Latest CG, the clearest example of P2W in ED to date?

[SteveWW57]

That "almost" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

The difference is likely to the tonnages delivered by those in say the top 25%. Below that I cannot see the new ship making a difference.

This CG should be thought of as a fun run. The serious people will have splashed out on the gear, but everyone will get a trophy for participating.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

I've just hit the top 50% of the CG. Woo hoo. In a type 9.

Seems you won

Has it changed my opinion of my OP? Not one whit! I've hauled over 7000t. If i had a PC i'd have hauled close to 10,000 tons. Over the coming weeks, that could be the difference between top 50% and to 25%.

And what is the difference in outcome? A few credits that pale in comparison to the profit you made in the trade.

 

[Nidoboros]

It's a competition

So you agree it is a competition.

It IS relevant because the OP was saying that someone who bought a Panther Clipper will have gained an advantage over someone who didn't. But the only thing it will help you do is make more credits faster, which is entirely meaningless when credits are so easy to come by. The advantage you get when trying to reach top 75% is so small as to be inconsequential.

... so you also agree there is a benefit that people who paid Arx for bigger ship get over people who didnt.

and it pretty much happens with automobiles every couple of years as well. Your old cars (ships) simply become classics.

The problem with this analogy is that some of these ships are hundred of years old. While a modern Honda Civic is different from a Honda Civic in the 90s, it's still Honda selling the same basic thing. Possibly even the same frame, just with new internals and safety standards. Certainly not totally different module layout.

So using that logic, we should be able to replace non-SCO ships with updated versions that do go zoomies efficiently.

I don't disagree that it's true. I disagree that it matters at all.

You spent a lot of pages insisting that it isn't P2W, so now that you suddenly go 'actually P2W isn't bad', it's  almost as if you agree that P2W is bad, but too much logic has been thrown your way to deny the whole situation any more... but you still want the shinies that come with the P2W, so suddenly it doesn't actually matter. Big oopsie.

We won't even know if the PC became more sought after the CG was announced ?

There is at least one player who has publicly said 'I wasn't going to buy it because the cargo capacity wasn't high enough, but these CG modules pushes it into the range I will spend cash on', so take that for what you will. We have a non-zero number of people admitting this CG specifically prompted them to throw cash at FDev.

 

[Greasetrap42]

The difference is likely to the tonnages delivered by those in say the top 25%. Below that I cannot see the new ship making a difference.

My Main Cmdr with Panther Clipper is in the 50% grouping and gained over a billion credits.

My Alt Cmdr only has a type 9 which I only brought comfortably into the 75% grouping then switched back to my Main Cmdr. Yes, the new ship is preferable and makes a difference. Its just better.

I didn't purchase the Panther Clipper for this CG. But I'm certainly going to use it. Easy credits for bulking up my alt's FC bank.

This CG should be thought of as a fun run. The serious people will have splashed out on the gear, but everyone will get a trophy for participating.

Hopefully everybody doing activities in ED are having fun.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Seems you won

And what is the difference in outcome? A few credits that pale in comparison to the profit you made in the trade.

The ease in which its done is the difference.

 

[WillFrog]

So you agree it is a competition.

By the strictest possible definition, I said, but not in any real sense.

so you also agree there is a benefit that people who paid Arx for bigger ship get over people who didnt

Sure.

You spent a lot of pages insisting that it isn't P2W, so now that you suddenly go 'actually P2W isn't bad'

No, I didn't. I took umbrage at the definition, but if that's how we're defining P2W, then fine, it's P2W.

it's  almost as if you agree that P2W is bad, but too much logic has been thrown your way to deny the whole situation any more... but you still want the shinies that come with the P2W, so suddenly it doesn't actually matter. Big oopsie.

I do NOT agree that P2W is bad. I really don't care in the slightest what other people are doing in the game. It makes no difference to me. I don't know why anyone is getting upset about it.

There is at least one player who has publicly said 'I wasn't going to buy it because the cargo capacity wasn't high enough, but these CG modules pushes it into the range I will spend cash on', so take that for what you will. We have a non-zero number of people admitting this CG specifically prompted them to throw cash at FDev.

Why is that a bad thing? FDev gets money. Player gets something they want. Win-win.

I'll once again say that it's not really a competition in any true sense, and you are not going to "win" anything, but if you want to define buying a ship for real money as P2W, there then follows this Received Gamer Wisdom that P2W is axiomatically bad, and I just don't see that as being the case. I buy a ship. I have fun flying it. It affects everyone else not at all. Where's the problem?

