So how many actually made it to Beagle point?

[-VR- Max Factor]

Due to reason's im still on my way to Sag A. Next time though.

 

[who?]

The figures above are about consistent with the figures from Obsidian Orbital during the barnacle hunt when the system traffic report had thousands of commanders in it, and probably 90+% were Asp Explorers and Anacondas.

It's all very well have 31 ships in the game, but for 99.999.....% of the galaxy, 90+% of the commanders fly one of two ships. Surely that should be an indicator that more balance, variety is needed? (Or, that exploration doesn't matter that much..)

I'd be a little wary of making one 'super explorer', since that would just mean 100% of Cmdrs would fly that instead of the Asp and Conda. I'd love to have variety. Maybe a small, agile explorer with good range, great visibility and is great to fly around over planets.. but doesn't have big slots and not great shields or hull, (so unsuitable for much other than exploring), perhaps with a limited fuel tank (to spice things up).

Or a 'science vessel', with fantastic jump range but poor speed/agility in SC and normal flight. Again, unsuitable for multi-role, but great for jumping to remote systems and launching a 'fighter' or SRV for exploration.

(Anywho, sorry for the OT sub-thread!)

 

[who?]

Well once Engineers come out, we may have plenty more options for deep space exploration. But that will probably mean that the Asp Explorer will also be that much better too! Which means that people will still have a hard time ditching the Asp even if the other are better than they are now. Unless they put a soft ceiling on FSD upgrades so that low range ships get a disproportional benefit?

In any case, I think the Asp will remain the king of exploration. If they scale the FSD upgrades by class so that lower class get a bigger proportional benefit, then the Asp may even be able to jump nearly as far the Anaconda. Which would be nice!

I'm very much intrigued as to how Engineers is going to work.

If they simply add a given % onto all ships' jump range, it won't do much for exploration or long-distance travel. People still won't fly a 20Ly Corvette if they have the option of a 70Ly Asp or 80Ly Conda. If - as you say - they disproportionately boost the ability of lesser ships, then you'd have to buff the Asp in other ways - would you fly a 35 Ly Asp or a 35Ly FDL? So then there's the risk of Engineers just ironing out the difference between ships, bar some things like 'number of slots' which can't easily be balanced. So everyone ends up with the ships with the most slots..

Good luck, Frontier. Rather you than me.

 

[Iron Orchid]

I'm very much intrigued as to how Engineers is going to work.

So am I. It could be special FSD, weapons, etc but I hope there may be special (adapted) Hulls (lightweight, armoured, more internal slots, different internal slots, combining internal slots, dividing internal slots, losing hardpoints / utility points and gaining internals the list goes on).
I have a feeling I might be disappointed and there won't be this sort of flexibility.

 

[Mengy]

So am I. It could be special FSD, weapons, etc but I hope there may be special (adapted) Hulls (lightweight, armoured, more internal slots, different internal slots, combining internal slots, dividing internal slots, losing hardpoints / utility points and gaining internals the list goes on).
I have a feeling I might be disappointed and there won't be this sort of flexibility.

Yeah I think you are hoping for a tad too much here.


I think the most we can expect to see from engineers, at least for 2.1, is a simple percentage increase on module performance which might also be accompanied by a percentage decrease in some other manner for balance. Weapons and shields will be most of what the engineers affect, FDev is always more focused on the combat crowd than everyone else. We might see things like FSD module ranges improved, maybe thruster modifications, at best that's what us explorers will most likely be getting out of engineers. Miners might see refinery bin improvements or even drone controllers improved, and traders probably won't get anything that directly impacts them (but shield crafts indirectly apply to them). Judging from past patch history I don't think we should expect much more than this honestly. I'd love to be very wrong of course!

 

[Ziljan]

I find it a bit puzzling you come to that conclusion. You are leaping there from "material grind" to "smaller ships can now match bigger ships in specialized areas".

First of all, the type of grind is completely irrelevant.

Second, it is unknown to us what type of modification engineers will provide:

c) Upgrades with competing but smaller downsides.

