Horizons Obsidian Ant has a better fix for Engineers than FDev do

[SentineI]

Some of FDev's planned changes to Engineers are good, but I am particularly worried about these two:

we just wanted to share with you a few more changes that we are planning for our next major point update. We are aiming for the end of July/Early August
...
- We’re also increasing the number of units you get for each instance of a material you find. This means instead of getting one unit of a material, you will get multiple units of that material. This will allow you to increase the number of attempts at each Engineer.
- We’ll be increasing the number of materials spawned when surface mining. Again, to make the process easier and the materials easier to gather.

This seems like a simple knee-jerk reaction to forum whining, rather than a properly-considered solution that will keep people playing ED in the long run. Their "solution" will simply mean that people can very quickly grind their way to min-maxed weapons upgrades, and then become bored of ED because they ran out of things to do.

Basically, they are planned to do what Obsidian Ant thought FDev should NOT do. The problem is NOT insufficient materials for making lots of Engineering attempts! Instead the real problem is due to two factors identified by Obsidian Ant:

(1) Materials (especially rarer materials) being hard to find reliably/predictably. (The first "dice roll".)
(2) Engineers crafting being too unpredictable. (The second "dice roll".)

Combined together it means you can spend many hours looking for the right materials, only to find that time wasted because of a crappy Engineers dice roll. So the underlying problem is feeling like you have made zero progress due to bad dice rolls.

Obsidian Ant's proposed solutions were rather more subtle & intelligent:
(1) Increase the frequency of materials being found, while also increasing the number of materials required by blueprints. This means people get a smoother sense of progression (less large gaps of finding nothing suitable), without actually getting towards the goal any quicker.
(2) Change the Engineers system, so instead of it being a dice roll deciding the stats, you simply have to provide MORE materials (and rarer materials) to get better stats. i.e. Get rid of the RNG element (except perhaps the Special), and ensure that more effort leads to better results.

[video=youtube;RKeC-FBomCw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKeC-FBomCw[/video]

 

[SentineI]

(2) Change the Engineers system, so instead of it being a dice roll deciding the stats, you simply have to provide MORE materials (and rarer materials) to get better stats. i.e. Get rid of the RNG element (except perhaps the Special), and ensure that more effort leads to better results.

The problem with doing this is that someone at FDev spent a long time designing the RNGineers system, and getting rid of it could be seen as admitting their design was fundamentally wrong (so I fear such a change won't happen if the RNG idea came from high-up FDev). Additionally, FDev no-doubt wanted an RNG element for some good reasons (e.g. maybe they wanted time-limited casual players to stand a chance at getting a great weapon upgrade).

FDev may be able to have their RNG cake & eat it. They can keep the RNG element, but simply reduce the RNG effect, so that it is more predictable. I imagine that more (and rarer) materials would make worse outcomes less likely & better outcomes are more likely. FDev already tried to do that a bit in the design of Engineers, but it needs to be made more flexible - e.g. if you don't have all of the "required" rare materials, then it simply will slightly lower the range of outcomes (to be not quite so good).


I'd also suggest that FDev get rid of the Casino-like presentation, and change it so that if you get a bad dice roll on the first stat, then you must get a better dice roll on the second (along the lines of a limited number of 'points' to assign to different stats). It may be that FDev already do this to a degree *behind the scenes* (they've obliquely hinted at this), but frankly, since it's entirely UNobvious to players, it might as well not exist for players frustrated by bad rolls.

But if FDev want to keep the Casino presentation, then what about visually reducing the subsequent RNG ranges, after the first RNG roll? Then it'd be obvious what is going on behind the scenes.

 

[YinYin]

Obsidian Ant's proposed solutions were rather more subtle & intelligent:
(1) Increase the frequency of materials being found, while also increasing the number of materials required by blueprints. This means people get a smoother sense of progression (less large gaps of finding nothing suitable), without actually getting towards the goal any quicker.

This wouldn't help me any except require even more inventory space. I am very happy about how excited I can get finally having another 2 Po to buff the jump range of my next ship. Increasing both drop and requirement is just bad for your inventory.

(2) Change the Engineers system, so instead of it being a dice roll deciding the stats, you simply have to provide MORE materials (and rarer materials) to get better stats. i.e. Get rid of the RNG element (except perhaps the Special), and ensure that more effort leads to better results.

The special is already rid of that element and RNG already ensures that your results improve the more material you bring in. Pick the improvements, discard the bad rolls. That and choosing the right modification type and grade (yes, eventually slotting that last perfect modification into your build will require something between 1 and 5 to use the ranges with highest chance of getting just the right values) already does rather well imo.

 

[SentineI]

@YinYin
So you are basically saying that Engineers is already perfect, and all those people complaining about it are wrong? And FDev should cancel their planned Engineer improvements too?!?

RNG already ensures that your results improve the more material you bring in

Only very crudely, as I pointed out in my second post.

except require even more inventory space.

So what? Increasing inventory to match increased material drops is such an obvious requirement that I didn't think it even needed mentioning. ALSO, your argument goes against FDev's planned changes too!


Summary: Please explain why FDev's planned changes are better than Obsidian Ant's.

 

[YinYin]

@YinYin
So you are basically saying that Engineers is already perfect, and all those people complaining about it are wrong? And FDev should cancel their planned Engineer improvements too?!?

