that's to be expected. If I could change anything, it would be a larger variety of commodities required with lower steel, aluminum etc. I get more enjoyment from the logistics of figuring out routes to get as much as possible in the fewest stops. So more varety of low quantity items would be more fun. Steel can be ok because of the scarcity and you have to keep track of your sources' supply.
4) Don't try to force everything thing into your gameplay of choice. Hauling has been seriously neglected and this isn't reskinned hauling, it's pure hauling with a tangible goal. Something that's been severely lacking.
5) I'd prefer they devote more development time on making everything more transparent in what all the stats mean. That and since horizons settlements and space installations are a big part of our settlements, give them some interiors!

 

[galahad2069]

we even still can't put an NPC in a chair

Those useless dole-bludgers don't deserve a seat. They can get a standing room in the back corridor and hold on to the toilet door handle.

 

[Peter Mannion]

Really? You'd haul for 12 hours to build your own station, instead of hauling for 6 to build mine + yours?

what is this maths? A solo player cannot complete 2 stations in 6 hours.

It's a scam to offer expertise now is it?

its a scam to convince players to haul for hours and hours for some "help" with where to place things. Such scammy behaviour if you ask most people.

All i can see here is ignorance to actual solutions. Does disagreeing with my ideas get your station built?

your "actual solutions" are delusions.

 

[Robert Maynard]

$$$

As RMT is not permitted, the assumption is "Cr." rather than "$$$" - in which case, credits don't motivate every player - not least those who have a decade or so of upkeep already stowed on their Carrier account.

 

[Peter Mannion]

.... and "expecting others to do things that one finds tedious" is?

ignoring the reply and op. please read the suggestion as you're wasting everyone's time by commenting nothingburgers.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Though - more as expected - the total number of merits over time (and the resulting rate of change of system ownership and strength) does seem to have gradually decreased. It's held up well but it's certainly not as engaged with a feature as it was on release, as is only to be expected.

Indeed - the rush to Rank 100 will have passed for many pledges.

Of course, if colonisation were to level off and stabilise at even 20% of its initial rate that would still be many thousands of new systems a month.

Which, given that the number if inhabited systems was around the 20,000 mark prior to the release of the Trailblazer update, would still represent a massive increase over a year.

 

[CMDR Vhi]

Slowing down the rate at which people can claim second systems would barely have touched the initial rush (I certainly don't intend to claim a second one, given how much space this first one still has left). Yes, there are a few prominent chains - though mostly made by groups, who again wouldn't be slowed at all by a "one per architect" limitation - but most of the reason there's a lot systems is there's a lot of different people.

My point was more than there is a compromise that plausibly could be made. It's too late (probably) to undo anything, but changes could be made to slow down the raw numbers of new systems being colonized, or boost the complexity of the systems being made, or both-- while also making it less tedious to colonize systems. They're not mutually exclusive, as you implied they were.