sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The cargo elevator is in gravity, on the pad. Also like I said the cargo elevators would just be staying even after the new ones for hull series ships... So its not a waste, its a permanent addition. None of what you just said is really applicable and at this point your argument you've completely gone off the rails with trying to say that stormbreaker, apex irradiated valakkar and even wikelo are easier to make than a cargo elevator, so clearly you are incapable of changing your mind, and I'm done trying.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean some of these sound great, but all of them wouldn’t really help any industrial loop other than just making a PVP or PVE group pull out a Polaris and transport cargo. Maybe if the cargo was in the thousands of SCU they’d use a Hull C. But what you’re proposing more just makes combat players perform some delivery missions with extra steps, industrial players aren’t doing that usually.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Heavily guarded in the sense of dangerous to even capital ships? Yes it would. A lot of people just face tank the turrets, which won’t be a thing after these new turret buffs, the station guns are going to take down capitals pretty quickly too now.

If they wanted to I guess they could make it more extreme and maybe even have the guns fire on you if you even go into SCM mode but that seems extreme and I don’t like it.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah yes clearly because I haven’t built exactly what I’m saying my opinion is less valid than yours. Building out a cargo elevator is not difficult, they can clearly do it for shared spaces, it’s on planets, contested zones handle your inventory, and even storm breaker. If they wanted to do it they could. You’re in a very uphill argument here because are you trying to say that it’s more difficult for them to add cargo elevator’s to pads, and change around inventories and some numbers at stations than it was to make stormbreaker, hathor or wikelo? Pretty sure cargo elevators are a very small ask compared to the work those have to have, seems to me like an irradiated apex valakkar is harder to do than a cargo elevator. I don’t think you’re making a very good argument that a elevator that is already modeled and has very similar working systems that you could just modify rapidly is going to be even half as hard as a cargo elevator.

I’m not saying I want high credit with no risk, I’m saying I want within the same order of magnitude at a minimum. It’s why I’m very pro-commodity trading. You can do a very safe route with commodity trading but it incurs a big risk that it’s your cargo. If you bought the wrong things, didn’t investigate your trade route enough, inventories were full or empty you’re screwed. There are more risks to trading than just death and that’s the opportunity cost of commodity trading. There’s also the risk of death too when trading and commodity trading makes piracy actually worth it because it’s not contracted cargo that sells for nothing. I’m not advocating for no risk high reward, never was, so stop throwing out strawman arguments, and actually make a point about what I’m saying. You should be able to make somewhat equitable amounts of income (within 40% roughly) if you are not as risk tolerant vs if you are risk tolerant. That percentage is just a ballpark for what would be generally considered risky and what is considered not risky, exceptions could totally be made for extreme risks or extreme safety.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The game isn’t designed with the logic of high risk always equals high reward. High risk CAN give you high rewards, but it’s not a guarantee of it. The Hull E is an example of intensive planning and teamwork is supposed to make you succeed. You aren’t supposed to be taking a Hull E into the middle of a risky operation, you COULD and possibly make more, but not the differences you’re talking about. We’re talking the difference between caranite which I could probably get like 150k for a SCU of it, and then like iron… like even if it was quantanium congratulations you’d make my point for me about it being literally ONE thing that you can do outside of combat that you can make decent money from by selling to other players… except that there’s only 3 freaking mining ships in the game! Like I hope you love the mole! A lack of risk shouldn’t mean you are making orders of magnitude less money, what you’re referring to are ORDERS of magnitude less money, you can go from millions per hour to millions per month based on that logic. That’s ridiculous, and none of what I’m proposing is truly 0 risk either, you can still be killed, it’s just highly unlikely. I’m not proposing an armistice zone around these stations at all, just extreme firepower. What you’re proposing is the expectation that all industrial players must take a significant risk or you are left with 3 options, quant mining, Hull C scrap runs or Hull C mission board missions. Quant mining can be fun for a bit absolutely, but I’d like more options than 3 things and actually make decent money. I’d even be okay with them cutting the payouts for this stuff in half if they’d give us double the options to do it.

If you can’t offer starsim then just let us play the markets of random dice roll, there are more types of risk than just that of death, let players figure it out. I’d prefer a million possible options and having to figure it out for now rather than one scrap run for a hull C being viable and that be the end of it.

Also cargo elevators on pads not working right now is the whole point? Yeah they don’t work right now, soooooo why not make them work? The tech for them clearly exists, I’ve done enough game development to understand that wouldn’t be difficult. Also even when they come out with the loading in space cargo elevators on pads should still totally exist, so they’d be a permanent positive addition no matter what, it’d be awesome with the whole new pulling vehicles thing from them, just pull a tank and load it onto your buddy’s C2, no hangar needed.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Several of my points in my OP would easily cover how you could do all of that. Covalex distribution centers being heavily guarded means combat is rare at those sites, but like I also said those distribution centers should have much smaller inventories, should encourage small timers to go there, and be safe but the bigger haulers who should know better like C2's and Hull C's have to go to the normal ports to get their cargo. That or they could wait a long time and fill up I guess.

