mission server - the death of ED

[Bionic Bytes]

Will we be increasing the amount of mission options so that players have more choice?

We won’t be increasing the amount of missions spawned initially. We will however be reducing the time it takes for a mission board to spawn new missions from 15 to 10 minutes. This means that players should overall see more variety and it won’t take as long for new missions to appear on the board.


Is there a possibility of adding a ‘refresh’ button if all available missions aren’t suitable?

We won’t be adding a refresh button at this time. It’s important to note that missions are shared between players so it could be frustrating if another player refreshed the mission board just as another player spotted one they wanted.


Will this see the return of the large cargo transport missions with high payouts?

Could you clarify which missions you mean? But this change does not impact the functionality of the missions themselves.


Can we get filters to find the type of missions we want to do?

You can filter the list currently. If you mean will it be possible to have a mission board spawn a specific type of mission based on player input (for example, choosing to spawn only cargo delivery missions), this is not currently planned.


How will this effect missions based around state changes (i.e. massacre missions) where the state may have changed in one instance (War) but not another?

This is an avenue we’re exploring but have no confirmed changes at this current time. It’s our goal to make the missions that spawn in each state make sense, but not overwhelm the entire board. As with a lot of mission development, it’s an ongoing iterative process.


Is it possible to separate wing and solo missions into different categories?

We are not separating Wing Missions into a different category at this time, but in the next update (3.3), you should see fewer Wing Missions spawning per board. We are trying to balance the right amount for all player types, and as said before, it’s an ongoing process.


Worried we’re focusing on the symptom of board flipping, not the cause (Not a great enough of interesting mission options rather than payouts)

We are trying to address all of the reasons players felt they need to use “board flipping”. As we said in the original post however, this is a small percentage of the player-base. We are listening to your feedback and trying our best to provide players with missions that suit their playstyle wherever possible.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/446165-Implementation-of-a-dedicated-mission-server/page59

FDEV, for the love of the game, please don't do this. Missions are the core activity of the game. To wait 10 mins to find the activity you want to play is simply too long. To assume only 2.8% of players refresh the board is a joke, or someone has seriously misunderstood the statistics he's been reading.

Putt simply: If you made the above changes, and that's it, it WILL be a MAJOR cause for the games death. WATCH carefully the active players statistic between now and Q4 launch because it will drop off. Nobody in their sane mind will wait 10 minuets for a mission. Many people have limited time available to play, perhaps an hour or two each week, and to have that time wasted in unproductive mission refresh will kill it for them, like myself.

You absolutely must address the large number of issues with the current missions - something you are not planning on doing. This is the second mistake.

Fix the mission wrinkles - the clean kill bonus preventing completions, the woeful payouts (yea 10% bump - an absolute insult), kill count for massacre missions, fix the endless other mission related issues mentioned all over these forums.

If you don't believe me have a focused feedback on your proposed changes to the non-refresh mission server. All hell will break loose.

This is my suggestion: Have someone actually play ED, from the ground up in a sidewinder, and measure how long it takes him to 'progress' to a python using your new mission server. Then have him progress to Corvette/Cutter. Lets have these metrics posted on the forums.
I can promise you the estimated time will be somewhere close to astronomical. I know this because I've done it and put the time in, and that's with the ability to refresh the board as many times as I need.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Missing the big picture there.
The primary reason for the change is server stability - that's a no brainer.

The secondary benefit is that once mission spamming doesn't really work, FD can finally get to grips with mission balancing, both in terms of how many of various types of mission get generated under various circumstances, but also balance the rewards relative to each other and to other game activities.

 

[Factabulous]

Missing the big picture there.
The primary reason for the change is server stability - that's a no brainer.

The secondary benefit is that once mission spamming doesn't really work, FD can finally get to grips with mission balancing, both in terms of how many of various types of mission get generated under various circumstances, but also balance the rewards relative to each other and to other game activities.

This.

 

[thistle]

How many deaths does ED have per year?

 

[Ian Phillips]

How many deaths does ED have per year?

Two or three per week I think.

 

[Rubbernuke]

How many deaths does ED have per year?

The trouble being it will be a death by a thousand cuts, as so much of ED needs attention. This situation is made much worse by ED being in its mid life stage, and that a lot of players have become accustomed to how things go in their underdeveloped state.

 

[2plex]

Oh, ED is in zombie mode then?

 

[Jmanis]

With the great changes going on behind the scenes with missions at the moment, such as:

- use of the cargo depot for supply/delivery missions
- removal of the timer window on assasination missions
- addition of USS spawn points for *all* massacre missions (not going near how the AI behaves though)

... and if these continue to be added to other missions:
- Cargo depot for *any* mission requiring cargo
- Removal of *all* timer windows such as for the Hijacking missions

... and the upcoming changes to exploration to make looking for mission-related activities an actual interactive activity, rather than lying prostrate before the altar of the RNG, there's never been a better time to remove boardflipping.

I think there's still a ways to go, but the changes are really promising. Payouts are actually really good in general[1], but as usual, it's the fringe cases (such as Wing Missions for 5000t of biowaste, or Mining missions for 13,000t of Water) that are broken... but that's fixable if the current rate of change keeps up.

FD need to keep the iron hot on this. There's still some issues with it for sure, but if getting rid of board flipping is a side-effect of achieving a more stable mission server able resulting in a more rapid ability to fix issues, I'm down for that.

