Why are we being robbed of grade 5 in the engineering conversion for no reason?

[Devari]

Do you see the hypocrisy in calling people who disagree with you "trolls" while, at the same time, whining about "personal attacks"?

You mean aside from the issue that those individuals have, in fact, been engaging in trolling behavior and personal attacks?

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

You really do need to re-read this thread, and the other similar threads, to understand the issue properly.

I'm suggesting very clearly that prior mods should be converted appropriately into the new system. That won't put them all at the new Grade 5 maximum but it should put most of them in the upper end of the new Grade 5 range if FD is converting the amount of work involved in a reasonable manner. It might take another 2-3 rolls to max out many of the converted modules but it should absolutely not take another 10 rolls (or whatever the RNG gives you) as if you're starting the entire Grade 5 process again from zero.

FD had no problem nerfing everyone's modules into new lower ranges for "game balance" when they applied Engineering nerfs yet somehow doesn't apply that same logic going in the other direction. The obvious motivation here is that FD wants everyone, including players who have already Engineered their ships with large numbers of Grade 5 rolls, to be putting in massive efforts into the new system so that their "metrics" show that players are "playing the game" despite the very obvious lack of new content.

Myself and others have been clearly indicating that prior Engineering effort should be valued appropriately when converted into the new Grade 5 system. For some reason this point has been missed (probably quite intentionally) by many posters who have tried to frame the discussion as "whining" or "complaining" or similarly dismissing a very legitimate concern.

I thought that I had said this previously, but I will try again.

You believe that our current G5 modules should appropriately upgraded to better correspond to the new G5 levels. For example, for simplicity's sake let's say that my G5 Long Range FSD is at 98% of its possible maximum performance under the new system, which gives me a 64ly range. Under the new system, I will still have the same 64ly range, but that is now only 90% of that mod's maximum performance, which happens to correpsond to a G4 level mod in the new system. You (and others) believe that FDev should adjust mt current module's performance so that it is closer to 98% of the maximum performance. It doesn't even have to be 98%, but it should be higher. If they did this, then my current G5 would remain G5, and my current 98% max performance would still be near 98%, and my FSD range would automatically increase to 68ly (or something highrr than 64, whatever corresponds to near 98% of new max).

Is that accurate?

 

[MottiKhan]

I like the new system. I have a lot of G5 modules and they'll be even better after the update. I have loads of G5 "very rare" mats and data to use at the mats traders.

What's not to love?

 

[Stealthie]

...in fact....

No, not "in fact". In your opinion.

I guess I can take that as a "no" though.

 

[Stealthie]

I like the new system. I have a lot of G5 modules and they'll be even better after the update. I have loads of G5 "very rare" mats and data to use at the mats traders.

What's not to love?

Exactly.

And with a mat-trader around, you can just hoover up any high-tier junk lying around, swap it for what you need and you're away.

Looking forward to playing around with my 60Ly exploration Asp and my >850m/sec Viper to see what else I can squeeze out of them. [up]

 

[Devari]

I thought that I had said this previously, but I will try again.

You believe that our current G5 modules should appropriately upgraded to better correspond to the new G5 levels. For example, for simplicity's sake let's say that my G5 Long Range FSD is at 98% of its possible maximum performance under the new system, which gives me a 64ly range. Under the new system, I will still have the same 64ly range, but that is now only 90% of that mod's maximum performance, which happens to correpsond to a G4 level mod in the new system. You (and others) believe that FDev should adjust mt current module's performance so that it is closer to 98% of the maximum performance. It doesn't even have to be 98%, but it should be higher. If they did this, then my current G5 would remain G5, and my current 98% max performance would still be near 98%, and my FSD range would automatically increase to 68ly (or something highrr than 64, whatever corresponds to near 98% of new max).

Is that accurate?

That's closer to what I'm suggesting but I'm not referring necessarily to the percentage of the current maximum achieved since it's a very non-linear process with respect to effort involved. The vast majority of rolls in the current system never got near the true "maximums" which were 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 events. I'm referring to the fact that it takes several dozen rolls just to get a "good" (but not outstanding) roll in the current system. I used an example of a Grade 5 dirty drive tune as it's quite easy to understand. A decent 132% roll (near the slider maximum without adding secondaries) was achievable with maybe 10 rolls or less. A 135% roll took an average of around 50 rolls. A 140% roll was probably 1 in 200 and 142%+ was around 1 in 1000 or less.

