What does the community want? Post your request here

[Klearoflauge]

1. New/improved, ships (Not sure why this game doesn't have this already) Fighters have extra dedicated military slots, shouldn't it be the same for mining, transport, haulers etc...?
Some of the older smaller ships need to be reworked to specialize in newer styles of gameplay.
2. Quality of life/bug fixes. When I choose a destination and confirm the jump it boots me back to the starting system and then tells me the destination was full.... why? Just tell me when I'm at that destination on the map so I can move to a close systems instead of making choosing a jump point a grind. Hell, even just show me it's full in the first place... Multi crew is a mess and a fantastic time when it works properly. No team members on FC in same instance (boo), more stats especially on FC's, there are plenty more.... take your pick.
3. Powerplay needs rebuilt
4. Ship interiors would be nice, at leaast while stationary.
5. All of the above things again!

 

[Ian Doncaster]

One example of "not all players want the same things"....

Of course, there's not much in the entire thread that's had more than two people suggest it yet, and plenty with just one.

Even on a basic "bug fixes" vs "QoL tweaks" vs "existing feature overhauls" vs "new features (small)" vs "new features (full expansion)" preference of direction I'm not seeing any obvious patterns yet ...

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Of course, there's not much in the entire thread that's had more than two people suggest it yet, and plenty with just one.

Even on a basic "bug fixes" vs "QoL tweaks" vs "existing feature overhauls" vs "new features (small)" vs "new features (full expansion)" preference of direction I'm not seeing any obvious patterns yet ...

perhaps... but most of the suggestions do not block a significant proportion of the player base of having any impact on the game quite as spectacularly as that one.

 

[Stealthie]

Said it before but one of the simplest things that I'd REALLY like to see would be variants of all the current ships.

Nothing super-dramatic - and nothing that required changing the graphical models for the ships - but just tweak some of the stat's for some/all of the ships and come up with a bunch of different ways for players to unlock them.

So, for example (and totally off the top of my head), there could be a variant of the DBX which has a slightly lower mass, has some different smaller core modules and has a C5 slot, thus making it an attractive ship for exploration.
To buy this ship you'd need to become Allied with Canonn research in-game and fulfill some mini' "rank grind" for them.

There are heaps of ships in ED which are "close but no cigar" (such as the AspX with all it's C3 and C2 slots when most explorers would prefer a heap of C1 slots) for specific activities and offering variants of existing ships with different core modules and optional slots would be a good way to give players some new toys without a huge amount of effort.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

perhaps... but most of the suggestions do not block a significant proportion of the player base of having any impact on the game quite as spectacularly as that one.

You might be underestimating its potential popularity - "no BGS effects in Solo" would be great for the trade and mining crowd - essentially exploit-level great, thinking about some of the bugfixes which went in during the early core mining days. Your sales don't make demand go down or risk changing the states that are causing the high prices? That's going to at least double their income in the right circumstances. People shooting down traders in Open in those systems would then become heroes, of course - blocking those griefers who are trying to crash the market by selling to it with BGS effects enabled!

Obviously Frontier doesn't want to encourage more people to play Solo just for extra money, so it's not going to happen, but it's understandable that it keeps coming up as a suggestion.

 

[Taimaru]

Ok, I don't do any Powerplay any more but I do have some Powerplay suggestions... so here goes...

1. An alternative way of getting Prismatic Shields so one doesn't have to do Powerplay to get them.
2. The rewards for Powerplay (e.g. Prismatic Sheilds) are not tied to specific Powerplay leaders so CMDR's support the Powerplay leader of choice NOT the leader which gives them the reward they want. In other words supporting a Powerplay leader gives you tokens allowing you to get ANY Powerplay reward regardless of the leader you support.

Non-Powerplay suggestions...

3. Drinks at the bar (yes I know this has been suggested many times). If age rating is an issue make the drinks non-alcoholic.
4. Ability to repair outside of your ship and Fleet Carrier using EVA (Extravehicular activity).
5. Ability to repair inside of your ship and Fleet Carrier with Ship Interiors.
6. If oceans/lakes are added, inlcude Moray 'Starboat' and Scuba Diving for going underwater.

 

[V'larr]

Anti-aliasing.

And the stuff in my signature, especially to do with reduced XP gain while in a wing or using a crew.

 

[bangermsuk]

Powerplay
Superpower (as in BGS hooks, ranks, etc) rework
Ship balance (as in, Asp S, T-7 rework) and nerfing silly ships like the Anaconda and FDL
Rationalizing and harmonizing engineering unlocks across engineers, tech brokers
New ships (no more new mediums- more SLFs, SRVs, small ships and one big one).

you live my anaconda out of this. burger boy!

better landing on planets. many times, i have had to redirect the ship manually to the direction of flee the base.why does autolanding need to be only one direction usually facing the wrong direction. Doesn't help my escape plans or board my craft with ease instead of avoid large rocks that seem conviently place infront of the dam bay.

