-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
A possible workaround for the story missions would be to simply travel to where the story mission is via the star map before taking the contract, right?
It has the disadvantage of paying for the travel, obviously, but it really isn't a whole lot of money.
It has the disadvantage of paying for the travel, obviously, but it really isn't a whole lot of money.
I think this would be better if it mixed in deployment contracts.
For the "breadcrumb" missions, I think some of them could be more along the lines of "we'd like you to do a series of missions for us in X system, and we'll pay for you to get here", and some of them could be "there's a rumor that such and such is going on in X system, probably lots of good jobs, lets travel there".
The one sort of mission that really makes me scratch my head in vanilla is the "this thing is happening right now we need your help" -- that you need 20 days of travel to reach.
For the "breadcrumb" missions, I think some of them could be more along the lines of "we'd like you to do a series of missions for us in X system, and we'll pay for you to get here", and some of them could be "there's a rumor that such and such is going on in X system, probably lots of good jobs, lets travel there".
The one sort of mission that really makes me scratch my head in vanilla is the "this thing is happening right now we need your help" -- that you need 20 days of travel to reach.
Great mod! But sometime deployments seem a bit long, plenty of reasons to want to leave early.
A few suggestions:
1. Rep Loss for Cancelling Deployment based on time served - deployments can be rough, one bad battle and some bad RNG on the mission timings (several in a row), can lead to disaster. Plus the new armor repair and fatigue rules will require like a company of mechs - of all the same tonnage.
Leaving at the beginning of the deployment should be harsh, but leaving towards the end shouldn’t be so bad. You’ve done a lot of work for your employer, so they will understand. I suggest a range of Rep Loss from 100% for leaving deployment immediately, to 25% of the max, if leaving just before deployment ends.
2. Reimburse employer for fraction of month left, if you leave deployment - if you leave early, you have to pay back the remaining amount of deployment fee for the month. Leave 20 days into which ever month the deployment is on, you have to reimburse them 33% of monthly deployment salary. Leave 10 days into it, 66%..etc.
3. Bonus - there should be a Deployment Bonus if all missions are completed with all objectives in every mission. Partial Bonus (25%) if 50% of missions had all objectives completed. This incentivizes the player to stay all the way through, and to add risk by trying to get every objective on every mission.
A few suggestions:
1. Rep Loss for Cancelling Deployment based on time served - deployments can be rough, one bad battle and some bad RNG on the mission timings (several in a row), can lead to disaster. Plus the new armor repair and fatigue rules will require like a company of mechs - of all the same tonnage.
Leaving at the beginning of the deployment should be harsh, but leaving towards the end shouldn’t be so bad. You’ve done a lot of work for your employer, so they will understand. I suggest a range of Rep Loss from 100% for leaving deployment immediately, to 25% of the max, if leaving just before deployment ends.
2. Reimburse employer for fraction of month left, if you leave deployment - if you leave early, you have to pay back the remaining amount of deployment fee for the month. Leave 20 days into which ever month the deployment is on, you have to reimburse them 33% of monthly deployment salary. Leave 10 days into it, 66%..etc.
3. Bonus - there should be a Deployment Bonus if all missions are completed with all objectives in every mission. Partial Bonus (25%) if 50% of missions had all objectives completed. This incentivizes the player to stay all the way through, and to add risk by trying to get every objective on every mission.
I think the idea is to give you reasons to field a Company of mechs vs just a lance and a spare or two. If the mod (even better coupled with CCC) makes you use all those mech bays on the Argo then it is doing its job, imo.
They hired you because they had an issue which needed a Merc company to resolve. Leaving early puts them in a horrible spot. Think about it this way, you hire a contractor to build you a house. They spend two months on the job and then decided that they have better things to do, and the house is only half done -- how understanding would you be?
I am somewhat okay with an exit penalty. but it shouldn't be a linear progression. If anything you should need to forfeit almost all or maybe 100% of what was paid (you at least got salvage) if you cut out early. But if you pay the fee, it could reduce the rep hit (but there still should be a rep hit.. you didn't do what you signed up for after all)
This is a cool idea -- I like it,
If I hired a contractor for a 6 month contract, and I had to wait 2 months for them to arrive and setup, I’d be far more pissed if they cancelled on the 2nd day after doing 1% of the work vs if they cancelled on the 178th day after doing 99% of the work. I’m just saying there should be a variable amount of rep loss if cancelling, and the base rep loss should be even higher.
