Re-brand E: D as "Bad Casino Simulator: In Space!"

[VR Morgan Grimes]

Yes, let's rename the entire game over a singular aspect that you don't like, ridiculous

 

[Ian Skippy]

Good point. There's still an RNG behind it all though.



Yet they still have an RNG algorithm behind them.



But the spawns themselves are still RNG based. I did read the ingame information about them, thanks.



Just the special effect? That's a shame, the rest of the module stats will still behave like throwing dice at a roulette wheel.



Rolling the dice gives you different results within a defined margin: said dice has a limited number of faces it can land on.



But still governed by an RNG algorithm.

Your post is a bit confusing, to be honest.

Note: I do see your point about Mission USS'. To be fair, I didn't mention them anywhere.

------------------------------------------------


Your comment took a jab at my OP making suggestions:


I never made any.
------------------------------------------------

Your "still RNG" argument makes no sense. Ofcourse USS has some random elements, always finding the same stuff in the same place doesn't sound exciting to me. There are four approaches possible:

1) Totally randomise everything.
2) Controlled randomization: the idea is players just play their game, get stuff as they go and slowly can start to add mods.
3) No randomization: Within 12 minutes Reddit has a list online where everything is, and a little later everyone is sporting C5 mods on all ships.
4) No randomization, but increased requirements: Within 12 minutes Reddit has a list online where everything is, and [insert long time period] after that everyone is sporting C5 mods on all ships.

Nobody likes #1. If you do #4 everyone complains about boring grinds. FD wants #2. Some want #3. Its a question about how FD envisions the gameplay of ED to be, and its obviously the opposite of grinding. Which is great, unless you decide to grind anyway and feel hindered by the controlled randomization. But thats not 'poor design', thats just you not enjoying something that wasnt supposed to be either done or enjoyed anyway. Comparing it with a casino only shows you dont seem to grasp or accept why things are the way they are, and why FD has repeatedly been very vocal about what the 'I hate RNG' crowd wants/demands.

 

[frostypaw]

Says cliché man

Is this relevant to the topic or just attacking me and the countless cookiecutter threads I start?

 

[Stahll Amatin]

seriously the engineers system is absolutely Unacceptable to me. it should be 100% What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get. I should know BEFORE DOING A SINGLE TASK that module X will increase my jump range by lets say 23.397% I should be able to precisely decide if its worth my time before doing the time. ZERO RNG of outcomes. ZERO

HEAR ME BAD DEVS!?!? Z-E-R-O RNG

 

[Kurdran]

...the OP and others complaining are welcome to set up farcical strawman arguments based on ad hominem assumptions about the intent and character of Frontier and their developers, proclaiming the sky is falling and only combat builds are viable while they're under siege from some imaginary PvP focused majority who want the game only playable by elite player...

Nope. Just wishing you'd tagged your cut'n'paste complaint onto one of the other identical threads with the same points in different words. Of which there are 86 from a quick search.

First you take a rather corrosive jab at me (and others) to then say it's a way of wishing we'd all post in the same thread? Please, stop posting in my thread. Just stop.

 

[frostypaw]

So you can post:

After 2.1, with the sucktacular grind-fest that RNGineers provide, I thought it would be sensible to ask FD to consider re-branding the game.

I wouldn't dare presume to speak for all the players out there, but I for one didn't spend my hard-earned cash to play a Poor Casino Sim. Why poor? Because real casinos don't force you to play 7 tables (or machines if you don't like tables) to maybe get a reward on the 8th. Right now the grind in ED is really craptastic (pun intended): RNG for materials, RNG for data, RNG for ships to blow up, RNG for asteroids to mine, RNG for material-giving-missions, RNG for planet minerals, RNG for signal sources, and at the end of it all moar RNG for every single stat present in a singular modular upgrade - plus special effects -... It's awful FD, it's just bloody awful...


FD, there's little you can do for me now, I paid for the game long ago, but if you want to lure more suckers into buying your game at least extend them the courtesy of being honest about what E: D has turned into.

taking a corrosive jab at Frontier and the game painting them as amateur con men at will?