I am leaping from the fact that Frontier does their best to maintain the ranking in the current Eco system. This means that the boosts cannot be a straight 10% etc. If a 35 LY ship gains 10% then that is a 200% higher benefit than a 17 LY ship would get for the same grind effort.. Eg, 3.5 vs 1.7. That would be untenable, and destroy game balance by boosting the extremes for ultimate min/maxing. So obviously the bonus will have to scale. Ergo smaller ships are likely to benefit more just like they do currently with HRPs.

Ships that are superior now will obviously continue to dominate, but smaller/weaker ships may become more relevant than they are now at any given task just because the gaps will diminish.

Now the difference between $$$ and mats is that it opens up the justification for "cheaper" small ships becoming more powerful. The biggest and most often voiced explanation for the superiority of bigger ships is that they "cost more". So a material grind now gives the smaller ships an opportunity to "cost more" as well. And this will hopefully appease the small ship haters. As well as adding more prestige to upgraded small ships.

And btw, they have already stated that it be option c), but it's early days and who knows if that will stay the case?

I'm very much intrigued as to how Engineers is going to work.

If they simply add a given % onto all ships' jump range, it won't do much for exploration or long-distance travel.

I don't think it will be a straight % for the reasons stated above. It's either going to be a flat bonus, eg 5 LY boost, or it will scale by module class with diminishing returns.

 

[Mephane]

And btw, they have already stated that it be option c), but it's early days and who knows if that will stay the case?

Have they? I can't remember them saying anything concrete in this regard.

 

[Ziljan]

Have they? I can't remember them saying anything concrete in this regard.

Yeah it was during one of the Dev video interviews. It was a while ago, so I can't remember if it was Sandro or Michael tbh, but they said there would be "some downsides, but over all a net upgrade".

 

[Mengy]

I don't think it will be a straight % for the reasons stated above. It's either going to be a flat bonus, eg 5 LY boost, or it will scale by module class with diminishing returns.

I'm actually in favor of the scaling by module class with diminishing returns. I'd rather bring the smaller / less flown ships to match or come close to the Asp & Anaconda. I want choices, not to be shoehorned even harder into the same two ships that we already are.

 

[Ginrikuzuma]

-snip-

I find it a bit puzzling you come to that conclusion. You are leaping there from "material grind" to "smaller ships can now match bigger ships in specialized areas".

First of all, the type of grind is completely irrelevant. Whether it is materials we hand over to an engineer or credits, or whether an engineer is involved at all or just a regular outfitting service - you exchange currency for components and stats. And anyway, as always with these things, both materials and credits boil down to time as the actual currency. It matters not how many materials or credits it takes, it matters how much time it takes to earn the price of an item.

(And I must say a credit grind is the superior one because credits are universal and agnostic to the activity - lots of things earn you credits. This is one point I so hate about most MMOs - having so many specialized currencies to collect, all with their unique and narrow method of acquisition. You don't choose what you want to do, you have to choose what item you want to get, then the decision is already made for you what and how you have to play.)


-snip-

And you summed up my feelings that I have had since November in regards to all this talk of crafting and material gathering for this coming part of the season 2 updates. Credits is one thing, I can earn them however I please [and thus how much of a "grind" it becomes depends on how committed I am to getting them the most efficient way vs what I feel like playing at the time. Where as this talk of crafting and materials might not give us great variation on how to gather materials (look at elements for example. We can only get them on landfall with the use of an SRV.)


back on topic though.


For next year's trip if I can pass a sanity check, I'll try taking a Fed Gunship or something

 

[Kuroshio]

Current success rates by ship type (quick and dirty, based on older roster data):

Adder: 0%
Anaconda: 65%
Asp Explorer: 50%
Asp Scout: 50%
Cobra Mk. III: 19%
Cobra Mk. IV: 100%
Diamondback Explorer: 28%
Diamondback Scout: 0%
Eagle: 0%
Federal Corvette: 200%
Federal Dropship: 100 %
Hauler: 10%
Imperial Clipper: 36%
Imperial Courier: 33%
Imperial Cutter: 50%
Imperial Eagle: 100%
Keelback: 100%
Orca: 0%
Python: 61%
Sidewinder: 33%
Type-6: 15%
Type-7: 50%
Type-9: 100%
Viper: 0%
Viper Mk. IV: 25%