Arcade or Simulator game? The dangers of fan-service

[Yank31]

Preliminary notes : I really enjoyed the 1.2 globally. Had some great time with wings. Love the tweaks to galaxy map, the debug camera, and a lot of things.

This post is not about profession earnings.

***
​

I am concerned about a ongoing trend i'm beginning to notice.

A lot of the most recent changes seem to go toward a more "arcadey" game, at the detriment of the simulation aspect.

Refuel costs have been reduced so hard they almost became a non-factor. Without an actual cost, the whole refuel function has basically been reduced to a "click" in station. Don't forget to click on the refuel button, and you're good to go.
The fuel scoop module has lost almost all relevance. If you're doing anything else than exploring, why would you bother fuel scooping? A shame really (imo), as it was such a cool mechanic !

Repair costs have been reduced with the same magnitude. Why? I mean, a reduction obviously allows for cheaper repairs and more combat actions, but why SO HARD? If you lower values that much, they become neglectable. Who would want that in a simulator? Or maybe we do, as I seem to be completely off with what I want / what the community wants, and more importantly, what FD does.

With "no" actual cost, it's more of a nuisance than anything else. Dam, must click on those things.

Should we get an auto-repair, auto-refuel option, just as we auto-refill H2O when we dock at stations? I really don't understand why those costs have been reduced to such insignificant levels. This feels very "arcadey" to me, and a step in the wrong direction (imo).


The Vulture price... a lot has been said. It's great that people get to have the brand new ship. A lot of immediate positivity. I'm concerned about the general dynamic of the game. But whatever, the point is it feels quite a rushed and demagogic decision ("20M, no wait, they don't like it, 5M!") which in itself is not reassuring when you think long-term ; and it also feels... "arcadey", again. Maintenance cost reduced to insignificant levels, new combat ship cost cut by 4 by popular request.

I'm also concerned about the way you're allowing players who REFUSED to do anything else than shooting, to still be able to get more powerful gear. Instead of validating their hostile and seemingly exclusive habit, why not promote diversity, via buffing (not only credits, fun too) other sources of earning, like Mining for instance ? "Sure, you can do many things in Elite, but meh... tedious, boring. Might as well just shoot your way through - it's fun and i's now the 2nd best source of income, give it a try!".

Again, I'm sorry if you're the shooting type, I have nothing against you personally, I'm concerned about the general state of the game. Overall balance. Population types in Open. Player behaviour and habits. And not you being able to afford a ship or not.

More so, I could very well be wrong. Its only a concern, not the holy book I'm typing here.

***
​

Well I could go on and on, I'll cut short :

Please, do not sacrifice the simulation aspect of the game on the altar of simplification. - do something about those maintenance costs

Please, do not succumb to the mesmerizing sing of some sirens that only sees their own and immediate interest. - consider the whole picture twice before releasing potent combat ships (which directly threatens all the player base, these are no exploration, passenger nor mining ships, these are combat)

Please, do not censor this thread or consider it "inflammatory", I'm simply expressing my concerned opinion about my current perceived direction of the game.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I agree the reduction in repairs/refuel seems a little over the top. But I am a bit confused why you think people who 'refuse to do anything else than shooting' should *not* get the ability to upgrade as they play? Isn't it the whole point that you can chose any profession and get meaningfull progress in that direction? Explorers should get better exploration ships by exploring, traders should get bigger trade ships, so why should combat-oriented pilots not get the same? Calling it 'validating their hostile and exclusive habbit' sounds a tad bit... biased.

But beyond that, I don't see how this has anything to do with simulation vs arcade. Changing cost balance of fuel/repair doesnt make it more or less a simulation. The mechanics are identical, only the total profits of the player increase/decrease.

 

[Munshine]

Hey Yank how are you doing, mate ?

From the beginning, ED isn't a realistic simulator but an arcade game. But even for today gamers, the learning curve is quite high.