 

[Rat Catcher]

That "almost" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

No doubt the same top 10 haulers, in their Cutters / T-9's would be in the top 10...

And I get accused of spohistry... (I'm being polite)

 

[Greasetrap42]

Imagine a race where the rules are: go more than 100m over the course of a month. Go farther if you want. Go faster if you want. Or don't. Doesn't matter. It would only technically be a race.

You are describing most amateur sports over the course of a season. Lots of people just have fun. Some people don't pay attention to their season standings and just drink beer while others take it seriously and really want to win. Regardless playing football isn't 'technically a sport'. It is a sport. Where are you going with your analogy? I don't understand the relevance.

 

[SteveWW57]

You are describing most amateur sports over the course of a season. Lots of people just have fun. Some people don't pay attention to their season standings and just drink beer while others take it seriously and really want to win. Regardless playing football isn't 'technically a sport'. It is a sport. Where are you going with your analogy? I don't understand the relevance.

How do you stand on the issue of darts? Sport or not?

 

[Greasetrap42]

How do you stand on the issue of darts? Sport or not?

Not sure. Its a great drinking game. I'm not good at it but its fun.

 

[WillFrog]

You are describing most amateur sports over the course of a season. Lots of people just have fun. Some people don't pay attention to their season standings and just drink beer while others take it seriously and really want to win. Regardless playing football isn't 'technically a sport'. It is a sport. Where are you going with your analogy? I don't understand the relevance.

Even if you're not taking it seriously, a football game has a clearly defined winner and loser. This would be more like if everyone was declared the winner just for showing up.

 

[Calebe]

All this PTW I do not get. Sure with the new clipper mk2 you get more cargo space, but it will boil down to how much time do you have to play. You may haul more but have less time to play. You may play more, but listen to music as well and do other things as well. So tons per hour are less then someone that hauls less per trip but is is more diligent and not being distracted (and makes more trips per hours). So in the end the one who can haul less then the Panther MK2, can actually deliver more in that same hour time frame. As for play to win again I use the Imperial Cutter as my example, which requires the rank of Duke to even purchase (at 600 million credits before upgrades). So to get Duke you need to earn it playing the game so not everyone can have access to it, and so I have a advantage over those that never worried about gaining ranks for the Empire. So no Imperial Cutter and 784 tons of cargo space as I use. Not to mention it is a beautiful looking ship but handles like a whale. I love it none the less originally outfitted for mining but reequipped and stripped down for the community goal.

In any event what it boils down to is play time and a ship that can haul a lot of cargo, not necessarily the most, but the people who can play longer and enjoy hauling. Otherwise I can't see someone hauling 211,200 tons (currently) the lowest of the top 10 and a high of (currently) 342,700 tons.

To make the top 25% currently requires only 16,833 tons of cargo (a far cry from 211,200 tones for the top 10), easily doable by many cargo ships buyable in the game. If you want to make the top 10 you would need to be a dedicated player who enjoys hauling cargo and have a lot of time to make that top 10. The ship isn't the reason (it may help), but not the only reason. Play time > then hauling capacity. Just enjoy the game and if you feel that the MK2 is the only way to make the top 10, I think you are mistaken. Play time far out weighs cargo capacity in the long run, having both would be the winning combination, but even without the MK2, they would still make the top 10 if not the top spot by sheer play time and dedication.

I would be interested if anyone in the top 10 will post what ship they use and those closing in on the top 10 which they also use. For me top 25% is all I need. I made it on a Friday, Saturday (I only played form noon till 5PM )and a few hours on Sunday before leaving for a BBQ with my wife in the afternoon. It didn't take all that long honestly and I was doing other things during that time and not constantly playing.

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

If you're unwilling to compromise on the basic principle of "pay-2-win bad", then I think that ship left the docking bay years ago. Probably to go get some DLC-exclusive engineering done.

But if you've got a more nuanced take, then the details are important. Details like, "can I achieve the full module reward in this CG without needing to fly a ship like the Panther Clipper which is currently available for Arx only?"

Since the answer to that question is "yes", the question then turns to whether or not one is willing or able to spend time or money to achieve one's goals in game. Which is a personal decision that we can only really answer for ourselves. Some of us are poor in time, but have the money equivalent to a takeaway meal that it costs to get an Arx ship. Others are money-poor but have the time to go without for now and wait around for credits release, or to accumulate the required Arx through gameplay. I don't think either is objectively right or wrong.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Even if you're not taking it seriously, a football game has a clearly defined winner and loser. This would be more like if everyone was declared the winner just for showing up.