[1] I say this as someone who's never, ever gone out looking for those broken fringe cases like Robigo long distance missions, Rhea passenger missions and the like. The standard day-to-day mission payouts used to be awful... these days I'm lucky to see a mission board that doesn't have multiple missions for multiple millions of credits that are easy to achieve.

Missing the big picture there.
The primary reason for the change is server stability - that's a no brainer.

The secondary benefit is that once mission spamming doesn't really work, FD can finally get to grips with mission balancing, both in terms of how many of various types of mission get generated under various circumstances, but also balance the rewards relative to each other and to other game activities.

^^ this *100

 

[Stealthie]

This.

That.

 

[Sylveria]

Two or three per week I think.

I'd be placing my bets here.

 

[Jukelo]

This is my suggestion: Have someone actually play ED, from the ground up in a sidewinder, and measure how long it takes him to 'progress' to a python using your new mission server. Then have him progress to Corvette/Cutter. Lets have these metrics posted on the forums.
I can promise you the estimated time will be somewhere close to astronomical. I know this because I've done it and put the time in, and that's with the ability to refresh the board as many times as I need.

The Python is easily reachable for even casual players in a short time frame these days.

As for the Anaconda, nobody is entitled to flying a ship that is supposed to be the achievement of a lifetime for an independent pilot.

There are plenty of bugs and issues affecting the mission system (one such issue was board hopping), funnily enough it took Frontier to announce they are fixing an exploit for cheaters to come out of the woodworks and suddenly express their worry about those.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

How many deaths does ED have per year?

2.8% of all deaths.

 

[M00ka]

The Python is easily reachable for even casual players in a short time frame these days.

As for the Anaconda, nobody is entitled to flying a ship that is supposed to be the achievement of a lifetime for an independent pilot.

There are plenty of bugs and issues affecting the mission system (one such issue was board hopping), funnily enough it took Frontier to announce they are fixing an exploit for cheaters to come out of the woodworks and suddenly express their worry about those.

Agreed, in fact you only need a Python if all you are doing is missions, well cargo ones anyway.

I wonder if the OP complained when the missions were screwed up and paying way too much for simple one ship missions?

 

[PiLhEaD]

...The secondary benefit is that once mission spamming doesn't really work, FD can finally get to grips with mission balancing, both in terms of how many of various types of mission get generated under various circumstances, but also balance the rewards relative to each other and to other game activities.

I don't share your optomism here. If after four years missions are still unbalanced and (imho) lacking reward for large ships, then this suggests a problem other than the server archicture.

This decision by FDev seems to me to be addressing a symptom rather than the underlying cause.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…
The secondary benefit is that once mission spamming doesn't really work, FD can finally get to grips with mission balancing, …

That is no benefit, that is the problem.

FDev apparently doesn't even realize how much the mission generating system is broken. They have no intention to fix it on launch of the single mission server system.

The result will probably be months of waiting for FDev to realize the problem and fix it - if they fix it. Time in which players have to deal with the broken system.

 

[Taimaru]

As someone who is part of the 97.8% who don't flip missions boards and additionally own all the ships in game I doubt ED will die.

 

[Tifu]

The Python is easily reachable for even casual players in a short time frame these days.

As for the Anaconda, nobody is entitled to flying a ship that is supposed to be the achievement of a lifetime for an independent pilot.

There are plenty of bugs and issues affecting the mission system (one such issue was board hopping), funnily enough it took Frontier to announce they are fixing an exploit for cheaters to come out of the woodworks and suddenly express their worry about those.

I always felt there was an unusually heavy emphasis on getting the big ships in ED. This is a result of the lack of any other means of progression (other than rank). Me, give me my own personal hangar that I can improve and expand that can hold my small & medium ships and I'll be happy. No problem maintaining my current fleet even after the mission server comes into place.

 

[Stealthie]

I don't share your optomism here. If after four years missions are still unbalanced and (imho) lacking reward for large ships, then this suggests a problem other than the server archicture.

This decision by FDev seems to me to be addressing a symptom rather than the underlying cause.

Not sure I follow your logic, there.

It seems, to me, like all the current issues are the result of the current system.

The primary issue being that heavy server loads (the result of board-flipping) cause meltdowns of the mission generation system and disconnects from the game.
The secondary issue being that it's almost impossible to achieve a balance that will satisfy those who don't board-flip without allowing those who do to earn daft amounts of credits.

An independent, persistent, server should address both of those issues.

Directly, it'll mean that high server loads don't have an effect on anything other than the mission board, itself.
Indirectly, a persistent mission server that prevents board-flipping will mean that mission payment levels can be set without worrying that they can be exploited in unintended ways.

I don't doubt that things will end-up getting adjusted but at least this means (hopefully) FDev won't constantly have to think about board-flipping when setting mission spawn rates and payment levels.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…
The secondary issue being that it's almost impossible to achieve a balance that will satisfy those who don't board-flip without allowing those who do to earn daft amounts of credits.

An independent, persistent, server should address both of those issues.
…

And FDev clearly stated that they won't address the secondary issue you mentioned when they change to the persistent single mission server.

It would indeed be no problem if FDev did both at the same time, but they won't.

 

[Nagual]

I expected that during Beyond that the mission system would be vastly improved somehow. We have had a few 'fixes' or improvements over the years but none of them have worked particularly well. The server thing is a step in the right direction but it will need much more before it becomes something fun/engaging.