The new maximum for a Grade 5 dirty drive is 147% which is ridiculously higher than anything in the prior system. An exceptionally lucky roll, maybe 1 in 10,000 might have gotten that in the prior system, but it was so rare that basically no one got that type of result despite making hundreds of rolls. The new system also gives you that ridiculously inflated maximum with an average of 10 Grade 5 rolls which would have maybe gotten you around a 132% roll in the prior system. That is a full 15% lower which is a massive difference and nowhere near competitive for any sort of PvP or even surviving Open if you keep your existing mod.

If you take most players who got a "good" Grade 5 dirty drive tune of 135% they have probably put in 50 rolls on average which is more than enough to maximize their results in the new system. An appropriate conversion should recognize most of that work and might put a prior 135% roll within say 2 rolls of the current Grade 5 maximum, probably around 145% in the new system. A prior roll of 140% might be 146% (i.e., around 1 roll away from the maximum) while a roll of 142% or higher should probably be put right at the maximum of 147% given how much effort it took to achieve.

Someone who just did a small number of Grade 5 rolls with mediocre results would still need to put in another 5-10 rolls in the new system to get the maximum results but at least some of the effort needed to obtain "good" rolls in the existing system would be carried over into the new system. Then you would have some incentive to push another few rolls to maximize the mods but wouldn't need to do this to remain competitive as you would be within say 2-3% of the new maximums, instead of 10-15% less which makes all that prior work basically worthless.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

That's closer to what I'm suggesting but I'm not referring necessarily to the percentage of the current maximum achieved since it's a very non-linear process with respect to effort involved. The vast majority of rolls in the current system never got near the true "maximums" which were 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 events. I'm referring to the fact that it takes several dozen rolls just to get a "good" (but not outstanding) roll in the current system. I used an example of a Grade 5 dirty drive tune as it's quite easy to understand. A decent 132% roll (near the slider maximum without adding secondaries) was achievable with maybe 10 rolls or less. A 135% roll took an average of around 50 rolls. A 140% roll was probably 1 in 200 and 142%+ was around 1 in 1000 or less.

The new maximum for a Grade 5 dirty drive is 147% which is ridiculously higher than anything in the prior system. An exceptionally lucky roll, maybe 1 in 10,000 might have gotten that in the prior system, but it was so rare that basically no one got that type of result despite making hundreds of rolls. The new system also gives you that ridiculously inflated maximum with an average of 10 Grade 5 rolls which would have maybe gotten you around a 132% roll in the prior system. That is a full 15% lower which is a massive difference and nowhere near competitive for any sort of PvP or even surviving Open if you keep your existing mod.

If you take most players who got a "good" Grade 5 dirty drive tune of 135% they have probably put in 50 rolls on average which is more than enough to maximize their results in the new system. An appropriate conversion should recognize most of that work and might put a prior 135% roll within say 2 rolls of the current Grade 5 maximum, probably around 145% in the new system. A prior roll of 140% might be 146% (i.e., around 1 roll away from the maximum) while a roll of 142% or higher should probably be put right at the maximum of 147% given how much effort it took to achieve.

Someone who just did a small number of Grade 5 rolls with mediocre results would still need to put in another 5-10 rolls in the new system to get the maximum results but at least some of the effort needed to obtain "good" rolls in the existing system would be carried over into the new system. Then you would have some incentive to push another few rolls to maximize the mods but wouldn't need to do this to remain competitive as you would be within say 2-3% of the new maximums, instead of 10-15% less which makes all that prior work basically worthless.

Oh dear - the whole house of cards just completely fell apart.

So what you want is for FD to measure the effort that went into a module, when the basis of that module is RNG. Don't even start on averages and probabilities, I understand them very well.

The point is that you can have the same module from 1 roll that took someone else 200. Unlikely, but still more than possible.

And you somehow expect FD to spend the effort to calculate that somehow, and to get it right.
All for the sake of what, 6 or 7 G5 rolls in the new system.

If you're serious about your upgrades, which apparently you are, given the effort already made, that's pretty small beer.

