All I am saying is fuel prices as they are now are under 50% of the market prices for the same fuel.
It isn't a big ship small ship thing.
It isn't about grind.
It is about fuel prices making sense from the in game Market.
Can we increase fuel costs?
- Thread starter CMDR Hagglebeard
- Start date
All I am saying is fuel prices as they are now are under 50% of the market prices for the same fuel.
It isn't a big ship small ship thing.
It isn't about grind.
It is about fuel prices making sense from the in game Market.
This little, minuscule element of "realism" would only waste players' time. I like realism, but I don't want it at the expense of a fun game.
Deleted member 94277
D
I agree, but I also think that it should not be scalled. As it has been pointed out, it's same fuel for a SW and for an Anaconda. The price should be the same.
Nonya
Banned
No. One of those holds much, much more fuel than the other.
What you're saying is that the same 5 bucks it takes to fill up my motorcycle's 4 gallon gas tank should also fill up my FJ Cruiser's 15-gallon fuel tank?
I'm afraid that's not how capitalism works, my friend.
Wow Yeah an extra 50 credits a ton, yeah kills the fun, adds hours and hours of grind.
What was I thinking I must be complete mad or evil
The extra 1280 credits it would take to refuel the type 9 with its 64 ton fuel tank would ruin the profitability of every trade route.
Yep, I know but there will be a few here that don't and FD might have "forgotten" about this so was hoping that others here would like the idea of furl quality and either say something for it or against it but I was wrong, they just seem to say fuel is fine as it is so I guess that this is another potential dynamic that gets left behind and makes the game simpler for the modern gamer.
No fun in a game where you don't have limits.
Introducing modules rebuy costs is a good move, but Fuel and Repairs costs should be augmented to a higher level in order to make feel the burdens of having an Anaconda.
I'm certain that MB or DB recently said that the fuel quality idea was dead. It would be nothing but a punitive penalty against explorers. Scooping is already enough of a time sink without making it even more of a grind for no purpose. In any case, it's inconceivable that a far future 'fuel scoop' couldn't sort the wheat from the chaff.
Agree - with the exception of module prices which are just about right.
Who wants to constantly spend their playtime grinding repair costs, that isn't a fun way to play. Ok, those who have lots of free time might think that is fun and want their simulation to be as immersive as possible, but they're the minority and really shouldn't be the focus of any game changes.
So no to fuel increases - these make no sense either as a game mechanic or within the game background.
No to repair increases - makes no sense as a game mechanic
Also - no to the idea of bringing back NPCs stealing bounties - that was idiotic content on release and would be equally daft now.
Technology improves over time and fuel consumption has been reduced as a result. It may be a big old galaxy, but the human race has spread far and wide and limiting use of precious resources is important. Besides some Federation dudes worked out they could extract fuel by fracking asteroids further depressing the price of fuel. The Galactic Organisation for Oil Producing Planets (GOOPP) has responded by maintaining their current level of supply which also contributed to fuel prices declining.
WRT Fuel Quality it sounds like a fair idea to me but if implemented it should perhaps result in component damage rather than just limiting range (that may indirectly limit range though - unless maintained above a certain level of damage). Doing this would perhaps make the Field Repair Unit upgrade more desirable for explorers like myself. Adding a Fuel refinery on board would be an option to avoid component damage from scooped fuel usage. However, the current implementation of Fuel Scoops is fine IMO. The cost of the devices and heat damage risk seems reasonably well balanced to me, but perhaps the distinction between levels needs to be greater - as it stands I see little reason to upgrade from a 2B to a 2A fuel scoop on my Cobra.
WRT Fuel Costs, if all you ever do is very small jumps but lots of them to get from A to B then fuel cost can be very low - longer more direct jumps are more costly in terms of fuel expenditure. Perhaps the problem is not with the Fuel costs for late game players but rather fuel capacity and consumption rates (especially in the larger ships).
