I really don't like any sort of world scaling to player. It's always immersion-breaking. Dumbest example of this was TES Oblivion: you are level 1? - Rats everywhere! Level 20 ? - Trolls everywhere!... Bounties in starsector follow overall same principle, though with wider range of outcomes.
You are lowly single frigate captain? Behave like one! Hide from scary big fleets, smuggle, seek appropriate challenges in large sandbox rather have game generate only them. Game may highlight threat levels of missions/fleets/areas/etc, but it should be always up to player to decide to challenge them anyway.
Heh, I can't agree with that more
. I greatly disliked TES: Oblivion's scaling just as much as you, it seems, and it
really ruined the game for me. Starsector's bounties don't feel that bad to me. Anyway, Oblivion-esque scaling- in general- was not what I was going for, but I definitely get the concern. I think pirate ambushes/other threats to "pre-determined trade convoy targets" (aka the player on a trade mission) would warrant an appropriately boasting-level optimistic rather than decisively overwhelming- "response strength" from pirates/other hazards due to their nature as having your travel/escort information upfront. So scaling is very specific in context in this regard. It was intended to be a suggestion to give small fleets direct roles in more missions since general mission scaling tends to require larger fleets from repeated completion. Good point, though!
I'm also wanting to preserve the player's choice of composition, so I agree with the large sandbox aspect in general- it adds a lot to replay-ability and for that I like the concept a lot. My intention wasn't to take this part away, if that was the concern. I would, subjectively, like to try and get away from the idea that implementing progression gates kills the sandbox feel, though. I don't think it has to, at least. I could be wrong, but that's my take on it.
Dynamic, as in faction doing their own things - waging wars, expanding, building up infrastructure, etc. Not just formally declaring war/peace like now without any real consequences. Or pirates behaving like ones, rather than combination of zombie horde and bounty pinatas waiting to be looted.
Missions/bounties/etc not generated simply because player needs something to do of X difficulty, but due to current state of simulation. Of course, in sufficient number that player is likely to find ones he can do with current fleet at any point.
In terms of mission generation based on simulation state, 'Drox Operative' was quite a good example (if you were willing to accept actual combat mechanics being not very good).
Oh ok, I see what you mean. Well, it's not necessarily my preference for dev work, but I understand the desire for those kinds of mechanics in general. It's not that I don't want these things too, to be sure (Slightly off topic: Doesn't Nexerelin do some of these things? This doesn't help the unmodded new player but is a consideration as far as available content is concerned), but more that the difficulty state early on cannot, by the simulation's nature of being dynamic and variable, result in a calculable determination of difficulty for early game. The game could be difficult to learn in some circumstances because it's somewhat random as such a simulation should be- or therefore it's too predictable. The gates act as an ease of entrance into the simulation to increase the overall available audience of gamers and their general tolerance levels regarding said difficulty spikes. That's the idea, anyway.
The sort of dynamic simulation you're referring to, in my mind, would be a mid-late game mechanic to me (so debatable difficulty gate 3-4)- because it requires experienced knowledge of the simulation for the player to be able to interact with it effectively without a relatively steep learning curve or, worse, a predictable enough behavior to be manageable for a new player. The gates are proposed with the intention to give that new player experience in a controlled and therefore balance-able way. Then, greater difficulty levels can provide greater challenge without the worry of RNG causing an over-percentage of difficulty spikes. Experienced players could theoretically opt-in to as much complexity/difficulty as they want relatively quickly.