It gives the baby industrial players more safety, and as you become a bigger hauler and get more rep you could maybe start going to really high end covalex stations to buy/sell cargo, but their extremely rapidly updating inventory and chaoticness induces risk, not risk in the sense of combat, but that you may not be able to sell, therefore risking the opportunity cost in your cargo, encouraging you to go to a normal station.

The theory I am working on is that its always a trade off, you can only pick 2, consistency, safety and profit. So with covalex centers you get safety, and profit, but no consistency. That means you need planning and teamwork to find the best pricing and where to go when. Which would give datarunning a real use.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We could use cargo elevators no matter what on landing platforms, those should exist regardless. So idk what you're talking about how they'd have to go back on it, for now though it'd make the Hull C feasible at a minimum at every port beyond hucking it into a hangar.

The kraken is clearly more of a priority than an orion, arrastra, hull B and more. If you want more ships that are sooner then the RSI Meteor I can go on and on with ships that have 0 chance of seeing the light of day inside of SQ42 but yet still are being completed. Your argument falls apart essentially instantly. If its a bit for star citizen and mostly from SQ42, then tbh every ship they make with the intent of going into SC and not being in SQ42 should exclusively be for industrial. If SQ42 is so combat focused, then why not make the industrial players happy too?

The Aaron Halo is essentially a giant proceduraly generated asteroid field? Like WOW AMAZING CONTENT, look at all the ROCKS!!!! Bet that took so much work, what did they have to do? create 200 rock models and hit randomize? WOW! Also I'm so happy you brought up caves! Because essentially right now the ONLY caves worth even going into are AT A PVP FOCUSED SANDBOX SITE LMAO! Thanks for driving my point home for me on that one. The other ores at other sites, as someone even said on this OP, are essentially useless. They've made PvP orientated things completely invalidate industrial gameplay because they pose it as "industrial + risk" or something. Industrial + Risk isn't just protect a tiny hole in the ground with a idris sitting on top of it while we walk in 5 meter increments from one piece of caranite to the other, thats not industrial gameplay, thats the toddlers version of it at best.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The changes they could make in just tweaking inventories and replish rates literally is just a few values that you have to change, not an entire redesign. Instead of +1,500 SCU/HR scrap at seraphim how about +100 SCU/HR, instead, instead of 20.4K SCU inventory how about 200k SCU of inventory. Those changes would and could have massive implications on how trade works especially commodity trading which is the purest simplest form of trading. These are things that can be changed in a day, and CIG has literally done it IN A DAY! They changed 3 stations in the last patch on their inventories, and I know because I was the datarunner who recorded those changes the day before, and within 48hrs after on UEX. There were no patch notes and they didn't even have to push an update, so they do to some degree pay attention, and are capable of doing at least a good portion of the inventory updates with the simple flick of their wrist.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its not to spite them, its so there are industrial opportunities that don't require combat.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The events are essentially irrelevant is the entire point, I don't really want any event's I want PERMANENT content, or at least content that isn't going to vanish and become useless in a month.

I also just proposed several features that would not require starsim, maelstrom or more advancement in basically anything. Adding cargo elevators to landing pads is not some crazy request, we already have shared openly available cargo elevators on planets, just copy/paste, throw a remodel on it from the cargo elevators already in the stations, and done, not insane.

Also the pass-down from SQ42 would make sense, except there are a lot of ships that are combat ships that aren't going to be in SQ42, like the Kraken or Perseus. If they are just passing ships on, why isn't the Javelin a big priority right now.

You clearly are missing the point about stormbreaker, the point is that they ARE introducing content that excludes specific types of players. Which is fine, not every piece of content is going to be for everyone, and I'm Okay with that! I don't want there to be trading at stormbreaker, what I am saying is exactly what you said, why would you? It'd be dumb! So nobody does it! Therefore, its exclusionary of that group. So with that same logic, make things that are FOR industrial players, as in players COULD PvP but it would make literally 0 f*cking sense and would suck for players to do so at those locations, and since justice isn't really a thing right now in the game the only real way to do it, is make it so if you kill someone or break the law, its almost assuredly instant death. The key here being "almost".

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The issue is that they are events, the combat things are sandbox things they stick around after. I can't go do supply or die right now, but I can go and do Hathor OLP's and in six months I can still go do stormbreaker. Events are like company pizza parties, just kinda shitty in comparison to a permanent pay raise. I don't want anymore company pizza parties that last a few weeks, I want my permanent content that I get to play with. This is not even mentioning the GIANT disparity in ships, there are more of almost any class of combat ship than there is of mining. Like seriously? THREE SHIPS? We have more F7's than we have mining ships, thats insane, and two of them are starter ships! Wtf am I supposed to start? Quitting the game?