But maybe i'm mistaken, you were meaning that in the curring trend, the game is going in some sort of casual way.
Fair enough but even with costs decreasings, it's up to Frontier make Elite Dangerous more than a grinding game.

That's why I'm thinking that Powerplay maybe is a step in the right way.

 

[Loskene]

I don't know how many times you need to be reminded of this, but elite dangerous is a combat oriented game. If you're not down for a scrap, what are you doing in this part of town at this time of night? Simulator aspects are always a bonus but if they detract from the actual enjoyment of the game they should not be favoured over more, as you call it, arcadey aspects. The repair costs were just stopping people from having fun, having to call fights as soon as shields dropped, which made the whole thing exceptionally silly. Fuel costs made absolutely no sense since hydrogen is hydrogen no matter what's carrying it.
So far all they've done is fix problems without managing to make new ones, which is a hell of an achievement at the best of times.

All of the things you're allegedly concerned about (population in open, general "feel" of the game or whatever) are entirely imagined problems, demonstrably false, and you'll have to come to terms with that by yourself, nobody else can really change your mind about something that only exists in there. You also seem to feel that players should not be able to stick with a chosen career from start to finish, and must dabble in others (specifically trading but you mention mining too, ugh) to reach higher tier equipment. This isn't just rather elitist, it's downright hypocritical, since it still allows credit earning professions to stay their course for their whole careers. If you can be a trader from day 1, I want to be a bounty hunter from day 1 and still achieve what you can achieve even if it takes a bit longer. If you have a problem with that, then it's your problem to deal with, because it currently seems Frontier is on the side of those of us with opinions grounded in reality.

 

[Poseidal]

The larger ships are actually not that much larger than the smaller ones, but the repair costs were well beyond additional volume from being bigger. Their fuel tanks and fuel were also the same size and buying the same fuel but the larger ships got price gauged.

It's actually more realistic now.

For the fuel scoop: If you are a trader, it will not pay more than the equivalent cargo slot in fuel cost - especially if it adds time.

It still has the same uses: Travelling distances where you do not want to (for time) or cannot (exploring) dock to refuel. Exploring, rare running or even just changing location (if you run small tank ships for example) would be times to use the fuel scoop now as it was before.

 

[Blood Lust]

Preliminary notes : I really enjoyed the 1.2 globally. Had some great time with wings. Love the tweaks to galaxy map, the debug camera, and a lot of things.

This post is not about profession earnings.

***
​

I am concerned about a ongoing trend i'm beginning to notice.

A lot of the most recent changes seem to go toward a more "arcadey" game, at the detriment of the simulation aspect.

Refuel costs have been reduced so hard they almost became a non-factor. Without an actual cost, the whole refuel function has basically been reduced to a "click" in station. Don't forget to click on the refuel button, and you're good to go.
The fuel scoop module has lost almost all relevance. If you're doing anything else than exploring, why would you bother fuel scooping? A shame really (imo), as it was such a cool mechanic !

Repair costs have been reduced with the same magnitude. Why? I mean, a reduction obviously allows for cheaper repairs and more combat actions, but why SO HARD? If you lower values that much, they become neglectable. Who would want that in a simulator? Or maybe we do, as I seem to be completely off with what I want / what the community wants, and more importantly, what FD does.

With "no" actual cost, it's more of a nuisance than anything else. Dam, must click on those things.

Should we get an auto-repair, auto-refuel option, just as we auto-refill H2O when we dock at stations? I really don't understand why those costs have been reduced to such insignificant levels. This feels very "arcadey" to me, and a step in the wrong direction (imo).


The Vulture price... a lot has been said. It's great that people get to have the brand new ship. A lot of immediate positivity. I'm concerned about the general dynamic of the game. But whatever, the point is it feels quite a rushed and demagogic decision ("20M, no wait, they don't like it, 5M!") which in itself is not reassuring when you think long-term ; and it also feels... "arcadey", again. Maintenance cost reduced to insignificant levels, new combat ship cost cut by 4 by popular request.

I'm also concerned about the way you're allowing players who REFUSED to do anything else than shooting, to still be able to get more powerful gear. Instead of validating their hostile and seemingly exclusive habit, why not promote diversity, via buffing (not only credits, fun too) other sources of earning, like Mining for instance ? "Sure, you can do many things in Elite, but meh... tedious, boring. Might as well just shoot your way through - it's fun and i's now the 2nd best source of income, give it a try!".

Again, I'm sorry if you're the shooting type, I have nothing against you personally, I'm concerned about the general state of the game. Overall balance. Population types in Open. Player behaviour and habits. And not you being able to afford a ship or not.

More so, I could very well be wrong. Its only a concern, not the holy book I'm typing here.

***
​

Well I could go on and on, I'll cut short :

Please, do not sacrifice the simulation aspect of the game on the altar of simplification. - do something about those maintenance costs

Please, do not succumb to the mesmerizing sing of some sirens that only sees their own and immediate interest. - consider the whole picture twice before releasing potent combat ships (which directly threatens all the player base, these are no exploration, passenger nor mining ships, these are combat)

Please, do not censor this thread or consider it "inflammatory", I'm simply expressing my concerned opinion about my current perceived direction of the game.

I think the problem is the only way to get rich and get the top ships is by a few months of trading.
.
The trade system needs a rebuff because the maximum return I have seen for a ton is $1,700.
There needs to be more ships on the route to the top so vessels don't get nerfed.
Combat missions should not level out at $150,000 but carry on into the millions (with increased difficulty of course!)

 

[Malactus]

I agree that repair and refuel cost should now be raised again, perhaps by 10%.

However, I believe the vulture pricing is now in its the correct zone.I have data on this. Earlier on the Vulture cost was thrice the amount its now. and would technically be unreachable by anyone doing pure combat unless they dedicated 3 times the time than if converting into a trader which until now was nearly zero risk if flying smart..

It allows for the profession income disparities to match up.
The increase in combat ships also increase the risk to traders (who were just grinding away the game), and it has increased the possibility for someone flying a big ship to now lose it. We otherwise would just have Traders trading away, and all the combat people would just leave. So it will make overall, everything more "Dangerous"

 

[Ceannard]

Preliminary notes : I really enjoyed the 1.2 globally. Had some great time with wings. Love the tweaks to galaxy map, the debug camera, and a lot of things.

This post is not about profession earnings.

***
​

I am concerned about a ongoing trend i'm beginning to notice.

A lot of the most recent changes seem to go toward a more "arcadey" game, at the detriment of the simulation aspect.

Refuel costs have been reduced so hard they almost became a non-factor. Without an actual cost, the whole refuel function has basically been reduced to a "click" in station. Don't forget to click on the refuel button, and you're good to go.
The fuel scoop module has lost almost all relevance. If you're doing anything else than exploring, why would you bother fuel scooping? A shame really (imo), as it was such a cool mechanic !

Repair costs have been reduced with the same magnitude. Why? I mean, a reduction obviously allows for cheaper repairs and more combat actions, but why SO HARD? If you lower values that much, they become neglectable. Who would want that in a simulator? Or maybe we do, as I seem to be completely off with what I want / what the community wants, and more importantly, what FD does.

With "no" actual cost, it's more of a nuisance than anything else. Dam, must click on those things.

Should we get an auto-repair, auto-refuel option, just as we auto-refill H2O when we dock at stations? I really don't understand why those costs have been reduced to such insignificant levels. This feels very "arcadey" to me, and a step in the wrong direction (imo).


The Vulture price... a lot has been said. It's great that people get to have the brand new ship. A lot of immediate positivity. I'm concerned about the general dynamic of the game. But whatever, the point is it feels quite a rushed and demagogic decision ("20M, no wait, they don't like it, 5M!") which in itself is not reassuring when you think long-term ; and it also feels... "arcadey", again. Maintenance cost reduced to insignificant levels, new combat ship cost cut by 4 by popular request.

