Imbalance of Progress in Elite Dangerous

[SiriusSeven]

And why wouldn't it work? If you get paid the normal payout + bounties + say 5 million bonus credits for blowing up 500 pirates is that not what some people are asking for? You'll get to do your favorite thing and get increased payouts with increased mission requirements, is that not scaling?

Oh I see you're one of those blowing up a harmless Eagle should pay 3 million credits types. You don't want scaling, you just want an EZ button.

*sigh*

It's amazing how backwards this post is. Killing 300 sidewinders is mindnumbingly boring. No, the end all in combat should not be a Viper. Foes should scale to be significantly more challenging as you rank up, and payouts should reflect the increasing equipment and armament cost.

And when you do find that Elite Conda, it only pays a few hundred K.

In no other game do you reach the endgame status by grinding on starting zone mobs

-- edit --

wow it's hard to type on this phone!

 

[Lobstris]

Correct me if im wrong. In 1.2 bounty hunting on RES are enhanced?
Cheers!

Only indirectly. The presence of AI wings in the RES sites does change things somewhat - you can make a bit more money attacking wings, if you can ensure you aren't going to loose out on hull repair costs. You can usually identify a lead ship in the wing (highest bounty) and a couple of 'hangers on'. As was pointed out to me in the Beta forum, if you are careful to go after the 'hangers on' first, before hitting the leader, you can collect on all ships. Hitting the leader first results in hangers on legging it via FSD. Whilst it might be debatable if this is an enhancement, in my mind, it beats juts endlessly destroying singly spawning Cobras.

 

[Allant Doran]

I don't think even FD themselves would argue that there is a problem with earning rates. Their solution might not be as simple as to buff Exploring, Combat and Mining up to near-trading levels, but I bet something is in the works. It is, after all, a videogame in 2015 that is being advertised heavily as showing off the combat aspects. I get that there are traders who enjoy the trading, more power to you, but it simply cannot remain in it's current state and be good for the game.

I also understand the argument of ''If a cobra can do all the combat sites, why would you need anything bigger? Be happy with what you have.'' The problem with that argument is you are showing understanding of the problem, but are then trying to tell others that they should be happy with the content they have, or that their dreams for the more luxurious ships are stupid because they don't want to space-haul like you do. You can repeat it as a mantra as much as you want, that ED is trading-focused, but it just isn't true, no matter how many times you say it.

Aiming for the biggest ship and having the fattest wallet are not necessarily the 'end game' of Elite: Dangerous, but the idea that just because it isn't means people should not be able to attain it the way they want to, IF they want to, is just smalled-minded and selfish. ''There is nothing wrong with the way I play, you should play my way too or just leave.''
Well, no. I shouldn't. I paid the same, real-life entry fee that you did. I should be entitled to play the game my way as you are yours. I should not feel penalized or forgotten about.

Speaking of which, the whole ''In real life it isn't X, so why should it be X in game?'' is the silliest argument. Elite Dangerous is not real. You are not really a spaceship pilot. None of these assets effect your real life. That doesn't mean they are meaningless, they are clearly important to all of us, but the comparison is just not apt.
In real life I can get up out of my chair and get some food, use the toilet and then take my Motorcycle 300 miles up country to visit family. In Elite Dangerous I cannot even get out of my cockpit. I can't walk around my hanger. I also cannot have a family, I don't have to pay bills.

Mimicking real life is not something Elite Dangerous does, nor should it ever attempt to. It is a beautiful, well-made and mechanically fun game to play but it is only exactly that. A videogame.

Two more minor, final points I want to address;

1 - Elite Dangerous, while being quite complicated, is not a simulator nor does it have simulation-level gameplay interaction. Check out this video of the mere startup sequence for an A-10c in DCS World and tell me starting up your Type-9, Viper or anything else in the game is anywhere near THIS level of interactive; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WyYA0pjUKw

2 - The idea that Trading should be more profitable just because there is piracy is also a biased idea. So you're saying Trading should be more profitable because you get shot at sometimes? It is possible to make that trading run without ever being shot at or interdicted. It is NOT possible to make money in any combat scenario without risking all the money you have invested in your ship. Not just your goods, ALL of it.

Allant's Final Thought and personal wish: With Wings implemented in 1.2, I think interdiction rates for trading-class ships should be increased. After all, pirates are more likely to scan an unarmed Type-9 and target it than my heavily armed Asp. However, FD should also introduce the ability to hire players for your Wing to protect you. Money up front, or % of profit of cargo on safe sales. That way even if the numbers don't get balanced elsewhere, traders have to share in their vast wealth.

Now you could say ''I earned that money trading, why should I have to share it?'' and my answer would simply be ''because in this instance, the galaxy just got a LOT more dangerous. You have to share because you NEED me. Without me, you make nothing anymore.'' Once traders see just how dangerous the galaxy can be, they'll soon be happy to share half their wealth to make anything at all

 

[Lobstris]

I don't think you understand scaling or progression.

I don't think (levelled) scaling should exist in the game, other than 1) the different security levels inherent in individual systems 2) accepting more dangerous missions from factions you become allied with. For things like mining and exploring there should be more interesting, but rare things out there (e.g. unknown alien artifacts, very rare/exotic mineral, generation ships, derelicts, anomalies etc.) scattered around, but again these should not be 'levelled' in any way - just that better equipment makes them easier to find and/or more lucrative.

 

[ChubbyBunneh]

*sigh*

It's amazing how backwards this post is. Killing 300 sidewinders is mindnumbingly boring. No, the end all in combat should not be a Viper. Foes should scale to be significantly more challenging as you rank up, and payouts should reflect the increasing equipment and armament cost.

In no other game do you reach the endgame status by grinding on starting zone mobs

As your ship gets more expensive, the more frequently larger and higher ranked enemies you encounter in interdictions and USS's. If you had used all options available to you to earn money and gotten out of the economy class ships instead of stubbornly stamping your feet and screaming 'NO TRADING EVER!' you would have known this. So the first 500 ships mission you take might be full of shieldless Sidewinders and Eagles. But after that you will have enough money for an Asp. Do some more and eventually you will have enough for a Python and you will seldom meet an enemy ship that isn't another Asp-Python-Dropship-Clipper-Anaconda. Sounds like scaling and progression to me. Plus in the war zones there is no shortage of larger ships.

As I said before it appears what the complainers want isn't more pay for longer missions but more money for simpler 1 kill missions -> an EZ button. But the good news is they can give the whiners what they want, put a mission on the boards to destroy a space station, 100 million credit payout. No grinding! Just go destroy it.

 

[Marthenil]

As your ship gets more expensive, the more frequently larger and higher ranked enemies you encounter in interdictions and USS's. If you had used all options available to you to earn money and gotten out of the economy class ships instead of stubbornly stamping your feet and screaming 'NO TRADING EVER!' you would have known this. So the first 500 ships mission you take might be full of shieldless Sidewinders and Eagles. But after that you will have enough money for an Asp. Do some more and eventually you will have enough for a Python and you will seldom meet an enemy ship that isn't another Asp-Python-Dropship-Clipper-Anaconda. Sounds like scaling and progression to me. Plus in the war zones there is no shortage of larger ships.

As I said before it appears what the complainers want isn't more pay for longer missions but more money for simpler 1 kill missions -> an EZ button. But the good news is they can give the whiners what they want, put a mission on the boards to destroy a space station, 100 million credit payout. No grinding! Just go destroy it.

So I am a whiner now because I refuse to do something that is not only mindlessly boring and unfun but quite pointless also?
Please tell me how I should watch Netflix while I trade so I can have my 60$ worth of this game. There is something that is so much better and also completely free: Clicker Heroes. Or Progress Quest. Much more interesting than "trading" in this game.

 

[SiriusSeven]

I don't think (levelled) scaling should exist in the game, other than 1) the different security levels inherent in individual systems 2) accepting more dangerous missions from factions you become allied with. For things like mining and exploring there should be more interesting, but rare things out there (e.g. unknown alien artifacts, very rare/exotic mineral, generation ships, derelicts, anomalies etc.) scattered around, but again these should not be 'levelled' in any way - just that better equipment makes them easier to find and/or more lucrative.

I agree with this. UO is a reasonable model for how to do progression without levels (although artificially hampering skills to %s is problematic, so it remains a challenging design problem)

One way forward might be via the procedural weapons generation system recently described. It would allow people to scavenge destroyed ships to find rare gear that could sell at much higher prices than the bounties. And by definition, an NPC carrying rare gear would be more of a challenge to fight.

 

[Saliddry]

In fact, there is way that you can make profit despite the economic imbalances and losses.

Go on one spot, sector with 5 system at least (places where you can find different ships, outfits, RES and NAV points). Go for hunting. Stay careful, be careful. Watch your back. Play always safe. And in 2 month you WILL earn 10 mil credit.