 

[Astaran]

Alright, I'm going for realistic options here

1. More ships across all sizes.
2. Engineering overhaul. It's just a PITA and not fun at all. Mats need to be readily available by just playing the game. I don't want to waste hours upon hours to grind the material needed for simple upgrades. Make material purchasable at vendors (no, not just FC and bartender or material traders with ludicrous exchange rates)
3. More exobiology content. Add more things to find, maybe even dangerous space flowers that can potentially kill you
4. Introduce more planetary POIs, especially different variations of "crashed ships". Everyone seems to fly just Sidewinders and Eagles
5. Proper Space Legs content for exploration. Abandonded settlements with voice logs and mysteries (not just as some random BGS state nonense nobody really cares about)

 

[Yaga-Shura]

1. The option to set Flight Assist to OFF by default like we can with the SRV. Alternatively the ability to completely remove the module itself.
2. Full VR support, with motion controls for the feets stuff.
3. Reinstatement of Horizons terrain generation, I want the canyons back.
4. A complete rework of Odyssey guns and armor. More Arma, less Unreal Tournament. NO shields on foot.
5. Rework of engineering (both feet and ship) and the associated means of getting the materials.


Pipe dreams, I know.
I do not speak for anyone but myself with these 5.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I think space legs was more or less a reaction to player demand. It's of course FD's take on legs. And it was never anybody's intent to have legs like in Odyssey, it was always something better, grander, more fun. Despite many predicting pretty much the current outcome. You can't beat stupid player dreams - just simply ignore them and do your own thing as a dev. At least we know who to despise after bad design decisions

The point is, the coherent artistic vision in general produces better games than stuff designed by poll.

 

[V'larr]

This is the main problem with all these 'suggestions'

They are actually: "What I would like" stuffs

That is inherently, by definition, what suggestions are. You may as well claim there's a problem that breathing is actually inhaling air.

 

[V'larr]

Said it before but one of the simplest things that I'd REALLY like to see would be variants of all the current ships.

Nothing super-dramatic - and nothing that required changing the graphical models for the ships - but just tweak some of the stat's for some/all of the ships and come up with a bunch of different ways for players to unlock them.

So, for example (and totally off the top of my head), there could be a variant of the DBX which has a slightly lower mass, has some different smaller core modules and has a C5 slot, thus making it an attractive ship for exploration.
To buy this ship you'd need to become Allied with Canonn research in-game and fulfill some mini' "rank grind" for them.

There are heaps of ships in ED which are "close but no cigar" (such as the AspX with all it's C3 and C2 slots when most explorers would prefer a heap of C1 slots) for specific activities and offering variants of existing ships with different core modules and optional slots would be a good way to give players some new toys without a huge amount of effort.

A) I'm not a fan of variants existing for the sake of padding out 'variety'. World of Tanks and Mechwarrior Online did that to death, and it was extremely dull.
B) We already have plenty of that, in the form of the Diamondback Scout, the Asp Scout, the Krait Phantom, the Viper IV, etc.

Not that I'm against considering rebalancing ships' optional internal slot layouts.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Of course, there's not much in the entire thread that's had more than two people suggest it yet, and plenty with just one.

Even on a basic "bug fixes" vs "QoL tweaks" vs "existing feature overhauls" vs "new features (small)" vs "new features (full expansion)" preference of direction I'm not seeing any obvious patterns yet ...

Give it time....

 

[Rubbernuke]

you live my anaconda out of this. burger boy!

Feed the burgers to the magical Anaconda, it needs that chonk

 

[Stealthie]

A) I'm not a fan of variants existing for the sake of padding out 'variety'. World of Tanks and Mechwarrior Online did that to death, and it was extremely dull.
B) We already have plenty of that, in the form of the Diamondback Scout, the Asp Scout, the Krait Phantom, the Viper IV, etc.

Not that I'm against considering rebalancing ships' optional internal slot layouts.

Thing is, attempting to "balance" things is doomed to failure cos something that's good for one person isn't good for somebody else.

Most of the ships in ED are "near enough" for some role or another (AspS excluded, obviously ) but I'd like to see a couple of variants of a bunch of ships that are just tweaked slightly to make them a bit better at something.
Give players the choice of using the standard version with no effort or, in return for a bit of extra effort, a variant of a ship that's a bit faster, has a bit more cargo space, has a slightly better jump range or whatever.

 

[Robert Maynard]

perhaps... but most of the suggestions do not block a significant proportion of the player base of having any impact on the game quite as spectacularly as that one.

Indeed.

If Frontier were to be inclined to offer those who don't want to share the galaxy with players they can't shoot at one or more features that can't be affected by players in Solo or Private Groups then the most equitable solution, especially if those features are existing and currently pan-modal IMO, would be to create a new "Open only" game mode with its own separate galaxy state to affect. That way the game would not be changed in any way for those who wished to continue to play in the tri-modal shared galaxy and those who don't want to share a galaxy would be able to play in the new one.

CMDRs would need to be prevented from moving between the galaxies though - as the inevitable divergence would offer trivial exploitation opportunities.

 

[Mayan Fury]

to go back in time and slap the odysey expansion out of FD's minds so that my favourite game can continue indefinitely on consoles...

im still really upset about it all and havent managed to boot up Elite since the news hit ...

 

[Brrokk]

This thread neatly illustrates the problem. "The community" don't unanimously want anything. All players have individual wish lists which in their details and priorities don't agree very much.

Faced with this, FD just get on with what they think is good. That's probably a good strategy.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This thread nearly illustrates the problem. "The community" don't unanimously want anything. All players have individual wish lists which in their details and priorities don't agree very much.

Faced with this, FD just get on with what they think is good. That's probably a good strategy.

Quite.

The only thing that some players have in common is that they play the same game.