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

That's closer to what I'm suggesting but I'm not referring necessarily to the percentage of the current maximum achieved since it's a very non-linear process with respect to effort involved. The vast majority of rolls in the current system never got near the true "maximums" which were 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10,000 events. I'm referring to the fact that it takes several dozen rolls just to get a "good" (but not outstanding) roll in the current system. I used an example of a Grade 5 dirty drive tune as it's quite easy to understand. A decent 132% roll (near the slider maximum without adding secondaries) was achievable with maybe 10 rolls or less. A 135% roll took an average of around 50 rolls. A 140% roll was probably 1 in 200 and 142%+ was around 1 in 1000 or less.

The new maximum for a Grade 5 dirty drive is 147% which is ridiculously higher than anything in the prior system. An exceptionally lucky roll, maybe 1 in 10,000 might have gotten that in the prior system, but it was so rare that basically no one got that type of result despite making hundreds of rolls. The new system also gives you that ridiculously inflated maximum with an average of 10 Grade 5 rolls which would have maybe gotten you around a 132% roll in the prior system. That is a full 15% lower which is a massive difference and nowhere near competitive for any sort of PvP or even surviving Open if you keep your existing mod.

If you take most players who got a "good" Grade 5 dirty drive tune of 135% they have probably put in 50 rolls on average which is more than enough to maximize their results in the new system. An appropriate conversion should recognize most of that work and might put a prior 135% roll within say 2 rolls of the current Grade 5 maximum, probably around 145% in the new system. A prior roll of 140% might be 146% (i.e., around 1 roll away from the maximum) while a roll of 142% or higher should probably be put right at the maximum of 147% given how much effort it took to achieve.

Someone who just did a small number of Grade 5 rolls with mediocre results would still need to put in another 5-10 rolls in the new system to get the maximum results but at least some of the effort needed to obtain "good" rolls in the existing system would be carried over into the new system. Then you would have some incentive to push another few rolls to maximize the mods but wouldn't need to do this to remain competitive as you would be within say 2-3% of the new maximums, instead of 10-15% less which makes all that prior work basically worthless.

The percentages I used were just to represent the concept, but I think I understand that the primary reason you want the conversion to be different is because of the time you've already invested to get the mods you have now, and that the current strategy throws all that time out of the window, or at the least doesn't respect that time, and also requires you to invest more time to max out your modules, which were already maxed out (reasonably so...not litteraly).

Or put another way,

You spent x amount of time to max out modules, which are now no longer maxed out, and you would like for your current modules to be buffed in the conversion so that they are still nearly maxed out, or at least provide a path that doesn't require you to invest time that you've already invested.

 

[Devari]

The percentages I used were just to represent the concept, but I think I understand that the primary reason you want the conversion to be different is because of the time you've already invested to get the mods you have now, and that the current strategy throws all that time out of the window, or at the least doesn't respect that time, and also requires you to invest more time to max out your modules, which were already maxed out (reasonably so...not litteraly).

Or put another way,

You spent x amount of time to max out modules, which are now no longer maxed out, and you would like for your current modules to be buffed in the conversion so that they are still nearly maxed out, or at least provide a path that doesn't require you to invest time that you've already invested.

Yes, that would be an accurate description of the issues that myself and other have raised in these threads.

 

[Red Anders]

Devari - genuine question for you.

If FDev had implemented exactly the same improvements to the highest potential stats for all mods as they are going to introduce in 3.0, but instead of increasing the spans of the 'new' tier 5's so that the top of it for any stat is the 'new' maximum value, they had left the top of the tier 5 range at what it would have been in 2.4 and simply added the difference between the 'old' maximum and 'new' maximum as an entirely new tier, i.e. grade 6 mods, would you have the same complaint - that your grade 5 mods weren't automatically turned into grade 6 mods?

You'd have exactly the same mods as you have now with exactly the same actual stats and performance and they would still be one tier below the new maximum. They would also still be the grade 5 mods that you worked so hard for...

The reason I'm asking is that so much of what your problem is (your real problem as stated in the thread, not an imagined one that I've made up) seems to be rooted in the concept that you have tier 5 mods now which are close to the current maximum, but when 3.0 lands you will have tier 5 mods that are not as close to the current maximum. You seem to feel that they should be proportionately in the same place, partly because you spent time to get them (didn't we all) and partly because they are still grade 5 mods, the top tier available under both the old and new systems.