Guaranteed.

thats an joke or? even with an type 6 i make 10 millions in 4 hours......

how much you make with bounty hunting? lets say elite pirat hunting 150-200k missions ..... you jump you fly around hop in and out of signatues find an npc that give you the right system... jump there... jump in an out of singals again...finnaly find the wanted enemy ..kill it go back to base..
IN THAT TIME FRAME i have done multiple trading tours from my standart system that works since 3 weeks and have made AT LEAST 1 million ..its an 2 hop route stations are within 100ls of the sun so 1 trip takes me 3 to target and 3 mins back i make profit on both ways so 6 mins 10 once i get lazy cause its boring..1 trip brings me around 250k
so you have to be very very very very fast and lucky to find that target anaconda fast enough that i have mad only 1 million in that time ...

NO OTHER CAREER get even close to that...
BUT HEY WE DONT WANT TRADE TO BE NERFED AGAIN !!!!
WE WANT TOHER CAREERS TO BE BUFFED ....
CAUSE WE ARE HERE TO HAVE FUNN AND AS WE PAID FOR THE GAME WE DIDNT SEARCH AN SECOND JOB

 

[Marthenil]

I agree with this. UO is a reasonable model for how to do progression without levels (although artificially hampering skills to %s is problematic)

A good indication of someone's level could be the amount of money they have earned through bounties and/or combat bonds. Something like "your reputation increases as an elite bounty hunter and as such we are willing to pay you more for more dangerous missions".

 

[Lobstris]

Mimicking real life is not something Elite Dangerous does, nor should it ever attempt to.

Personally, I'd love E: D to go more down the simulator route. The game should mimic enough of real life to present an internally consistent and plausible simulation of the galaxy, so as to achieve willing suspension of disbelief, albeit with some compromises in fidelity and with some abstraction for gameplay purposes. (I'd love E: D to have the same level as systems modelling as DCS, but that's not realistic without a far bigger budget - hello Star Citizen 2.0? )
.
As for trading being more profitable than piracy, well across the entire galaxy trading has to be more lucrative or else people wouldn't risk the trade. On the fringes of society I do think there could be better ways of making piracy more lucrative simply by increasing the demand for certain goods - artificially elevating the price of goods in anarchy systems, or factions paying a bonus for specifically attacking other factions ships, or major powers issuing 'letters of marque' to give pirates license to operate within certain bounds, whilst the police turn a blind eye etc.

 

[ChubbyBunneh]

So I am a whiner now because I refuse to do something that is not only mindlessly boring and unfun but quite pointless also?
Please tell me how I should watch Netflix while I trade so I can have my 60$ worth of this game. There is something that is so much better and also completely free: Clicker Heroes. Or Progress Quest. Much more interesting than "trading" in this game.

You're a whiner if they add larger scale combat/hunting missions that pay out more and still refuse to do them because it's 'grinding' and insist on demanding missions that pay you 20 gazjillion credits for destroying 1 target.

 

[Barulf McBaren]

Oh the 'you want everything now!' strawman again.

 

[Lobstris]

I agree with this. UO is a reasonable model for how to do progression without levels (although artificially hampering skills to %s is problematic, so it remains a challenging design problem)

One way forward might be via the procedural weapons generation system recently described. It would allow people to scavenge destroyed ships to find rare gear that could sell at much higher prices than the bounties. And by definition, an NPC carrying rare gear would be more of a challenge to fight.

Now that is a nice idea. Being able to find bits of kit out in space (why can we not use our cargo holds to store ship components?) in derelicts. Also, there was talk of NPCs in certain systems being able to 'tune-up' components for a fee or services rendered - hope to see that in game at some point.

 

[SiriusSeven]

You're a whiner if they add larger scale combat/hunting missions that pay out more and still refuse to do them because it's 'grinding' and insist on demanding missions that pay you 20 gazjillion credits for destroying 1 target.

There will be no agreement here. The people who like trade think this way. Otherwise they wouldn't like trade!

 

[ChubbyBunneh]

Well you lot are the ones saying 'NO I WILL NOT DO LARGE SCALE COMBAT MISSIONS EVEN IF THEY PAY WELL ABOVE AND BEYOND NORMAL FARMING'. Not much more I need to say, it's obvious the complainers are the ones that feel they are entitled to everything now without putting in any work at all.

 

[Lobstris]

CAUSE WE ARE HERE TO HAVE FUNN AND AS WE PAID FOR THE GAME WE DIDNT SEARCH AN SECOND JOB

One of the things I hate in games is level progression that appears too quick or allows you to become 'God of Everything' with no penalty or consequence (points at Bethesda's rpgs). With the Bethesda games (and other single player games) you can at least mod things to slow the progression down and add things like the 'Choices and Consequences' mod. I liked Frontier: First Encounters for the converse reason, to get on with a faction and get the best gear from the military or story missions took weeks of gameplay (and about 5 years in game IIRC) - it felt like it was a second job, but a job I really enjoyed.