I'm also concerned about the way you're allowing players who REFUSED to do anything else than shooting, to still be able to get more powerful gear. Instead of validating their hostile and seemingly exclusive habit, why not promote diversity, via buffing (not only credits, fun too) other sources of earning, like Mining for instance ? "Sure, you can do many things in Elite, but meh... tedious, boring. Might as well just shoot your way through - it's fun and i's now the 2nd best source of income, give it a try!".

Again, I'm sorry if you're the shooting type, I have nothing against you personally, I'm concerned about the general state of the game. Overall balance. Population types in Open. Player behaviour and habits. And not you being able to afford a ship or not.

More so, I could very well be wrong. Its only a concern, not the holy book I'm typing here.

***
​

Well I could go on and on, I'll cut short :

Please, do not sacrifice the simulation aspect of the game on the altar of simplification. - do something about those maintenance costs

Please, do not succumb to the mesmerizing sing of some sirens that only sees their own and immediate interest. - consider the whole picture twice before releasing potent combat ships (which directly threatens all the player base, these are no exploration, passenger nor mining ships, these are combat)

Please, do not censor this thread or consider it "inflammatory", I'm simply expressing my concerned opinion about my current perceived direction of the game.

Spot on.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

-- Deleted --

 

[Dagless]

Pure combat has always been a bit arcadey. Go to nav beacon or RES and shoot ships for money.

But pure traders complain that pirates get to deal them loads of damage for little risk to themselves by "imposing their game style" on them.

Frontier are obviously trying to keep all players happy while they work on the next updates.

I think they are aiming for more depth to the game overall. They certainly aren't "dumbing down" the game as some claim. It might take a while though, and will certainly involve some changes that don't seem to make sense to everyone.

 

[Dielos]

I agree too with what you say here.

I do understand why they levelled fuel costs. It makes sense that all ships pay the same for the fuel, although I liked it that it was a cost to factor in.

Repairs are now though extremely low. I saw someone post a repair bill of 18.000cr for an Anaconda with 18% hull left. For a 400T ship, with the price of Titanium around 1.000cr/t, it would be more realistic if the repair cost would have been around 180.000. Still much cheaper than before, and this only involves material costs... For me, with these repair costs, ships have lost all sense of value.

About the Vulture. I thought it had been underpriced too, but after noticing it uses a small pad, I start to think that the price is correct.

 

[nats]

There is a balance to be had, the game shouldnt be overly frustrating to play and the combat, spaceflight, landing and exploration elements should be far more prominent in the gameplay than struggling to pay ship expenses. The game needs to be FUN rather than a grind. But it should also be a challenge - but a challenge for the right reasons. I play games like this to see wonderful sights, use my skill in battle and landing on planets, and be immersed in the environment the game builds. I dont play game like this to worry too much about fuel use and repair costs.

 

[mitth'raw'nuruodo]

I dont understand why some of you play videogames. Is it to waste yours and everyone else's time? Or to enjoy?

What will you complain about next? Why does it take 3 seconds to load 200T of cargo? Should it simulate the hours it would take for the machines to load it while you sit and wait?

This is supposed to be a videogame, not a job. Unlike you (apparently), most of us have real jobs to do instead of grinding for endless hours to recover from one botched battle.

 

[Poseidal]

I agree too with what you say here.

I do understand why they levelled fuel costs. It makes sense that all ships pay the same for the fuel, although I liked it that it was a cost to factor in.

Repairs are now though extremely low. I saw someone post a repair bill of 18.000cr for an Anaconda with 18% hull left. For a 400T ship, with the price of Titanium around 1.000cr/t, it would be more realistic if the repair cost would have been around 180.000. Still much cheaper than before, and this only involves material costs... For me, with these repair costs, ships have lost all sense of value.

