ARX Ship Early Access Update

KnezBP

KnezBP
aRJay said:
You can only deploy one example of a ship you buy for Arx at a time. You can deploy that ship at any shipyard where you are present or at your own FC even if it doesn’t have a shipyard module.

Any module included with the Arx bought ship has to stay with the ship or be sold/deleted they cannot be stored or transferred to another ship, the modules can be engineered but that doesn’t change their transferability.

If the ship gets destroyed it can be rebought in the usual way, the cost will be based on any new modules added. If you don’t rebuy the ship or sell it you can deploy it at any shipyard as above where it will be as originally purchased for Arx.

Buying the ship for Arx allows you to buy further examples in game for credits while playing in Odyssey these ships will be treated just like any other ship bought in the game.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's basically what I was hoping. It would seem quite silly to not allow for credit purchases of modifiable ships but I wanted to double check.
 

vanFace

V
Jinx Chrome said:
What approach to keep ED's lights on - and perhaps expansion do you suggest when monetization through ships, ships kits and paint jobs is a flawed approach in your eyes? I can only think of a subscription model but would like to hear other suggestions.
Click to expand...
One idea of a model close to subscription is transaction tax. Imagine you have to pay a certain percentage of ARX for every credit you want to transfer by any means (buying ships/modules/ammo/fuel, getting payed for missions, trading, etc.). If you don't have the ARX, you can't complete the transaction. So if you run dry, you can technically still play the game, but effectively not progress any further. For starters they could balance the percentage and ARX earned so it cancels each other out (mostly), but for the future they could stop the free ARX and thus activate a full-blown subscription model.
 

aRJay

aRJay
vanFace said:
One idea of a model close to subscription is transaction tax. Imagine you have to pay a certain percentage of ARX for every credit you want to transfer by any means (buying ships/modules/ammo/fuel, getting payed for missions, trading, etc.). If you don't have the ARX, you can't complete the transaction. So if you run dry, you can technically still play the game, but effectively not progress any further. For starters they could balance the percentage and ARX earned so it cancels each other out (mostly), but for the future they could stop the free ARX and thus activate a full-blown subscription model.
Click to expand...
Sounds at least as obnoxious as a normal subscription model to me.
 

yianniv

yianniv
vanFace said:
One idea of a model close to subscription is transaction tax. Imagine you have to pay a certain percentage of ARX for every credit you want to transfer by any means (buying ships/modules/ammo/fuel, getting payed for missions, trading, etc.). If you don't have the ARX, you can't complete the transaction. So if you run dry, you can technically still play the game, but effectively not progress any further. For starters they could balance the percentage and ARX earned so it cancels each other out (mostly), but for the future they could stop the free ARX and thus activate a full-blown subscription model.
Click to expand...
Saying what I really think about your suggestions would probably get me banned, so I'll just say I don't like them.
 

Kimosabe_X

K
vanFace said:
One idea of a model close to subscription is transaction tax. Imagine you have to pay a certain percentage of ARX for every credit you want to transfer by any means (buying ships/modules/ammo/fuel, getting payed for missions, trading, etc.). If you don't have the ARX, you can't complete the transaction. So if you run dry, you can technically still play the game, but effectively not progress any further. For starters they could balance the percentage and ARX earned so it cancels each other out (mostly), but for the future they could stop the free ARX and thus activate a full-blown subscription model.
Click to expand...
In here the power of strange suggestions is huge... :yoda:


Oh and no thx to any kind of subscription model...


Even more if we can't have multiple commanders under one account (plus merging separate accounts together to achieve that...)
 

Rat Catcher

Rat Catcher
vanFace said:
One idea of a model close to subscription is transaction tax. Imagine you have to pay a certain percentage of ARX for every credit you want to transfer by any means (buying ships/modules/ammo/fuel, getting payed for missions, trading, etc.). If you don't have the ARX, you can't complete the transaction. So if you run dry, you can technically still play the game, but effectively not progress any further. For starters they could balance the percentage and ARX earned so it cancels each other out (mostly), but for the future they could stop the free ARX and thus activate a full-blown subscription model.
Click to expand...
Such an excellent suggestion!

Itis the perfect way to sunset the game, I'm surprised that FD have not thought of it themselves - "Hey, Boss... I have this great idea... We charge Arx for any action in the game, stop giving any away for playing, and force folk to spend £30 each month just for basic play! We'll be so rich we could hire a team to rival CIG!!!!"

I'm sure that you have limitless funds to commit to playing such a version of the game, why not buy yourself a billion Arx, just to help FD out?
 

vanFace

V
Nowhere did I write that this is what I want to see implemented or that FDEV should do it. It was merely in reply to Jinx's "I can only think of a subscription model". This is a thinkable (although nefarious) model, and also not the first time I've brought it up.
That it is not to your liking is understandable, but the state of my funds is certainly none of your business, dear pest control officer. Your sarcasm is entertaining, though, thanks for sharing.
 
Last edited:

vanFace

V
Rat Catcher said:
Perfect! The resident entertainers on the forum.
I had my cynical phase after the launch of Odyssey, then shrugged and got over it.
After a while you may even do the same!
Click to expand...
Nah, I find that funny. But I may borrow your sarcasm from time to time, if you don't mind.
 

Chatin Naidoo

Chatin Naidoo
Phil W said:
Greetings Commanders.

Alongside the launch of the Panther Clipper MK II on 22nd July, we will also be updating our ARX pricing structure for ships.

New ships will continue to launch in ARX Early Access, before arriving for in-game credits at a later date. You can find the full details here:

https://www.elitedangerous.com/news/arx-ship-early-access-update
Click to expand...
Please, tell them to not get greedy. This isn't star citizen, destiny or Halo.

ED is seeing the first resurgence of existing and new players in literally years from the new additions, but if they're just going to start copying other MCTs it's going to have the inverse effect. Given how many, many, other games have pushed MCTs so hard their literal playerbase has died from it.

It makes no sense to me to increase the cost of the ship given the previous releases were all the same cost, kits included. Maybe if it had been structured that way from the start it might make sense, but now it just seems like a cash grab because they can.

I might be cynical here, but having left games that stated "the shop will pay for future expansions and entirely optional!" only for them to only release content in the shop... Left others that pushed way too aggressively for cosmetics to the point hundreds of thousands of players were reduced to less than 2,000. I've seen and experienced this in the past and it makes me worry.

My opinion is to keep all real world pricing the same for any ship regardless of size.
Alternatively. They could let us earn more Arx per week than what they are. I can hit the Arx cap in a day and then I have to wait until the next cycle to earn more.

Meh.

Approximate time played 9W 5D 4H 22M
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom