In theory that is true of missions but... in practice it really isn't working that well
besides feds can't rank up past the maelstrom mission and empire ranking is just.. borked beyond compare.
Patch Notes Update Elite: Dangerous 1.02 change log
- Thread starter Edward Lewis
- Start date
- Status
In theory that is true of missions but... in practice it really isn't working that well
besides feds can't rank up past the maelstrom mission and empire ranking is just.. borked beyond compare.Just adding in my 2 cents here- I'm seriously disappointed to see this change regarding rare goods. I just discovered this as a means to start making some good profits in my Cobra and begin making some real progress towards the many upgrades that are available. The higher end ships still seem a really long way off and I don't feel like having to wait for an hour or so hopping around a few clustered stations stocking up rares before making a long distance journey was a terrible way to play. Now I just don't see the point of it, and I'm back to other less profitable ways of going forward. It feels like the only way to move forward in this game is through boring, painful grinding.. I was having a lot of fun making that long risky journey, exploring new systems, avoiding interdictions, getting nearly roasted by the sun with some fuel scooping.
Maybe they could at least require you to leave the system and come back to get a restock, and cluster more of the rare goods systems near to each other? At least then you avoid people camping out and doing AFK trading.
Maybe they could at least require you to leave the system and come back to get a restock, and cluster more of the rare goods systems near to each other? At least then you avoid people camping out and doing AFK trading.
Michael Brookes
Game Director
Indeed, although there is an issue with the QAI trading that's making the system harder to read than it should be. We're currently looking into this.
Michael
Ed, seems like the devs were a little overambicious in "fixing" rare trading.
(I don't know what needed to be fixed, as it seemed to work like intended in 1.01.)
Now stations have NO SUPPLY at all.
Maybe someone could have a look at this?
You have 76 in your cargo. More won't show up in station for you until you get rid of them.
Yup, and it will keep happening. Are we going to have rages every time? This is perfectly natural for an evolving game. My only negative here is that they fail to communicate with the community properly about changes and major issues (Ie: connection issues etc), but regarding that i just shrug and get on with playing.
Really, if you were going to nerf the profitability, then it should have been a reduction in the peak sale value of each rare by at most 25%.
I would rather be able to actually buy some stock and then trapes half-way across the galaxy for a reduced profit, than not be able to buy any of the stock at all. As far as I am concerned, what has just happened is not a reduction in profitability, but a effectively a removal of the mechanic. Who is going to plod 150-200 ly with a cargo of 10 and make 100,000 creds when you can fill your hold with local stock and make the same by going one system over?
The most fun I have had trading, so far, was plotting massive courses across known space, often getting to dead ends with my limited jump range, fuel-scooping where needed and making a profit that felt earned, then slowly upgrading my ship to make the trek easier. In beta, I made several millions both by rare trading and by normal trading - profit aside, rare-trips were (up to this morning) much more interesting and fun than short-hopping.
As it was I could make a local run with 128 tonnes of normal cargo and make more money, in the 10 minutes it took to get a new tick of 5-10 tonnes of rare, than I could with those 5-10 rares. Once you get a big enough cargo bay, rare trading is not as profitable, due to the slow replenishment of stock, but it was certainly more fun.
I would rather be able to actually buy some stock and then trapes half-way across the galaxy for a reduced profit, than not be able to buy any of the stock at all. As far as I am concerned, what has just happened is not a reduction in profitability, but a effectively a removal of the mechanic. Who is going to plod 150-200 ly with a cargo of 10 and make 100,000 creds when you can fill your hold with local stock and make the same by going one system over?
The most fun I have had trading, so far, was plotting massive courses across known space, often getting to dead ends with my limited jump range, fuel-scooping where needed and making a profit that felt earned, then slowly upgrading my ship to make the trek easier. In beta, I made several millions both by rare trading and by normal trading - profit aside, rare-trips were (up to this morning) much more interesting and fun than short-hopping.
As it was I could make a local run with 128 tonnes of normal cargo and make more money, in the 10 minutes it took to get a new tick of 5-10 tonnes of rare, than I could with those 5-10 rares. Once you get a big enough cargo bay, rare trading is not as profitable, due to the slow replenishment of stock, but it was certainly more fun.
Yay! Thanks for responding Mike... i was just criticizing^H^H^H^H^H^H^H erm, commenting on the communications around here. *cough*
I dunno, rares seemed OK before but I can see how they could short circuit the pace of progression. I actually think that with a bit of shrewd buying in the right places, they can still be pretty profitable, and that over time we'll all get used to the way they are now. We did after their first nerf.
But I think FD should focus more on bumping up other activities to the same level as trading (even with the rares) rather then concentrating on bringing trading down to other levels. People need to see their progression, even in a game like Elite where progression isn't necessarily the goal, and with the ship and module prices being what they are slow progression just saps morale.
There's got to be a better way of doing it, and as luck would have it I just made a post on that very matter ---> https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=79596
But I think FD should focus more on bumping up other activities to the same level as trading (even with the rares) rather then concentrating on bringing trading down to other levels. People need to see their progression, even in a game like Elite where progression isn't necessarily the goal, and with the ship and module prices being what they are slow progression just saps morale.
There's got to be a better way of doing it, and as luck would have it I just made a post on that very matter ---> https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=79596
That is actually not what you said, and neither is that what I said. We can debate the topic but please stop straw manning me and moving the goal poast.
the profession I was talking about was the wonderful job of a nomadic rare trader that stayed in a system for a day or two while loading up my hold, running missions and exploring the area, then moving 150'ish ly and doing it again. Making friends with new stations and earning enough by the rare trade to keep my asp running.
I never claimed it was "my whole point in playing the game" I said it made this way of playing that was amazingly fun to me possible.
And if your big issue is that people should "calm a bit" then... really why are you feeding the flames with straw man arguments and moving your own goal post around?
Dude, that was Gamma. Gamma 1.05, which was pre-rares nerfs.
So you do have time to respond, but not time to like.. respond to what by far the most people are giving you guys feedback on here?
I mean... even just explaining why these changes are made would make it so much... easier to swallow, I'm sure. oh well.
...but the dirty canopy come at no extra charge!
How big is this update? I wish Frontier would say on the news item as some of us have terrible internet BW.
Michael
Thanks for taking the time to respond, however a more detailed explanation to explain the changes & issues with non rare trading would be helpful to many of us traders who have seen the, it would appear, to have the rug pulled from under us.
I have no issue with change but change is easier to accept when logic and reasoning are shared - you need to remember now you are no longer testing, this is the game.
Michael Brookes
Game Director
There seems to be an issue with the AI trading in that in some circumstances it's over trading leading to producer economies becoming consumers for the same good, this has the knock on affect of reducing profit margins.
Michael
I should have you put my thoughts into words, you have basically the same point only you don't come off as crass as me, nice job.
So, somehow they must have missed all the times people have asked for something that resembles an explanation of the standing mechanics, the crime / bounty mechanics, the event system mechanics etc? I mean, I disagree on an abstract level that some parts of the game should only be for people in small ships (i.e. bounty hunting, warzones etc.) but that is like.. up for debate. FD's lack of transparency and ability to communicate with the community is not. Are you seriously positing that they're totally willing to answer questions about mechanics and such, mayhaps even reasoning behind said implementations? because if that is your experience I would adore you if you could get an explanation of said mechanics out of FD
Here is a thread where Sandro was getting involved, discussing rep mechanics:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=71072&page=2&p=1214748#post1214748
Further, to easily see what deva are saying, check out this tool:
https://mobile.twitter.com/ED_DevPosts/tweets
Yes Virginia, devs REALLY DO discuss their game. There are topics they seem to steer clear of, which is sometimes disappointing for us all, but we cannot compel them to discuss it. (Can we compel them to discuss it? Michael, how do you feel about waterboarding?)
As for whether bigger ships outgrow certain roles, agree to disagree? I have never seen Dog the Bounty Hunter roll up in an M1a Abrams even though I am pretty sure he could have compelled some people to give up and come along if he had.
Why thank you santa, I still think that simply explaining the actual mechanics would alleviate a lot of frustrations, but maybe the manual will do that when it arrives.
And yeah we can totally agree to disagree, I'd reply tho that I've never seen a bounty hunter in a FTL capable spaceship either, so comparing it to reality seems silly
And I'm on the side of allowing as many playstyles as possible > analogues to Dog the Bounty Hunter but I can see your point.- Status