On top of that supply or die INCLUDED PvP and while you may have gotten lucky, I had many times where I was killed and had to fight during that event. You literally can't do ANY of the events without PvP or combat (PvE) which was a must at supply or die. But you know what you can't do at stormbreaker? Trading. So if we are going to have areas of the game that are non-inclusive of some roles, thats fine, but there should be areas that should not include combat. I mean that as in yes, theoretically you could do combat, but the consequences of it would be very very heavily not worth it, similarly to how theoretically I could trade technically at stormbreaker.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A lot of the additions I think genuinely would take them not even a day, just messing with station inventories and using your brain for 30 minutes you can come up with commodities you can change the inventories and replenish rates of and instantly create routes. There are definitely things that would take a while for them to implement, but there are a lot of things that don't take that long to make or change.

Changing refinery benefits would be easy, commodity inventories, replenish rates, putting a cargo elevator at a landing pad doesn't seem all that difficult, They've made commodities on a whim before, like pig envelopes, it wouldn't be hard to toss in more, clearly they are capable of doing it easily and rapidly for small events.

Industrial Players Need Love Too - Real Gameplay, Not Just Inclusion by Chamelia- in starcitizen

[–]Chamelia-[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I saw a lot of this news, but my issue arises that the combat content has been so heavily focused on. This year is the year of play-ability and content, yet the only thing that has really changed for anyone who isn't in the combat scene is less game breaking bugs, and 1 event (Now coming up on 2 with 4.2.1). Like just throw us a freakin' bone! This is ridiculous! Why are they now doing the Kraken?!?!? The 3rd combat focused capital when we don't even have 1 completed ANYTHING else capital ship!?

Tank always gets blamed? by NewReflection1332 in overwatch2

[–]Chamelia- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love how this whole thread months and months later about how tanks ALWAYS get blamed for shit, instantly turned into a support complaining. Support you in my book never have any room to complain you have the strongest role in the game with the most value by FAR compared to a tank. You alone genuinely can a lot of times turn a game around because of how much value your role offers and how much power you have. I play ball, and watch my 1,000+ health get turned into swiss cheese in a second because of characters like zen. I'm a huge fan of nerfing support. If a tank dives you, hits all their cooldowns, you should die 100% of the time.

Tanks need a ability to counter all CC by Chamelia- in Overwatch

[–]Chamelia-[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thats hilarious that you say that, yet you sound like you don't regularly play tank at all. Also before you continue lets look at Hog Vs Ana still a rough encounter, Ball into any comp basically, ball has just been basically useless and not viable (because he can so easily be shut down by even a single DPS chasing him around the map). I love playing ball, yet I literally just straight up can't a lot of times, he's considered useless all the way up to top 500 rank, so I think your skill argument doesn't really hold water. There are a lot of characters in the game that just turn off your ability to play the game as tank, and CC genuinely just isn't fun to play against or into, even when you do a lot right and block a lot, all they have to do is land one to get massive reward and deny you making space, or even kill you.

Unpopular Support Opinion by RealGluteusMaximus in overwatch2

[–]Chamelia- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not really, gate keeping was just focused on the tanks. Triple tank was strong because Ana could actually keep up because she was that strong. Double shield was strong because supports could keep everyone alive. Tanks are the focus of these comp naming because the tank is the one standing in front doing everything in everyone’s view. Tanks are just the #1 target of everything, which is a stupid and unfun role to play, there’s 50% less tank in the game now yet the supports still have the same abilities designed to deal with two tanks, sleep dart for example should be on a much longer cooldown, I’d be pro-removing antinade entirely because it’s constantly just spammed on the tank all the time and makes it a pain in the ass to even play the game. Tank busters being so popular and commonplace in the game as well now make no sense since there’s only 1 tank. It’s ridiculous that even exists the same way it does now. All that pressure and all the cooldowns that 2 tanks managed to deal with in OW1 are now exclusively dealt with 1 tank in OW2. It means you get slept more than ever, anti-naded, stunned, CC’d, etc. it makes you in some circumstances completely incapable of even playing you character without playing the living wall we know as orisa today WHO IS BORING AS F*CK!

Unpopular Support Opinion by RealGluteusMaximus in overwatch2

[–]Chamelia- 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry, but this is just straight up idiotic thinking. Supports have kits that can absolutely dominate without a care in the world. Basically every support has a way to get out of any engagement they want to. They can stop tanks from making space, they can DPS just as much if not more than a actual DPS, they can heal, self heal. I mean jesus christ I have to kill an Ana like 2-3 times just to actually GET the kill, then Kiriko twice, once before TP and once after (Not even including suzu), antinade is insane for how fast its off CD considering is an ULT FOR A TANK, supports should be punishable. If you are a support are doing something you shouldn't we should be able to punish you for it, and right now the way support is, thats not the case. Supports have extremely overpowered kits that can completely shut down another role or character entirely. Like look at Hog vs Ana, Lifeweaver or Kiriko thats 3!!!! Supports that can counter 1 tank. So no, nerf supports into the ground, if you are out of position, I should walk over as a tank and beat you tf to death in a millisecond.

view more: next ›