The reason I don't share your ire about it is that I'm not at all concerned about the relative position of my mod within the new hierarchy, or indeed what they are called either today or after conversion. What matters to me is only the actual performance of the mod.

For example, as of today I have a drive on my (luxuriously equipped and in no way range-optimised) exploration Anaconda which will see it jump 60LY. (It's about a 54% drive, which is no God-roll but is hardly shabby and took the expected amount of effort in 2.4 engineering to obtain)

After conversion, I don't care whether that mod is called a grade 4, a grade 5 or a tin whistle, it's just words on a screen. What I care about is how far my Anaconda will jump.

With that same drive installed it will still jump 60LY because the mod won't change at all. I have exactly the same functionality as I have today - I have done no additional work and have neither gained nor lost any performance. The fact that the changes have created a potentially higher maximum doesn't mean that I'm somehow getting shafted, it merely means that if I choose to do some additional work I can receive an additional improvement, not only over what I have now but over and above what I could possibly have attained under the old system.

If I was going to be forced to roll it again just to retain my existing level of performance, I would care quite a bit. But I'm not. I don't have to do anything at all to retain what I have.

If I do decide to roll it again within the grade 5 structure though it's not going to stay the same, it is going to improve. Not only that, it is actually guaranteed to improve, whereas I could have rolled another 500 times in 2.4 and it may well not have improved at all.

So I can either do nothing and keep a drive with exactly the same performance as I have today, or I can do a few extra rolls and get a drive which is objectively better than the one I have now.

You feel that if your drive was relatively at the 95% point of the old range, you would want it to be at the same relative 95% point of the new range. That is actually giving you an objective improvement in the drive compared to what you have today, rather than merely maintaining the actual (not relative) performance of the drive you have. You expect to get that objective improvement for no additional work. I'm not judging, but I can't see why simply not getting every module that you already own buffed at conversion is deemed to be unfair. It seems entirely reasonable to me. It certainly doesn't seem to be anything even resembling a critical problem.

As long as I keep the performance of the mods I currently have, I have lost nothing at all. I may choose to take advantage of the new opportunities provided by the higher stat caps, or I may not. If I do, I play the game some more and receive a new benefit for the effort I put in. How is this bad?

Myself and others have been clearly indicating that prior Engineering effort should be valued appropriately when converted into the new Grade 5 system. For some reason this point has been missed (probably quite intentionally) by many posters who have tried to frame the discussion as "whining" or "complaining" or similarly dismissing a very legitimate concern.

See that's it right there - 'prior effort should be recognised'. My 'prior effort' consisted of collecting the materials to roll a better FSD. I collected them, I rolled the drive. I was happy that I had a 54% optimised range drive. My efforts were recognised by obtaining that drive. Next Tuesday I will still have it. It hasn't changed one iota. I'll still be happy. My efforts are still recognised by virtue of me still having the exact thing I made the effort for, performing at exactly the same level. The fact that it could potentially now be improved to perform even better doesn't change that at all.

If I want to, I'll be able to make a bit more effort and be rewarded by getting a better drive still. That will recognise the additional effort I have made. Assuming that we're measuring effort by the time taken to obtain engineering materials and do the rolls, the amount of additional effort I will need to make to max out the drive will be proportionately tiny compared to that already spent on getting it where it is. I mean it will be like having to work an extra five minutes at the end of the week for another full day's pay.

I don't need my existing drive to be bumped up to say 57% at conversion (close to the new 60% maximum) just to give me an extra pat on the head for what I've already done.

Its amazing to see so many people being ok despite their efforts being thrown out the window, just because the devs are so lazy to come up with a decent conversion system and just because the numbers will be better than before.

Describe how keeping all of the gear you already have, with exactly the same stats as it already has, represents your efforts being 'thrown out of the window'. Please, I'm doing overtime at work tomorrow and could do with a laugh on my break. Try to make it as dramatic and hyperbolic as possible.

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

Yes, that would be an accurate description of the issues that myself and other have raised in these threads.

Great!

I'll have to see how it pans out with my FSDs, and am looking forward to it. I'm curious to see how much time it will take for me to get better performing drives than I have now and how much better they will actually be.

Honestly, the prospect of actually having performance specs that are effectively out of reach for me now is out weighing any concerns I might would have. While I understand the issue you have, I can't say that I feel the same way, at least without having tried it myself.

