The amount of time we've been kept in complete darkness is pretty disgusting.
Elite Dangerous | System Colonisation Beta Details & Feedback
- Thread starter Paul_Crowther
- Start date
Ones again I misplaced a station because I was not in the proper system map. Don't know why this happened but it did. I don't want this type of station in this system !
When will Fdev decide to implement a placement undo at least when nothing is constructed ??
How is it only possible that they ever released this colonization tool without enabling the undo ?
This is beyond my understanding.
When will Fdev decide to implement a placement undo at least when nothing is constructed ??
How is it only possible that they ever released this colonization tool without enabling the undo ?
This is beyond my understanding.
I did the math and it takes 388 IRL yrs to see any sort of actual profit off of a basic t2 station. This is how pathetic the incentives are.
We will all be corpses rotting in the ground before we see any sort of reward from Fdev for systems we barely get any sort of real benefit from in the first place. This is just here to milk Arx from people putting funny names on Funny fartbutt outpost at this point.
So will our children, and their children's children actually.
forums.frontier.co.uk
It takes 48 yrs alone to cover the colonization fee.
We will all be corpses rotting in the ground before we see any sort of reward from Fdev for systems we barely get any sort of real benefit from in the first place. This is just here to milk Arx from people putting funny names on Funny fartbutt outpost at this point.
So will our children, and their children's children actually.
Just How Unreasonably Bad Is the 10k Colony Stipend? Lets do Math And See. (Everyone You know and Love will be dead before You profit)
Extended subtitle: And so will their children. T2 Asteroid Base Requirements, And how many years it will take at 10k per week to turn a profit for the architect. This math assumes the colony ship didn't pay us back for the resources we provide. Basically if you didn't get a good deal on what...
It takes 48 yrs alone to cover the colonization fee.
Last edited:
But given how financially rewarding so many of the older activities are in the game who would be colonising for rewards or incentives?I did the math and it takes 388 IRL yrs to see any sort of actual profit off of a basic t2 station. This is how pathetic the incentives are.
We will all be corpses rotting in the ground before we see any sort of reward from Fdev for systems we barely get any sort of real benefit from in the first place. This is just here to milk Arx from people putting funny names on Funny fartbutt outpost at this point.
So will our children, and their children's children actually.
Just How Unreasonably Bad Is the 10k Colony Stipend? Lets do Math And See. (Everyone You know and Love will be dead before You profit)
Extended subtitle: And so will their children. T2 Asteroid Base Requirements, And how many years it will take at 10k per week to turn a profit for the architect. This math assumes the colony ship didn't pay us back for the resources we provide. Basically if you didn't get a good deal on what...
It takes 48 yrs alone to cover the colonization fee.
Well do you expect people to haul hundreds of thousands of tons of stuff for nothing?
If its a group activity what does it do for the group except put a list of names that isn't even visible unless people have a reason to dock at the station? Which there isn't, because the stations only output biowaste. You're entire squadrons hundreds of hours of efforts are given less meaning than the guy who was flying through the system and casually honked the star once, then left. So that's ruled out as a reason to colonize ever.
If payment remains the same per installation, we also will have an overarching issue of systems littered with t1 trash installations if you really just want to focus on making passive income.
Last edited:
Feedback specifically on resource balancing:
Construction costs should be reduced. It is quite difficult to develop systems because of the resources required. In theory, one can finish an outpost in 5-6 hours with non-stop hauling, but it can quickly become painful if it needs to be repeat multiple times to develop a system, and gets worse when constructing a larger station. The construction cost should be reduced by 40~50%. While I understand that Tier 3 stations are probably meant for large player groups, those should also receive cost reduction.
The architect reward should be increased. In terms of credit reward, a weekly in come of 10k cr per system point is too low. It should be at least tripled or even more. Apart from discounts, architects should receive more benefits from their systems as well, like reduced carrier upkeep if parked in the system, increased faction influence gain, etc. Currently, the reward architect received is simply too low and colonization can quickly become discouraging.
Construction costs should be reduced. It is quite difficult to develop systems because of the resources required. In theory, one can finish an outpost in 5-6 hours with non-stop hauling, but it can quickly become painful if it needs to be repeat multiple times to develop a system, and gets worse when constructing a larger station. The construction cost should be reduced by 40~50%. While I understand that Tier 3 stations are probably meant for large player groups, those should also receive cost reduction.
The architect reward should be increased. In terms of credit reward, a weekly in come of 10k cr per system point is too low. It should be at least tripled or even more. Apart from discounts, architects should receive more benefits from their systems as well, like reduced carrier upkeep if parked in the system, increased faction influence gain, etc. Currently, the reward architect received is simply too low and colonization can quickly become discouraging.
There is no need for additional credit income. I am doing colonization only for weeks now, with only few BGS missions and BH inbetween.
Am up 200m credits. The architect payment? I dont care. Could be 0, could be 100times as much as it is now. I wouldnt care.
Credits re meaningless in Elite. They are just a finite grind to complete, and then never have to worry about again. Just as Engineer levels. Or building a colony system. Or getting rank for Cutter or Corvette.
Anyone doing this for credit is wasting their time, it was never intended for that, plenty of other ways in the game to make huge amounts of dosh.
O7
The biggest waste of time is making a system like this that is particularly unrewarding. In an ideal world I'd like to see inflated numbers such that especially with a couple of systems it offsets Fleet Carrier expenses. Then at least it respects players time a bit more.
I disagree but then im not doing this for financial gain, its a huge amount of fun.
O7
I'm building orbitals and ground constructions because I like seeing a system come together properly and be as self-sufficient as possible. My current system will have one dedicated planet each to refinery, high-tech, agriculture and industry, possibly a smaller one for extraction, all with at least one T1 or bigger surface civilian port.
