Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'missionsystem'.
So... The biggest growing problem in DU right now is the fact that NQ has done little to properly nerf warping. This is NOT a call to make warping more expensive... This is more of a signal to NQ to either reduce the safezone of planets, or make warpdrives drop you off about 5-10 su outside of a planet's safezone that's NOT inside the Thades, Alioth, Madius bubble There's been a growing number of complaints about how warpdrives really kill the game in many respects even though it's a huge time-saver, it completely removes the risk factor from the game. In addition, since there's no way to interdict someone and force them out of warp, this really gives no reason for PVP to take place naturally in game. Suggestion: The system might be nice.. however some suggestions for the NPC generated missions: There needs to be two types of missions Warp capable - Allows a person to warp the package without fear of the mission being terminated The shorter the distance, the less quanta a person will make The shorter the distance, the less valuable the package The greater the distance, the more valuable the package The greater the distance, the more costly it will be to ship/warp (meaning the weight will be increased... thus you add balance to the game) Non-Warp Capable - If the hauler warps the package from one location to another the mission is automatically terminated BY DEFAULT these missions are exponentially more valuable than warp capable missions on a factor of 3 or 4 The shorter the distance, the less quanta a person will make The shorter the distance, the less valuable the package The greater the distance, the more valuable the package The greater the distance, the more costly it will be to ship/warp (meaning the weight will be increased... thus you add balance to the game) NPC generated missions need to be more plentiful The community is not lively or active enough to support hundreds or thousands of available missions.
In order to build trust between actors, NQ intends to add a 5-star rating system, but a rating system like this can be abused as well. I can give a player a poor rating and impact their ability to play the game regardless of their performance with respect to the mission itself. However, there are ways to formally rate a player's mission performance. NQ should have the ability to track when or whether certain mission-related events occur. (I am focusing on hauling missions here, but the principle of formal performance metrics is not limited to this scope) A few possible metrics for mission performance: Was the mission completed successfully? How quickly was the mission completed? (Could be elapsed time or presented as a percentage of the total time allotted) If the mission failed, why? Package was destroyed Package was opened by the player <-- MOST IMPORTANT The mission timed out The destination container was destroyed Any mission system should have some sort of indication of whether or not a mission failed because the hauler opened the package before delivery. The most important information to the player writing a hauling mission is whether or not the hauler will just steal the freight. Formal detail can be included in the rating system fairly easily, and it allows for a greater degree of trust between actors than would otherwise be possible, increasing the proportion of players who are willing to create missions and lowering the necessary collateral. Addendum: There are two major purposes to a rating system: To establish trust / penalize/disqualify untrustworthy players (e.g. did the player steal the payload) To distinguish performance between trustworthy players (e.g. how quickly a haul was delivered) Ideally, the rating system would segregate these two objectives. There is a problem when a player is rated poorly because they took a long time to respond to messages or perhaps they were rude in communications, but when another mission writer sees this bad review, he wrongly presumes the hauler is not trustworthy.
So we know that with the next patch that NQ is going to add in the mission system. However, after giving it some thought NQ, I feel, needs to understand the environment the game is currently in. With the onset of the .23 patch they've added in more sinks and almost no faucets. So in the end, the economy is in the crapper and no one is able to make much money unless you're a market guru and know how to capitalize. However, even then barely anyone will be interested in engaging in the game because they all feel they have to mine in order to do anything. Or Join a large org to get anywhere. When adding in the mission system, the way you can help the community is to add a balance to it by having Bots auto-gen missions for people to engage in. The current status of the community, barely anyone is in a realistic position to generate meaningful missions and honestly it's on NQ to create a solid foundation of plentiful missions that the community can at least start off at. Then eventually make their own when the community is thriving again. Adding in this new feature without a foundation for the community to start off at will only lead to the mission system being identified as another sync and barely a faucet for anyone else. These missions need to be plentiful in number so EVERYONE has a chance to at least grow individually or as an org. So as far as turning this ship around that's a SOLID way NQ can do it. PLEASE DON'T LET THIS POST FALL ON DEAF EARS!!!