If the new system allows for me to have an FSD that exceeds my current capabilities, then I do not feel that any buff should be given to my existing drives, and I don't expect to realize the new max potentials without some additional work.

I understand your view on this, and I personally disagree with it.

See, it is possible for those two thoughts to exist. Just because I or others feel differently, does not mean that I or we do not understand you.

 

[Maro-Val]

Describe how keeping all of the gear you already have, with exactly the same stats as it already has, represents your efforts being 'thrown out of the window'. Please, I'm doing overtime at work tomorrow and could do with a laugh on my break. Try to make it as dramatic and hyperbolic as possible.

1. Oh so i can keep my existing gear, while others get even better modules and weapons than the previous god rolls right?
2. If you dont like it, then convert them to the new system.
3. But converting my G5 module that has thousands of rolls, will get me back to G4 and i would need EVEN MORE rolls which means -> my previous rolls + some more rolls. Why the convertion just cant put me in a perfect G5 in the new system, since if it wasnt for the rng (which is exactly what they wanna "fix") all those rolls would have got me the perfect G5 in the new system many times over?
4. Dude this is how it works. If you dont like it, keep your existing gear.
5. Goto 1.

See anything familiar in the above? What i cannot do, is keeping my obsolete gear when the entire game will change around me, the moment the update hits, IF i want to maintain the playstyle that i enjoy.

If still you have difficulty understanding the above, i really dont know if anything else can help your case. The number of hours and mouse clicks that i need to fully make the transition to the new system for all of my ships is soul crashing. I also have a small fleet in colonia of fully engineered ships but hey.. even that sounds minor in your perfect world right?

- No surprises for your doing overtime tomorrow. Since you accept whatever they throw at you, get ready for even more dude.

 

[Devari]

Devari - genuine question for you.

If FDev had implemented exactly the same improvements to the highest potential stats for all mods as they are going to introduce in 3.0, but instead of increasing the spans of the 'new' tier 5's so that the top of it for any stat is the 'new' maximum value, they had left the top of the tier 5 range at what it would have been in 2.4 and simply added the difference between the 'old' maximum and 'new' maximum as an entirely new tier, i.e. grade 6 mods, would you have the same complaint - that your grade 5 mods weren't automatically turned into grade 6 mods?

That is effectively what they've done with the new system by downgrading existing grade 5 mods to grade 4 and dramatically increasing the Grade 5 blueprints. They difference is that what we're getting with 3.0 is even worse than straight-up adding a new "grade" of mods because they actually expect players do to exactly the same activities and make more of exactly the same rolls they already made over the past 2 years.

There's no new content, new gameplay or new "depth" to the new Engineering system. In fact there's considerably less depth due to the removal of certain secondary effects which added unique combinations and some of those can't be exactly duplicated in the new system. All we get is more grind to do exactly what we've already done for 2 years.

Describe how keeping all of the gear you already have, with exactly the same stats as it already has, represents your efforts being 'thrown out of the window'. Please, I'm doing overtime at work tomorrow and could do with a laugh on my break.

Since you clearly have no intention of truly understanding the issue here and it's been explained in such extensive detail so far I doubt there's anything I could explain that would help you at this point. The most appropriate response now seems to be adding you to my ignore list, along with the other individuals who have been trolling and derailing the point of this thread and have no actual intent to participate in a constructive discussion.

Try to make it as dramatic and hyperbolic as possible.

If you weren't already headed to my ignore list for trolling, this comment certainly helped confirm that as a very appropriate decision.

 

[Devari]

Great!

I'll have to see how it pans out with my FSDs, and am looking forward to it. I'm curious to see how much time it will take for me to get better performing drives than I have now and how much better they will actually be.

Honestly, the prospect of actually having performance specs that are effectively out of reach for me now is out weighing any concerns I might would have. While I understand the issue you have, I can't say that I feel the same way, at least without having tried it myself.

If the new system allows for me to have an FSD that exceeds my current capabilities, then I do not feel that any buff should be given to my existing drives, and I don't expect to realize the new max potentials without some additional work.

I understand your view on this, and I personally disagree with it.

See, it is possible for those two thoughts to exist. Just because I or others feel differently, does not mean that I or we do not understand you.