About the Vulture. I thought it had been underpriced too, but after noticing it uses a small pad, I start to think that the price is correct.

Although that's not a bad way, having 18% hull doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of it is missing or blown off, otherwise the Anaconda model would start looking a lot smaller!

 

[Loskene]

Although that's not a bad way, having 18% hull doesn't necessarily mean that the rest of it is missing or blown off, otherwise the Anaconda model would start looking a lot smaller!

Exactly, it's a measure of the hull's structural integrity, not how much of it is still attached to the spaceframe. Repairs would involve replacing buckled hull plates and melting down the old ones for scrap. Shouldn't cost as much as the equivalent mass of raw materials.

 

[Dielos]

I agree fully about the balance, but this game was also marketed with Braben's vision of immersing the player in the role of a spaceship pilot. I think maintenance and repairs are part of this, and I loved them.

On the other hand, when I was beaten in combat, the real feeling of defeat came when you were faced with the repair bill. Now that is gone, as I couldn't care less how much of a beating my ship takes, as it only costs me dimes.

The other thing I see since the repair prices reduction, is that Anaconda, Phyton and Clipper Cmdr's are boosting through the letterbox with complete disregard of whatever is in between much more often. Not that it didn't happen before, but now the costs of repairs of these tactics are negligable. I got almost killed several times these days by these Cmdr's, and have decided since then to move back to the rim.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Exactly, it's a measure of the hull's structural integrity, not how much of it is still attached to the spaceframe. Repairs would involve replacing buckled hull plates and melting down the old ones for scrap. Shouldn't cost as much as the equivalent mass of raw materials.

In those numbers I took only 200T into account, but yes, you are both right. Still, damaged exterior plating usually has to be completely replaced, and although it might not be as much, it's still a considerable cost.

The Anaconda has a size similar to a small naval frigate, ask the poor lad that broke that antenna on the frigate while cleaning it how he feels after his superiors pushed the repair invoice under his nose. He's probably still in therapy...

 

[Tetsuko]

The devs have very nicely addressed one of the big problems with the game, being that the only way to progress to the "best" ships for your chosen profession was to be a trader. An inherently tedious mode of game play which qualifies more as a job than a game. Some people may like it. I don't, but that's just my character. They kind of broke the "fun" part of the game (combat) by introducing a couple of combat oriented ships that a large number of combat oriented players couldn't afford. And, chapeau to them, they realised what they'd done and very quickly fixed it.

So, now we have trading, which works, because the earnings and the big ships are the reward. We have combat, which works because it's fun, and because the earnings enable the purchase of better ships. And we have exploration which works, because it's fun, and the earnings don't matter because you can trade or bounty hunt your way to a fully kitted Asp and head off into the wide black yonder.

All they need to do now is make mining either profitable, or fun, or both.

As for the new ships threatening the player base. Really? If you are going to trade in Open then you need to spend some creds on fitting out your barge for defense. That's part of the game. If you don't do it then you only have yourself to blame. Even so the risks are small. I've never once been interdicted by a player CMDR even when trading rares in Open around Lave area. And if you are that scared for your profit margins that you have to strip out the whole ship for cargo, then go play in Solo. I could care less what the (extremely small) player pirate population have to say about that.

 

[ICO_hr]

I also agree about the refuel costs. I didnt manage to break my ship yet so i dont know how big is the repair cost nerf but based on what i'm reading in the forums i guess is also too much. The Vulture price maybe is ok because i have no idea what ships they'll add in the future. To me it feels just like bigger Freagle.

 

[Yank31]

@sleutelbos

Hmmm ok, it's because I see it like that :
combat = fun >> dream >> credit
explo = dream >> fun >> credit
trade = credit >>> fun >= dream

This has already been changed quite a bit. In short, I never considered trading as an end, but as mean to get to do other stuff. You just get credits to do other things, with. And that justifies the abomination that is space trucking. You do it for another purpose.
So, having a suddenly self-sufficient profession in combat doesn't feel right in that scheme.