WRT Fuel Costs, if all you ever do is very small jumps but lots of them to get from A to B then fuel cost can be very low - longer more direct jumps are more costly in terms of fuel expenditure. Perhaps the problem is not with the Fuel costs for late game players but rather fuel capacity and consumption rates (especially in the larger ships).
Last edited:
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Yeah, I can see how it's nothing but a bad news for explorers... Sadly, sacrifices are a necessity of almost any change to any system. For all the other roles however - if combined with increased fuel costs - it would add an extra layer to decision making. Spend money on the good stuff or scoop the unrefined poor quality stuff for free. Thinking of it - with the extra fuel tanks you'll be able to mount on your ship in 1.3, the hit to exploration role may not be as bad if this idea became reality.
It was my attempt at satire. Don't read to much into this.
I really agree with some of the ideas in the OP.
Fuel costs:
Fuel is practically free. Surely the hydrogen isn't that expensive, but operating the pumping facility (in space of all places) might be. So I'd agree with a price increase.
Repair costs:
I got my T6 torn to shreds a few weeks ago. I probably had less than 30% left between all my modules combined, and 16% hull integrity left.
Repair bill? 30k.
This is absurd. Unless our ships are made of paper machete, there is no reason a 200t space ship repair bill should be equivalent to 3 slaves.
Maintenance costs:
For whatever reason, people aren't a fan of taking out anything but the largest ship ship they can possibly afford. I don't really get this. I tend to get a lot of flak when I suggest people take out smaller ships.
"But what's the point of big ships if I can't afford to fly them?" Well, you wouldn't drive your yacht to school. No, you save it for those special occasions. Like assassination missions, etc.
However, ED really drops the ball in this regard, resulting in the maintenance cost reduction being necessary. It's not all that convenient to get into your bigger ship after accepting a mission, so people want to stay in it and fly around in their pythons all the time.
So once more mechanics are in place to make it easier to use your big ships without being in them all the time, then I will be more okay with operating costs getting pushed back up.
Fuel costs:
Fuel is practically free. Surely the hydrogen isn't that expensive, but operating the pumping facility (in space of all places) might be. So I'd agree with a price increase.
Repair costs:
I got my T6 torn to shreds a few weeks ago. I probably had less than 30% left between all my modules combined, and 16% hull integrity left.
Repair bill? 30k.
This is absurd. Unless our ships are made of paper machete, there is no reason a 200t space ship repair bill should be equivalent to 3 slaves.
Maintenance costs:
For whatever reason, people aren't a fan of taking out anything but the largest ship ship they can possibly afford. I don't really get this. I tend to get a lot of flak when I suggest people take out smaller ships.
"But what's the point of big ships if I can't afford to fly them?" Well, you wouldn't drive your yacht to school. No, you save it for those special occasions. Like assassination missions, etc.
However, ED really drops the ball in this regard, resulting in the maintenance cost reduction being necessary. It's not all that convenient to get into your bigger ship after accepting a mission, so people want to stay in it and fly around in their pythons all the time.
So once more mechanics are in place to make it easier to use your big ships without being in them all the time, then I will be more okay with operating costs getting pushed back up.
Last edited:
The logic in this sentence doesn't even remotely support the conclusion.
Fuel is practically free, but spurious reasoning about pumping means the price should be jacked up.
Wha?
Well, clean water is everywhere, but sending it through my pipe costs money....
Last edited:
TBH I can not see what all the fuss is about with Fuel Scooping and Fuel Costs, Fuel Scoops do still have utility but perhaps only for explorers (like myself), bounty hunters, and pirates.
The addition of support for Fuel Transfer and additional fuel tanks also makes for some interesting options when playing co-operatively (well perhaps not interesting for the pilot of the fuel bowser).
The addition of support for Fuel Transfer and additional fuel tanks also makes for some interesting options when playing co-operatively (well perhaps not interesting for the pilot of the fuel bowser).