I think we'll see quite a bit of balancing and re-balancing once 3.0 launches, much like every other expansion, so I don't plan on doing anything at all in the new system for at least 2-3 months assuming I get back into Engineering at all, which is unlikely unless FD provides some sort of reasonable conversion for Grade 5 mods. I also fully expect they will "adjust" the ludicrous new blueprint ranges several times (much like the massive nerf/buff cycles we saw during Horizons) and I'd rather not convert my modules over only to have them nerfed shortly afterwards.

Basically the only thing I'm looking forward to in 3.0 is the Chieftan, which fortunately they did buff considerable due to 3.0 beta feedback and should be a excellent combat ship.

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

1. Oh so i can keep my existing gear, while others get even better modules and weapons than the previous god rolls right?
2. If you dont like it, then convert them to the new system.
3. But converting my G5 module that has thousands of rolls, will get me back to G4 and i would need EVEN MORE rolls which means -> my previous rolls + some more rolls. Why the convertion just cant put me in a perfect G5 in the new system, since if it wasnt for the rng (which is exactly what they wanna "fix") all those rolls would have got me the perfect G5 in the new system many times over?
4. Dude this is how it works. If you dont like it, keep your existing gear.
5. Goto 1.

See anything familiar in the above? What i cannot do, is keeping my obsolete gear when the entire game will change around me, the moment the update hits, IF i want to maintain the playstyle that i enjoy.

If still you have difficulty understanding the above, i really dont know if anything else can help your case. The number of hours and mouse clicks that i need to fully make the transition to the new system for all of my ships is soul crashing. I also have a small fleet in colonia of fully engineered ships but hey.. even that sounds minor in your perfect world right?

- No surprises for your doing overtime tomorrow. Since you accept whatever they throw at you, get ready for even more dude.

Just because someone doesn't perceive that the problem is as big is you do does not mean that they do not understand you.

Maybe perceptions will change after next week, maybe they will not. If the gains are real, then I don't see a problem with a few extra rolls to get them.

I understand your point, but I don't feel the same way.

 

[WR3ND]

I think people need to look at the greater good here. For those of us who had tested out the original Engineers beta, it's a huge relief with what we had to contend with and suggested at the time. Yes, it is different than what we've managed with so far, but overall I think it's a much better system.

There is only a competition here regarding the PVP meta, other than that, keeping whatever it is that you have now is a completely viable option, so it isn't a waste in that regard. The main reason for me to switch over some of my modules in the new system is because I don't want any inaccessible advantages over others, even though I'm not really into the PVP meta. I still like PVP being an option in the game.

I write if off as growing pains. The game is much better for it, in my opinion.

 

[Maro-Val]

Just because someone doesn't perceive that the problem is as big is you do does not mean that they do not understand you.

Maybe perceptions will change after next week, maybe they will not. If the gains are real, then I don't see a problem with a few extra rolls to get them.

I understand your point, but I don't feel the same way.

You dont see a problem with "a few extra rolls". That small phrase right there, where i know that you dont even get the size of the problem for some players, despite you stating the opposite. Players that are getting punished for just playing the game a lot. Yes thats our sin. We played a lot.
Since you understand my point, you shouldnt have a problem of me asking a fair conversion system. It was their fault introducing the rng in the first place, right?

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

You dont see a problem with "a few extra rolls". That small phrase right there, where i know that you dont even get the size of the problem for some players, despite you stating the opposite. Players that are getting punished for just playing the game a lot. Yes thats our sin. We played a lot.
Since you understand my point, you shouldnt have a problem of me asking a fair conversion system. It was their fault introducing the rng in the first place, right?

I didn't say anything about how you are or are not allowed to feel or to ask for. I understand a few extra rolls or any extra rolls will not be acceptable to some. I don't havae a problem with it.

You state how you feel and I say that I feel differently, and you imply that I'm not qualified to have an opinion since I do not play as often as you or can't understand the problem.

I can understand the problem, and for now at least, I don't have a problen with the proposed strategy.

For what it is worth, I too have played 'a lot' (though no doubt your definition of that will be different than mine) and have totaled just over 1000 hours in the past tweleve months when I started playing. I have engineered all modules on all ships, and have multiple G5 mods on the same modules for different loadouts, which include near god rolls for G5 DD for several thrusters and G5 long range mods on nine different drives (I list these separately because they are commonly given as examples of grindy mods).