I don't understand where your sports season analogy is going. Sports have scores. ED has scores[1]. Both are games. You are simply reinforcing that ED is a game filled with measurable scores.



[1] For almost every activity. Combat Rankings, Trade Rankings, PvP rankings, CG rankings, PP, BGS, there are numbers and stats galore all over the game and made available through third party tools. Even credits are a form of a game score. These are all measurable outcomes from the game being played.

 

[WillFrog]

I don't understand where your sports season analogy is going. Sports have scores. ED has scores[1]. Both are games. You are simply reinforcing that ED is a game filled with measurable scores.



[1] For almost every activity. Combat Rankings, Trade Rankings, PvP rankings, CG rankings, PP, BGS, there are numbers and stats galore all over the game and made available through third party tools. Even credits are a form of a game score. These are all measurable outcomes from the game being played.

I didn't make a sports season analogy. I said it would be like a 100m "race" where all you had to do was cross that distance sometime within a month, and everybody who managed to do that was declared the winner. That is to say, it's technically some kind of competition because you can lose by not doing what is required, but what is required is laughably easy, and it doesn't matter if you walk or spend money on a bike or something.

A fairly torturous analogy, granted.

 

[Brieus]

Personally, I'm happy to pay ARX for ships HOWEVER I do think it might have a detrimental effect on new players as they begin the game. If a shiny new player can come in and buy arguably the best mid-tier ship fully kitted (T8 Stellar), then that new player will miss out on the very early accomplishments in the game. They won't have to scrape together credits to upgrade their sidey, modules, trade up on ships, etc and get out of the NOOB zone(s). They can just jump right into mid-game content. They will lose the very early (and gratifying) sense of accomplishment of getting yourself established in our galaxy. This could lead to an "Easy Come, Easy Go" perspective for new players who might then lose interest in the game play fairly quickly.

OMFGWTFBBQ!!!1ONE!!

People are having fun the wrong way! That must be stopped.

 

[Greasetrap42]

I didn't make a sports season analogy. I said it would be like a 100m "race" where all you had to do was cross that distance sometime within a month, and everybody who managed to do that was declared the winner.

I don't understand how this analogy applys to CGs. CGs have multiple ways of measuring scores including credits earned, player rankings, top 10, and overall #1. And most players are participating for rewards of some kind.

 

[WillFrog]

I don't understand how this analogy applys to CGs. CGs have multiple ways of measuring scores including credits earned, player rankings, top 10, and overall #1. And most players are participating for rewards of some kind.

Yes, but none of the scores matter to anyone but you. Nobody else can even see your score. And the only important line to get across (getting the extra cargo racks) is a super low one that's trivially achieved in any kind of decent hauling ship.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Yes, but none of the scores matter to anyone but you. Nobody else can even see your score.

Ok? I'm not seeing the relevance. In the context of the original post why does this matter?
The scores, stats, and rewards matter to the player, of course. That is how progress is measured. And in the case of CGs, how we can tell if we are getting close to receiving rewards. This all seems very obvious and way off topic.

And the only important line to get across (getting the extra cargo racks) is a super low one that's trivially achieved in any kind of decent hauling ship.

No,
That might be true for <50% of the participants.
The other > 50% of the participants are obviously interested in something more than just the extra cargo racks.
The top 25% are absolutely interested in something more than extra cargo racks.


Edit: Really bad grammar correction

 

[WillFrog]

Ok? I'm not seeing the relevance. In the context of the original post why does this matter?
The scores, stats, and rewards matter to the player, of course. That is how progress is measured. And in the case of CGs, how we can tell if we are getting close to receiving rewards. This all seems very obvious and way off topic.

It's only relevant because people keep insisting they're competing with one another when they're really not.

No,
That might be true for <50% of the participants.
The other > 50% of the participants are obviously interested in something more than just the extra cargo racks.
The top 25% are absolutely interested in something more than extra cargo racks.

Yes, credits, which you can earn plenty of during this CG without buying a Panther Clipper and also get any number of other ways. You can earn more in the same amount of time if you get a PC, but credits are so easy to come by that it hardly matters.

I'm just repeatedly stating the same things here, so I'm just going to stop at this point. I don't think we're ever going to come to any agreement.