So you say exactly what I said. Everyone is engaged in colonization. But no one will carry goods to someone else's construction site. They will carry them to their own. What you said is exactly it. They carry them, so to speak, to "their" construction site. "Their" - in this case, it means that this site belongs to some group of players who have agreed to work together. If a player is not a member of any group, then no one will help him, of course.
Elite Dangerous | System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback
- Thread starter Paul_Crowther
- Start date
That's a terrible idea, because it means Colonisation adds nothing.
Now I'll entertain the idea of there needing to be more variety of activity to support colonisation... but to go out and do any other extant content just to hit a button and go "pay x credits to get it" is a fail- state for this update.
Why? FD pitched this around colonisation being a time- effort activity. It's introduced proper and much needed market demand creating interesting logistics issues to resolve (just look at CMMs and a insulating membranes... people who are more than capable of sourcing thousands at a time versus those who couldn't find money in a bank). The pitch here was to build colonies, not to just play the game as you were and throw credits at something[1]
Like i said elsewhere... can you imagine if the Thargoid war was won by clicking a button to say "donate credits to hurt the titan" and destroying one simply because you killed human pirates in stacked massacres for a day? Ridiculous. So why would that be a good choice for colonisation, when a community effort, commensurate to that to defeating Thargoids, is needed for building out new colonies?
Pay to skip is a terrible suggestion.
[1] notwithstanding credits being a completely valueless commodity in the game due to the economy being a write- off. The demand for commodities and the value proposition of sourcing them being a key step towards fixing that.
Then i guess you don't understand incentivising things, or people's motivations here.
Edit: i guess that comes with the bias of strongly solo play.
So colonization will remain an activity that requires effort. You need to earn this money first. I.e. spend effort. Everything is fair. But give me the opportunity to convert the activities that I like (the same income from hunting Thargoids) into colonizing systems. And stations will be expensive. Let's say 500 million for Coriolis and more than a billion for Orbis. So you will have to work anyway. We just need an alternative to boring hauling.
That's right. Elite has always been a solo game for me. 1 - 1984, 2 - Frontier 1993, first encounters 1995. They all provided me with my personal universe. That's how I prefer to see Dangerous. It's my personal Milky Way. That's why I want to see opportunities for solo play in the matter of colonization. The galaxy is big. 400 billion systems. There's enough space for everyone even if someone builds Orbis for money quickly. He still earned this money and spent effort on it. So the hardwork doesn't disappear anywhere.
Uhm, you do know you are discussing with someone that thinks credits have value? Someone that thinks 500 million or a billion is a lot. That a billion credits for an Orbis is a meaningful purchase. That doesn't understand that piddly credits for colonization would render the update useless. As I said much earlier, there is no reasonable basis for discussion.
The fact that there are methods of quick enrichment in the game is not the problem of the players. It is the problem of the game design. That is, the developers. I have never used any methods of quick farming of credits. Not Sothis, not Robigo, not opals. So yes. For me, credits matter. I have been playing since the fall beta of 2014 and I still do not have a Carrier.
If only the game's economy was functional, and value and effort were proportional.
They aren't. And it's why credits are a trash option.
That's true! I agree. That's a different matter.
Except it's not. You can't put a price on, say, 80 hours of hauling, when that 80 hours could be 100m credits or 100 billion credits, depending on the activity.
That's why credits for engineering materials isn't a thing, and it's why credits for "make colony do fast" shouldn't either.
But it's the core matter honestly.
Because either you build your colonization idea on a broken economy, i.e. doing an orbis for a sum like a billion, which would be trivially easy to obtain,
or you put in more realistic numbers, like perhaps 50-100 billion for an orbis, to get the same amount of hours doing platinum mapped mining.
edit ninjas
Why? The price should simply be high. The fact that there are ways to quickly farm credits in the game is not a problem for players, but a problem for developers. For example, I did not use such methods and therefore my capital is still spinning around 2 billion credits after 10 years of playing (with breaks, of course).
In looking at this post, the word 'feedback' comes to mind. Why is Fdev doing this 'beta'? they want Feedback, right? They 'did a thing' now they want to see if player happyness is + or - did Fdev get a <<<<< or >>>>>> score on creating such a new feature? for example, in the past, Fdev created Odyssey, the player feedback was <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< and many bad things happened.
Now they created Trailblazers, they got a >>>>>>>>>>> rating, they didn't know they were going to get that result, but it happened, then the system got unstable, as an unexpected side effect, so it suddenly went <<<< so they paused it, that giving them a <<< score. One might thought that score would be worse, but then they fixed it and it went >>>>> So, Feedback is important.
Fdev, you need feedback, folks are asking for the same thing, if we 'do a thing' did our status in the system go <<<<< or >>>>>? they wanted feedback when they 'did a thing' and we need the same thing.