For now, so long as the gains are there and are a given, I'm happy to roll them all again.

Then again, gathering mats has never seemed to be as much of a grind to me as with others, so maybe that has a lot to do with the differences of opinions regarding this issue.

 

[Bob Lighthouse]

I said want the best. Didnt day that i got it. I rolled hundreds and hundreds especially for drives and fsd and never got what i wanted.
Yes, probably easier on the new system to get the best of the best, but thats the reason we should forget that the hundreds of those previous G5 rolls will only get us... a perfect G4, right? Its laughable the way our rolls on the stupid rng system is going down to the trash, just because now will be easier to hit the top. Maybe i should say thanks mate?

And let me ask you something about your amazing fleet of 20 ships. You said SO MANY of your ships share C5 thrusters? Lol. Whats your fleet made of? Dolphins? Now i know why you like the new system. Try engineering a conda for pvp with all those internals and utillities and weapons before coming back with an opinion.

Lol, it was a poorly worded example that plays out across the fleet.
But it is just the Vulture and 2 Asps now that I think about it.
I also have 2 Condas, a Cutter, a Vette, a T-10, two FGS, FAS, FDL, two Pythons and more, all G5 where possible.
Many of them share modules, and since I always roll on more than one module, multiple ships benefit.
They are mostly hand-me-downs.
Better?

Now, how many DD5s over 140%?
None?

You can get that in a few minutes on Tuesday.

Myself, I'm going to be happy to finally get all the rolls I wanted, on every ship.
I'm going to buy many more ships now too, since getting multiple great modules is a given, instead of a fantasy.
There's no need to swap stuff around anymore, just buy another ship.

 

[Red Anders]

No surprises for your doing overtime tomorrow. Since you accept whatever they throw at you, get ready for even more dude.

It's voluntary overtime and I'm paid for it. We call it a job. Give one a try, they're fun.


Nobody gets a module that's even 1% better in any stat without doing some engineering after 3.0 arrives. You say 'whilst others get even better modules' like they're going to log in on Wednesday and find FDev have converted all their gear to grade 8 mithril-plated Cyberdyne mods or something, whilst you get a video of the entire dev team pointing at you and laughing.

If you already have a shedload of grade 5 modules you will only need to do at most the same amount of additional engineering as any other player to maximise your gear. You will do less than anybody who has grade 4 or lower mods now.

So to recap, you can do a bit more of what you already did. The additional amount is tiny relative to the 2.1 - 2.4 experience and the payoff is significant. The payoff vs time spent calculation is incomparably better for the time you will need to spend on it after 3.0 compared to that in 2.4.

Your mods do actually get better. It's not like we're going to be having to re-do stuff for the hell of it.

You seem to be concerned with the relative position rather than the absolute and you mentioned wanting to 'maintain the playstyle you enjoy'. So I assume PVP is a significant feature of your gameplay? Every significant thread about engineers was prompted by PVP focused players complaining about needing to do thousands of rolls to get God-mods and maintain parity. The entire reason it has been changed is to sate PVP focused players. There was a vast amount of feedback about the new stats from PVP-focused players in the beta threads with loads of tweaks being made as a result of it.

Seriously, I have no beef at all with PVP-focused players, I find the attitude towards them from some players on here to be flat-out nuts but this update has been literally built around their wants and needs. That's fine, there's no doubt that PVP is the aspect of the game where the benefits of engineering are most significant but FDev were never going to just throw a full set of top-rank mods at everybody. Compared to the average FDev timesink, the amount of time that's going to be needed to top off existing G5 mods to the new max is minimal. Your definition of getting shafted seems to be pretty unrealistic; if they really wanted to shaft you all they had to do was spend the last three months working on some PVE stuff and leave engineering as it was.

I'm no shill for FDev but they seem to have managed a decent trade-off here between their natural instinct that content must take six months or more to obtain and players who want to spend less time preparing and more time playing. Just my opinion, fair enough if you disagree.

Oh and just checking - I know this was a reply to someone else

You dont see a problem with "a few extra rolls". That small phrase right there, where i know that you dont even get the size of the problem for some players, despite you stating the opposite.

but just for the record I have 17 ships with G5 mods including a fully G5 engineered Corvette and Cutter, so I hope that qualifies me to have at least some elementary grasp of what I'm talking about.