OK bud. I'm not here to do your PR. Enjoy

 

[Ian Skippy]

seriously the engineers system is absolutely Unacceptable to me. it should be 100% What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get. I should know BEFORE DOING A SINGLE TASK that module X will increase my jump range by lets say 23.397% I should be able to precisely decide if its worth my time before doing the time. ZERO RNG of outcomes. ZERO

HEAR ME BAD DEVS!?!? Z-E-R-O RNG

They hear you. They also extensively responded in the past. They dont care for your idea, they wont implement it, but do they do thank you for the festive formatting of your demands.

 

[DefiledDragon]

Most responses have not been toxic - people have been bending over backwards to help people left right and centre.

You might be confusing the ED forums with the Hasbro Twister forums?

Is this relevant to the topic or just attacking me and the countless cookiecutter threads I start?

I think you should be posting those on here http://www.baking-forums.com/


I've not actually done any "engineering" yet as I only came back to the game today, although I've taken a quick peek. I found the interface a tad confusing tbh. The bonuses and penalties seem to have possible ranges and I'm not entirely sure what I'll be getting if I do decide to implement an "upgrade". Also, if I'm reading the UI correctly, most of the "upgrades" actually seem to make things worse rather than better, or am I just misunderstanding the level of penalties applied?

Maybe I should read the manual.

 

[Bounder]

I honestly thought we were getting a procedurally generated game.

FD don't seem to understand that procedural generation is causal, and that its key attraction is that the variability it produces remains causal. Causality can be gamed. Randomness provides variability but without any logical consistency.

You can get away with some randomness. Some elements of a deeply procedural game may seem effectively random. But personally i avoid everything that seems to involve randomness - so all USS's, all missions.. i just trade, basically. In trading, i can make educated guesses based on available information - so even if there's a degree of randomness involved, the impression of gaming a procedural system remains.

An overriding impression of randomness is just exasperating and emasculating.. obviating player influence.

 

[Stahll Amatin]

They hear you. They also extensively responded in the past. They dont care for your idea, they wont implement it, but do they do thank you for the festive formatting of your demands.

the direction they have gone with this one element has literally degraded the games place in my view by several magnitudes. for this element alone, i now hold the same contempt for FDEV that i do for all the freemium developers with thier predetory business models. the game is actively WORSE for this addition having been made in my opinion. i would sooner have had this expansion/patch scrapped at the drawing board then released in the format we have.

 

[frostypaw]

Upgrade stats are linked together such that while it appears totally random they are meant to be set up so they always give you an upgrade, even if it's not clear why or it's not by much

I honestly thought we were getting a procedurally generated game.

FD don't seem to understand that procedural generation is causal, and that its key attraction is that the variability it produces remains causal. Causality can be gamed. Randomness provides variability but without any logical consistency.

You can get away with some randomness. Some elements of a deeply procedural game may seem effectively random. But personally i avoid everything that seems to involve randomness - so all USS's, all missions.. i just trade, basically. In trading, i can make educated guesses based on available information - so even if there's a degree of randomness involved, the impression of gaming a procedural system remains.

An overriding impression of randomness is just exasperating and emasculating.. obviating player influence.

Good thing it's made how you want it then, not how you believe it to be for some reason *glares at certain content producers*

USS types and locations are determined by procedural stuff, mat distribution is procedural and not all random, missions are procedural based on system/faction state and not totally random.... pretty much everything is how you want it to be. If you wanna hand around bits of it just ask - there are guides and people who are willing to help.

 

[babelfisch]

Good point. There's still an RNG behind it all though.



Yet they still have an RNG algorithm behind them.



But the spawns themselves are still RNG based. I did read the ingame information about them, thanks.



Just the special effect? That's a shame, the rest of the module stats will still behave like throwing dice at a roulette wheel.

This is why I am asking for suggestions to further reduce the RNG. It should be procedually generated (which might be already the case in some situations) IMO.

Rolling the dice gives you different results within a defined margin: said dice has a limited number of faces it can land on.

It's basically a dice with 6 sides but it can only land on 5 and 6. Which isn't the same like "casino RNG".

Note: I do see your point about Mission USS'. To be fair, I didn't mention them anywhere.

But you implied everything in the game is governed by RNG... So I thought I could just as well point something out that isn't...

Your comment took a jab at my OP making suggestions:


I never made any.

Yes, that's is the sad truth. You are not making any suggestions.