Last edited:
No drama. In all fairness, selling goods to the colonisation ship isn't the worst thing you can do but it's still light years off other things you can do for money. I think there is a world where we are both right o7
One thing I like about this is that it doesn’t just inflate the rewards yet again, with so much of the game providing credits in huge numbers quickly it is nice to see something that breaks about even.
I like I suspect the majority of FC owners will worry about the upkeep expenses in about ten years from now.
Truth is... it's lots of other things that reward too much.
But tbh... i get, what, 400k? per week from my very haphazard, casually made colonies that took me not long to build. Getting 160k per system for an outpost plus five t1 facilities.
Barring someone targeting each of my colonies and keeping them down at 0% happiness... that's permanent. Forever. For doing nothing else other than what I've done so far. It wouldn't take much to pump that up to 5m a week, which would cover my raw costs... give it a year and that'll easily be over 20-30m/week... maybe even 50m. Every week. For nothing else.
reduced carrier upkeep if parked in the system, now that is a great idea.
Ok, my feedback:
I would really love if the increase of T2 and T3 point requirements would be decoupled. That means, building T3 ports causes an increase in T3 construction points for subsequent T3 ports, but T2 construction points are not increased. Building an asteroid base increases the costs of T2 construction points for subsequent T2 ports, but doesn't increase the costs of any T3 ports.
Unfortunately, today, I consider spending T2 points for a Coriolis or an asteroid as a waste, as it increases the costs of T3 ports. To provide an example, if I plan my system and I consider having one asteroid base and 2-3 Coriolis stations, that would increase the costs of one T3 port to insane levels. Or, vice-versa, if I start with that T3 port, then the last T2 station requires an insane amount of T2 points. T2 points are hard to obtain as there is no T1 building that grants two T2 points, and I do not want to litter my ground slots with small settlements.
To underline this topic, T1 ground ports are very similar to Coriolis stations, consume no T2 points, offer place to more citizens... for a comparable amount of commodities to deliver. But they are not in orbit.
To conclude, I would really like to have T2 and T3 build points increase separately. T3 ports are insane by themselves, with their >200kt tonnage to be delivered. A third port already costs twelve T3 points, which, in turn, require lots of T2 points to be consumed before. So, it is very hard to save T2 points, and you need them for lots of valuable stuff, such as refinery hubs.
For me, with the current scheme, I'll end up with only one crown jewel T3 space port, not a single T2 space port, but as much T3 ground ports as possible to increase population. Then I already have that unavoidable flood of outposts littering the orbital slots that I don't care about as they offer no large landing pads and I need to... haul! I assume, that asteroid base I would love to have, which would fit nice in either the asteroid belt or one ring, won't gonna make it. In a system with more than 120 build slots.
o7 Strunzdesign
I would really love if the increase of T2 and T3 point requirements would be decoupled. That means, building T3 ports causes an increase in T3 construction points for subsequent T3 ports, but T2 construction points are not increased. Building an asteroid base increases the costs of T2 construction points for subsequent T2 ports, but doesn't increase the costs of any T3 ports.
Unfortunately, today, I consider spending T2 points for a Coriolis or an asteroid as a waste, as it increases the costs of T3 ports. To provide an example, if I plan my system and I consider having one asteroid base and 2-3 Coriolis stations, that would increase the costs of one T3 port to insane levels. Or, vice-versa, if I start with that T3 port, then the last T2 station requires an insane amount of T2 points. T2 points are hard to obtain as there is no T1 building that grants two T2 points, and I do not want to litter my ground slots with small settlements.
To underline this topic, T1 ground ports are very similar to Coriolis stations, consume no T2 points, offer place to more citizens... for a comparable amount of commodities to deliver. But they are not in orbit.
To conclude, I would really like to have T2 and T3 build points increase separately. T3 ports are insane by themselves, with their >200kt tonnage to be delivered. A third port already costs twelve T3 points, which, in turn, require lots of T2 points to be consumed before. So, it is very hard to save T2 points, and you need them for lots of valuable stuff, such as refinery hubs.
For me, with the current scheme, I'll end up with only one crown jewel T3 space port, not a single T2 space port, but as much T3 ground ports as possible to increase population. Then I already have that unavoidable flood of outposts littering the orbital slots that I don't care about as they offer no large landing pads and I need to... haul! I assume, that asteroid base I would love to have, which would fit nice in either the asteroid belt or one ring, won't gonna make it. In a system with more than 120 build slots.
o7 Strunzdesign
Last edited:
HIP 22824 AB 4 e
has an orbital tier 2 space station *(colony) *(just has bio waste and hydrogen fuel)
tier 1 planetary outpost high-tech *(the update Thursday to the server got the high-tech commodities to show up)
1 tier 2 refinery hub
the moon has a planetary construction site of tier 2 refinery hub.
what impact does the high-tech outpost have on the refinery hub and vise versa. and how do I get other commodities showing up on the station commodity market?
has an orbital tier 2 space station *(colony) *(just has bio waste and hydrogen fuel)
tier 1 planetary outpost high-tech *(the update Thursday to the server got the high-tech commodities to show up)
1 tier 2 refinery hub
the moon has a planetary construction site of tier 2 refinery hub.
what impact does the high-tech outpost have on the refinery hub and vise versa. and how do I get other commodities showing up on the station commodity market?
I can't build an outpost because the construction site flies away! Is this where to complain about such things? It's very annoying and seems to prevent construction entirely. Not a primary port luckily.
Also please reconsider Coriolis stations lacking shipyard upon construction, this is not consistent with the game before the update, since you could always expect Coriolis stations to have a shipyard.
Also please reconsider Coriolis stations lacking shipyard upon construction, this is not consistent with the game before the update, since you could always expect Coriolis stations to have a shipyard.