Nope

So what? Increasing inventory to match increased material drops is such an obvious requirement that I didn't think it even needed mentioning.

It does need mentioning. Even then I wouldn't personally see it as an improvement or feel more progression. Just scaling things up. Which also means you have to collect more (which some players may not enjoy).

Summary: Please explain why FDev's planned changes are better than Obsidian Ant's.

I don't think they are. There hardly is a better/worse scale for this. You can always find plenty of positives and negatives to all kinds of solutions. In the end several will need to be tested to see how the majority of players feels about it.
Was just trying to point some of these things for those two out.

 

[Varrag]

He had a bit more elaborated concept which actually summarized what many people -my humbleness included- were proposing.

- Step One: Search for a suitable star system based on star temperature, planetary makeup and system layout.
- Step Two: Locate a suitable planet based upon details revealed by the Detailed Surface Scanner.
- Step Three: Locate Hotpoints on the planet for chosen material (using planetary resource map)
- Step Four: Do orbital flight reconnaissance over the large hotspots revealed in Step Three. This refines the hotspots.
- Step Five: Do low level fight over these narrow hotspots to find the equivilent of POIs that contain chosen material.
- Step Six: Drive around in SRV within the POI to locate materials.

FDEV seems to be working on something resembling step two, and trying to tweak step six. That alone may, or may not, be part of the solution; guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Stupid_hippy]

What was wrong with the long thread we already have on this video?

At the end of the day, It's Frontiers game to develop how they think best, not ants, not mine, not anyone else's..

 

[Flavourless]

Agree that increasing material availability does nothing to fix the underlying problems in Engineers.
Just means that every man and his dog can get all the top upgrades quicker than before, which is a bit pointless in a supposedly open game environment.

 

[foebits]

Everyone has a better fix for RNGineers than FDEV do bro...

 

[Bigglesof206]

What was wrong with the long thread we already have on this video?

At the end of the day, It's Frontiers game to develop how they think best, not ants, not mine, not anyone else's..

The forum exists so that players can comment on the game, not to mention making suggestions as to how it migth be improved. Your suggestion appears to be that FD know what they are doing, and have the best plan - seeing how broken some of this game is (powerplay anyone?) I think they've already proved you wrong.

That FD have a vision of how the game is intended to develop I wouldn't deny, I am sure DB sees this as almost a religious quest, but the design decisions the development team are making along the way often seem to be pretty strange, to put it mildly. Personally I'm beginning to suspect that every time a new feature is added it gets passed along to the delay department (may be called something else) where game undesigners figure out the best way to turn it into a grind of some sort.

To me the biggest issue with engineers is down to the lack of storage space - I honestly cannot think of a more frustrating way to implement random dice roll crafting than to limit the storage space of the player to what they can physically carry - you fly round in one ship endlessly because you need commodities to upgrade, and can't swap ships unless your cargo hold is empty...what IDIOT thought than one up?

Dave

 

[GG7]

The problem with doing this is that someone at FDev spent a long time designing the RNGineers system, and getting rid of it could be seen as admitting their design was fundamentally wrong (so I fear such a change won't happen if the RNG idea came from high-up FDev).

BINGO!

You just basically nailed it on the head Chris! These guys have made one of the biggest BLUNDERS a development team can make! They have allowed themselves to get "Emotionally Attached" to their FIRST ATTEMPT (s), thus making it extremely difficult for them to "pivot" away from their original offering if it proved problematic and/or unpopular with the game's player community.

In the case of Engineers we have a TWO FOR TWO situation! Their 2.1 offering was highly problematic and as a direct result quickly became extremely unpopular!

However... because the Elite development team allowed themselves to get too emotionally attached to their work, they were making crucial decisions with their EGOs instead of their professional training! Game development being a highly creative endeavor, it is very hard not to become emotionally attached to your "creation (s)", but YOU MUST NOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN! Nothing good ever comes out of such a situation.

Good intentions or no, their original design is fatally FLAWED and simply can not be allowed to stand! To ignore this reality would be to threaten the entire future of the game in the process!

I'm pleased to see that they are just now beginning to accept reality, and are making moves to steer the game in a more favorable direction. Its too bad they took so long to reach this inevitable conclusion, since during the last month they have ticked off a ton of their previously loyal core fanbase, with many of them leaving the game, likely never to return. And many others who are still here, but will be far less likely to blindly support any future seasons of Elite, choosing instead to WAIT until the release and reviews before actually purchasing the next installment.

If FD already counted all those chickens and included them in their 10 Year Plan, things are not going to be looking very good to investors come this time next year. Leave alone 2025!

Last but not least... 2.1.03?? [wacky]

What in the heck happened there? Two MAJOR features of the core game suddenly BROKEN and not an emergency patch in sight!

Instead of declaring a company wide emergency/all hands on deck and busting butt to get a patch released TODAY, they can't even be bothered to post a bulletin about the broken Docking Computer/AI Landing Ability and the Turret Weapon Mode switch! The way it is looking at this point, we are going to be stuck YET AGAIN with an update has broken the game for the next week to ten days, or perhaps even longer!

When exactly did this "We don't care if its broken, its Saturday" attitude become the Frontier Development company line?