 

[INSTG8R]

i agree with your war zone statement rewards need flat buff all around.

bounty hunting needs some quirks like allied with a local faction grants you a permit which you can lose if you fall out of the allied category with this permit you can fire apon wanted people in the no fire zone of stations of that faction or drop off cargo taken from wanted people for 3/4th the full value. or a system permit allowing you to fire on any one with a bounty.

i also would like us to be able to have our own escorts i own 5 ships right now eventually i would like to be able to hire mercenary to pilot these ships with me and help bounty hunt their kill only grant me 1/4th of the bounty. this could be edited for traders as well so we could make our own convoys of t6's or t9's.

for mining i don't want a tractor beam but i can see drones/net gun being put on hard points to help pick up the chunks.

as for exploring i don't due much of that any way so your on your own....

feel free to edit/ add on

I think you're looking for the X Series

 

[SiriusSeven]

Well you lot are the ones saying 'NO I WILL NOT DO LARGE SCALE COMBAT MISSIONS EVEN IF THEY PAY WELL ABOVE AND BEYOND NORMAL FARMING'. Not much more I need to say, it's obvious the complainers are the ones that feel they are entitled to everything now without putting in any work at all.

something was lost in translation

 

[Barulf McBaren]

One of the things I hate in games is level progression that appears too quick or allows you to become 'God of Everything' with no penalty or consequence (points at Bethesda's rpgs). With the Bethesda games (and other single player games) you can at least mod things to slow the progression down and add things like the 'Choices and Consequences' mod. I liked Frontier: First Encounters for the converse reason, to get on with a faction and get the best gear from the military or story missions took weeks of gameplay (and about 5 years in game IIRC) - it felt like it was a second job, but a job I really enjoyed.

And this point is reached in this game when you buy a viper. I think we can agree that balancing for combat gameplay must come in two ways:
1. Add more challenging content which requires better gear that
2. pays better.
This could well come in smaller stepstones, like content for cobras, then for asps then for clippers, pythons etc.

 

[Drakedge]

I don't think even FD themselves would argue that there is a problem with earning rates.... ...Once traders see just how dangerous the galaxy can be, they'll soon be happy to share half their wealth to make anything at all

Just gotta say I really agree with everything in this post.

If I want to play the combat side of the game, which the game is heavily advertised around, I shouldn't feel stuck at a cobra mk 3 as far as progression is concerned.

If I want to go out and explore, an Asp shouldn't feel prohibitive from attaining, or that spending 12 hours out in the dark finding interesting bodies was a worthless adventure, aside from getting my name on some stuff.

If I want to smuggle, I shouldn't feel that it is prohibitive. Last night I found a black market in a manufacturing station that had slaves as ilegal cargo, i loaded up 100 tons of the cheapest slaves i could find (1,000 credits or so below galactic average and the cheapest ones on BPC) only to net a 5,000 credit loss for trying to sell them there. The largest problem being there's no way to tell before hand if it is worth the risk to trade them there, and no way to earn that knowledge through smuggling reputation either.

No idea about mining sorry.

The point is, that Elite Dangerous is being advertised as a combat centric game, and it's one of the paths that is hindered in progression the most. One of the ways that it could be fixed is by allowing the combat focused individual an opportunity to enlist in the navy of the nation of their choice, be it Federation, Alliance, or Empire. They would be able to enlist once they have reached "friendly" reputation with a local population that was allied with the nation. This would be easier than say having to achieve friendly with the entire federation.

Once they are enlisted they unlock new sets of contacts that give military like missions for them to accomplish, and other such goals. Progression could be made through rank, and rank could award bonus % credits for killing targets of their nation. Rank could also unlock more military grade components, weapons, ships what ever. That way the combat player feels a progression, and is able to see it. Heck they could even get a little nationality symbol next to their name when scanned.

As it stands right now though, a combat player sees the end of their progression road when they are able to afford a Cobra Mk3, and all of it's fancy components. The repair costs, and other module costs, and the cost of the next logical ship down the line are nearly prohibitive in nature compared to the amount of money one can earn in combat. The biggest joke of them all, is the most dangerous activity in combat, that being combat zones. Some of the toughest AI ships are flying around in them. Military grade Condas that take forever to kill and are deadly as hell, popping for a 10k reward is just pathetic.

Money is the way to progress currently in the game, it is the only true measurement of progress. With more money you can buy more lasers, and more ships, and more everything. With out money you can't really do anything in the game. "But but drake you could explore or pew pew with out money"... what happens when you lose your ship to combat, or explore yourself into a binary system that you get stuck in and lose your ship... With what cash do you replace your ship and stuff with?

Oh yeah... the money you earned from Elite Trading Simulator 2015.