We see this in other areas of the game, I 'do a thing' for a faction, I can see '<<<' or '>>>' in fact, many missions even tell how much or what item will change, Influence +++ or Rep+++ or we get money +++ or items +++ This is what this colonization feature lacks, we see what it 'could do' but we have no 'You are Here -> ' element. like we get with a lot of other systems. I shoot a ship, I see its shields drop, I get shot, my shields drop, I know that will happen, but how much? if I am getting shot, and my shields drop like a rock, I take action A, or I am getting shot, and my shields hardly move, I know I can take action B. Where is that for colonization?
I have finished my first station, and I see a lot of new things in the list to build with a lot of stats, but what is my current status? I built a refinery, it has X values, but what were the starting values? did it do what it said it was supposed to do, or did something unexpected affect it? I don't know, do you? That's the point, we need a 'You are here ->' just like what we get with factions and other in game features.
And I know you know the value of this, I can prove it, what's the title of this thread? oh, yea "System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback"
Imagine the complexity, of adding a feature, and engagement went drastically up or down, and no forums or posts, nor nothing to tell you what you did right or wrong, how hard would your work be just guessing thousands of players left, and you created a new feature you thought they would like, when the real reason is it was something very small that had a big impact that you could have easily fixed, but you didn't know it, and had drastic results.
My conclusion: This is not 'feature complete' yet, as its lacking a core element: feedback, so core that even frontier knows its importance by asking for feedback.
As a side note, documentation is missing, There is no documentation on the points system being used. That should be easy to add.
'Do a thing' and check what 'you are here ->' says. It may not give numbers, or exact values, but it can help made educated guesses, That's what Frontier has to deal with, they don't get a 'players happy points +10, Player is not 45% happy,' so do X to make player 60% happy, or lets try Y and now player is 20% happy, for them, it's more, are they yelling or screaming or fighting, the only actual value they get in the end in numbers is 'did player engagement go + or -' but by that time, that's the last effect stat they want to check, they want to know more before that happens, Just like we do before we invest more time being committed to a task.
What's good for the gander is good for this goose.
Thanks.
Ok, for the sake of the argument (although I utterly oppose that idea).
When Trailblazer was announced (I read about it rouglhy two weeks prior to release) one of my Chars with which I wanted participate in it was utterly broken, around 25 Mio in the bank and 3 Medium Ships.
Doing two weeks of intensive Exobio (I estimate ~60 hours gametime) I managed to scrape 7 BioCr to purchase and commision a Flight-Carrier and have some pocket money left for expenses. That gets to an average of 116 Mio Cr per hour (was good on finding Textonicas in newly discovered Systems).
Out of experience over the last 6 developed systems and hauling for that, I can confirm that it takes between 12 to 14 hours gametime to haul ~22 Kto of Mats.
So ~251 Kto Mats for an Ocellus divided by 22 times 14 hours times 116 Mio Cr makes a staggering 18.5 Billion Cr,
plus a 25% overhead for the logistics company and an FDev Tax of around 10% (for unwillingness to do it yourself) you come to a price for a bought Ocellus of 25,5 Bio Cr or, if Primary Port Construction plus the 25% Infrastructure Charge, 31,8 Bio Cr.
Good luck with that.
edit: and I cannot fathom the outrage if that would be introduced like that - first by a lot of Cdrs like my - since when we buy results in Elite (except bribing Feds and Imps for Rank), and the second - even larger group ".....thats much to expensive", not to mention all the newer Pilots with maybe 1-12 Month in their log "...well thats serving the old-timers only"
So, as I stated, I strongly oppose that idea
Last edited:
As I said, having ways to get rich quick is not a problem for players. It's a problem for developers. But even if these credits make colonization easy, it's not a big deal. There are 400 billion systems in the galaxy. Even if players colonize 1 million systems, it's not a problem. There's enough room for everyone.
It's not that terrible, if you need to get those money somewhere first. What is terrible is that we have many billons and have no where to spend them.
To fix it, FD first need to make a money sink first. Colonization is a perfect way to do this. If, for example, an outpost will cost 1 bln and Orbis will cost 5 billions (and 1 month to build by NPC) - in a few months pilots will spend their money (and will be happy having a couple of colonies).
Very strange opinion. Instead of fixing a few exploits allowing fast money, you prefer to define money as trash.
That's it. But why a month to build an NPCs? Let it be built in an hour. Why wait a month. The money has been invested. The labor has been applied in one form or another. Everything is ok.
Because you then homogenise around those "one quick trick"methods, because they become the only methods that makes sense to build a colony.
You agreed, credits have no value, so if you just "go high" there's zero sense to actually haul, or really, do anything else, because the opportunity cost is too great.
It also just magicks resources out of nowhere, ruining the demand on the markets created and removing a big source of player- driven markets.
If "high" is the answer, I'm certain other players would more than happily ship steel to be paid 100k/t to your nearby FC.
Oh i would love for it to be fixed.
I'm also sure FD like having customers, and what's necessary to fix the economy would likely leave it barren of players too... this goes all the way back to Nu- mining, hardened by FCs costing 5b credits. FD can't back out now, because they should have many years before now.
Road safety would be made infinitely better by having licenses needing an annual recertification via testing. Guaranteed the first government to do that wouldn't be in power much longer in most parts of the world... just because its what should be done, doesn't mean it's a good idea