Paying back 5 months of payments because you quit in the 6th month? Who would be stupid to sign a contract with that. But some exit financial penalty is required, at minimum you need to give the money back for the rest of the month. If you quit in the last month, but the day after you were paid, that money should be returned. Or change it such that a 30 day timer pops to pay you at the end of each 30 days, rather than timing it with your monthly expense report.
Well, after doing several deployments with even with the new armor repair mod, I certainly didn’t need 2-3 lances of mechs. Deployments is very cool, but doesn’t achieve that necessity IMO. I needed backup scouts and front line mechs, my 2 direct firesupport were either untouched or required 1 day of repairs if occasional taking damage. Unfortunately it all came to RNG on how quick the next mission appears. More balance perhaps is needed, and maybe the new reduced difficulty on deployments made it too easy.
I really think the only way to ensure to require you to have 2-3 fulllances is multimissions. But Morph isn’t working on that while infinite loading problems exist (hasn’t happened to be in 200 missions now however). But even with multimissions, armor repair, and pilot fatigue, you could reuse mechs which were not damaged which defeats the purpose of trying to simulate 2-3 simultaneous missions.
There needs to be a new mod to complement all of this. ‘Post Mission Maintenace’ - it can be assumed the maintenance time on a mech is accounted for while being repaired (with armor repair, scouts and front line will need ‘down time’ after every mission). But for mechs that constantly take no damage, they need to have downtime at some point. Not sure of what solution can or should be put into place. 1 day of maintenance after every mission? Sounds a bit harsh, 6 hours would be a bit better but the game doesn’t operate in hours. Maybe strip off internal structure from the mech to simulate wear and tear. Sure you can use the mech without performing maintenance but higher chance of death or limb loss. But that risk is still low if that mech never gets hit anyways. Perhaps making 1 random weapon go Crit after each mission. The more use it gets prior to maintenace, the more it falls apart and less useful. You can go 2-3 missions if you want, or perform maintenance after every mission. This would prevent you from re-using that same mechs in a future multimission mod and require more ‘redundant’ mechs during deployments.
Is anyone still having issues w/ story campaign? Or has that issue been fixed? I’m looking at starting a new campaign, and would love to use this mod!
It still has the issue. What I did was prior to any campaign missions, log out and set the mod to 'false', do the campaign mission and then reset it to 'true'
Its a pain, but not too bad if you time it around your normal playtime windows anyways.
Interesting. I haven't had an issues yet although this time through I have only got as far as the mission where you get given the bigger ship. I did also start the campaign without the merc deployment mod (had not found it at that time) but with the company commander mod installed and then added merc deployment later on. Does the issue start to kick in later in the campaign or should I have seen it from the start? I have only taken the one deployment so far, immediately after the last campaign mission and on the same planet. It was a 6 month one and I am about to complete it.
Like i said in my eyes i assumed this fixed, but since people still claim its broken i guess it is.
The issue I had was not that it didn't work, but that the payout was astronomical as it was multiplying it like a deployment vs a stand-alone mission. So, yes it would work but it would break the economy unless it was disabled.
That being said, my last test was a week ago or so and it was on the last missions of the campaign, I'll try to get online later tonight with some early game missions and report back after a more thorough test.
That being said, my last test was a week ago or so and it was on the last missions of the campaign, I'll try to get online later tonight with some early game missions and report back after a more thorough test.
Oh, is that so? I thought the interactions with the story missions were much larger than just a cost multiplier. I'm really interested to know if that's the only issue. If so, I might be able to fix that and put it in my Mod Pack.
Hmm, I thought some more about this. If this really is the only issue with missions, then the easiest solution is just to scale down the mission payout for story missions if this mod is installed. That's just some simple json edits to milestones.
Got some time to test tonight. I first verified that I am on the latest versions on both CCC (1.3.11) and Deployments (July 16th version) . Modtech was also verified to be the latest version.
I loaded up an old save that was just prior to traveling to Coromodir for the Locura mission. The mission report says that the reward is ~200 million C-bills (same as before).
I am running the mission now to see if it is a just a display error -- update to be forthcoming shortly.
I loaded up an old save that was just prior to traveling to Coromodir for the Locura mission. The mission report says that the reward is ~200 million C-bills (same as before).
I am running the mission now to see if it is a just a display error -- update to be forthcoming shortly.
Pre-drop mission summary seems to be working properly though.. now Locura is only paying out 3 million which is in line with what it should be:
Mission conclusion -- a 2.9 Million C-bill payout. It looks like the deployments mod is working fine with the campaign except for a display error when you decide to travel to it.
As far as I can tell all functionality is fine, just a display error that is easily overlooked
As far as I can tell all functionality is fine, just a display error that is easily overlooked