Yes, it was biased.

Coming to arcade vs simulation, maybe I wasn't clear... the thing is : yes the mechanics remain but if you lower their values too much, to the point of "near zero", it sort of remove the interest of having such value in the first place. Might as well just remove the value. And losing values does feel like a move toward an arcade game, less things to care about, you know.


@Munshine

o7

Doing good, good to see you in the english side of things

Got you, maybe I was expecting too much from the simulator aspect. Yet we had it, somewhat! Really confused as to why they nerf those values SO HARD, to the point of non relevance. Sure, people needed to afford the repairs, but not stop caring about them completely ("click", done, how much did I cost? I don't know, w/e)... oh well.

And yeah, hoping that 1.3 will be as good as 1.2 has been, overall, besides those little annoying things that I really cannot understand.


@Loskene

I believe one can have a combat oriented game, and still get either the arcade approach (say an arcade shooter, insert coin type) or the simulator approach (something you'd play with an HOTAS for instance). I think we both (and all) agree that a reduction was needed, I was talking about the amplitude of the reduction, though.

I think space trucking is only a mean to get credit, not an end. So yeah, the sole purpose of this "profession" is to make credits. Why not use it to make credits? Then you go do anything else. This is how the game has been played up untill now, nothing groundbreaking I do believe.

But yeah, I do agree, Frontier seems to be of opposite opinion. That's why I moan here, for all the reasons you've already read many times, seeing as you like to answer many of my posts !


@Poseidal

True. It is more realistic. However I think having "close to zero" value is a much bigger nuisance, in that it renders the whole refuel function moot, than being realistic with the hydrogen cost per ton. Plus we had this little "high octane" excuse going, it was doing the trick.

We now forfeit cost value, fuel scoop fitting, fuel scooping... I don't know, it seems like a very poor change to me. I liked to care about my fuel. Now I just need to remember to click, and that's done. Seems like a huge downgrade, tbh.


@Blood lust

Yeah, I like your ideas about higher tier combat mission. Someone also suggested, elsewhere : "combat earning should be based on high risk, high reward". Sounded good.

 

[Arubeto]

BrewerGeorge made a very good point why cheap fuel is reasonable:

Great change, IMO. Fuels should be dirt cheap, and it should cost the same as the the salable commodity itself. In terms of opportunity cost, gathering fuel with a scoop used to be the most profitable thing a large ship could do, which was absolutely crazy. It was badly, badly broken before; now it's internally consistent. It's not about being easier or harder, it's about being correct or incorrect.

And "Cheap" is relative. Don't underestimate the value of the credit just because players tend to have a lot of them. That 110 Cr for a ton of hydrogen also buys a ton of grain. A ton of grain is enough food to feed a person for a full year.

Our ships' fuel is the most common element in the galaxy and we can gather it for free just be spending a bit of capital on a fuel scoop. My explorer Asp can gather a Ton of fuel every 2 seconds. Supply is effectively infinite and easy to obtain, why should it be expensive?

I can also live with cheaper hull repairs, since they finally allow you to fly into combat zones with larger ships.

What FD shouldn't reduce on the other hand are the costs for module repairs. If those get damaged, it should still be expensive to get them fixed (they represent cutting technology, so reparing them is not as easy as just replace some dented hull plate; also, it would mean there is still some incentive to prevent damage).

Concerning ship prices, I think the adjusted FdL price is appropriate. It's still expensive enough for a small, nimble ship with four medium and one huge hard points and 50 million credits still emanate a certain luxury feeling the ship is supposed to have.

The price of the Vulture, on the other hand, has been reduced too much, IMHO. With the new, improved profits from bounty hunting, 10 million credits would have been more reasonable than lowering the price to 5 million.
Even though I know I am not making an friends with my following statement, I do think the ship is vastly overpowered for 5 million and it's fighting power should be slightly adjusted down to fit the new price.