1.3.04

[Andrej]

Here we go again. Someone in FD really hate combat pilots

 

[Nitek [pl]]

Pecisk: Actually your argument could be valid if the bug didn't destroy mission systems. In most cases [ any ship larger than vulture] a mission to interdict pirates will cost more than the payout from it.
It is a bug - devs will fix it and this conversation is over.

 

[Soopyyy]

What you said. You want use better equipment, and better equipment is more expensive isn't? So maintaining such equipment is more expensive right? Progression isn't only about your equipment,bit your skill too. If you can't take care of your better equipment, you have to play "better" price for you carelessness.

Except for the fact that damage is inevitable if you're a combat pilot and the price paid for bonds and bounties seldom cover the cost of actually obtaining them...

 

[Dbrn47]

Problem is their definition of fun differs from some of players. Fun can mean different things, and in ED case is where big split always lies.

- - - Updated - - -



You aren't being punished. Good equipment have bigger running costs. Simple as that.

People have set their goal to get bigger ships themselves. Game doesn't put such goal for you. And it won't carter to your certain gameplay, like it or not.

Interesting how that works huh? You can actually play the game in an Eagle for the rest of your life and be perfectly fine. No no, actually that sounds silly, gotta have that carrot.

- - - Updated - - -

Except for the fact that damage is inevitable if you're a combat pilot and the price paid for bonds and bounties seldom cover the cost of actually obtaining them...

I've been a combat pilot for most of my play time since release and this simply is not true. In fact, due to how missions now scale with your rank, how combat bonds have been increased and how faction powers have bounty bonuses to be had, there is no excuse for not having enough credits to cover the price of a ship you want to fly. Bugs are one thing, but not everything is a bug. At some point the math makes sense.

 

[Ari Ben Zayn]

Before the hate starts to boil up here, here's official word:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=157537&p=2413427&viewfull=1#post2413427
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=157537&p=2413430&viewfull=1#post2413430

tl;dr: seems to be a bug, will be investigated

 

[Stigbob]

Except for the fact that damage is inevitable if you're a combat pilot and the price paid for bonds and bounties seldom cover the cost of actually obtaining them...

I generally make a little under half a million per hunting sortie, that would cover interdiction/combat damage repairs on a big ship, for my small ship its pure profit.

 

[Derath]

No it isn't, why would you have to be punished just because you want to use good equipment?
The only set goal in this game atm is getting bigger and better ships. If some people like to roleplay in Cobra's, they can do that. But they don't have any right to force others to fly crappy ships just because 'It's the realistic thing to do'

I'm only an Asp owner, but this forum trend of people who either don't care about progression or are just bad at the game insisting their junkers are the ultimate ships is idiotic.

Because good equipment comes with the largest shield in the game by a sizeable margin a swell as substantial firepower.

You'd have much more grounds for concern complaining in an asp than somebody who got trashed in a conda.

Sounds to me like repairs are back to before the first nerf, which I think is a good change to be honest.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Dear unhappy ED players:
.
Please consider that using bazookas to kill elephants might be spectacularly fun, but not cost effective.
I recommend instead taking a large caliber rifle.
.
Please stop whining and consider the costs before you decide to 'upgrade'. What you might think is an 'upgrade' may not be fit for you.
.
Thankyou,
PR

 

[Han Brannigan]

FD said they fixed the integrity repair costs the anaconda's is still bugged i dont know about other ships and also its normal repair price is bugged now 216k for 5%

Not a bug.

to those of you that think 216k sounds reasonable keep in mind im bounty hunter and with that kind of repair cost i cant use it for bounty hunting without loosing money

Nr1. Yes you can - don't get damaged ;-P. No but really you don't have to be at 100% ...
Nr2. Wrong tool - Anaconda is not ideal for bounty hunting

 

[Krieger]

There are new gripes and suggestions made every day, including there's not enough ways to make money, there's too many ways to make money and not enough money sinks, nerf everything, and everything needs a buff.. It's really not surprising that numbers are constantly changing. For some odd reason FD seems to be listening, even though they are told day in and out that they aren't. Interesting, isn't it?

We can not check whether the new repair costs are correct because Frontier never explained how it is calculated and what the rationale behind it is. That's why we get stuck in these endless "doesn't look right/seems fine to me" discussions. Not just on this subject BTW.

 

[Steve72]

I disagree with op. It sounds very reasonable. You trash your super car but expect the repair bill of a fiat. Come on. Yes if its cheaper to rebuy then thats wrong. Owning a larger ship should have risks and maintenance.

You dont let shields drop and there is no excuse with big ship due to shield cell then no repair.

You can drop in on the low wake as sc targets drop out at stations so no need to interdict or get a smaller ship.

 

[Han Brannigan]

Pecisk: Actually your argument could be valid if the bug didn't destroy mission systems. In most cases [ any ship larger than vulture] a mission to interdict pirates will cost more than the payout from it.
It is a bug - devs will fix it and this conversation is over.

Thats .

Nr1 You do not need to FS interdict ( you can follow the ship and drop at its wake )
Nr2 Interdicting sb in my Python costs 1% damage and makes anywhere between 100 and 500k ( with bounty )

- - - Updated - - -

Except for the fact that damage is inevitable if you're a combat pilot and the price paid for bonds and bounties seldom cover the cost of actually obtaining them...

Not true - or are you only using ramming techniques?

 

[Dbrn47]

We can not check whether the new repair costs are correct because Frontier never explained how it is calculated and what the rationale behind it is. That's why we get stuck in these endless "doesn't look right/seems fine to me" discussions. Not just on this subject BTW.

True but it's also hard to tell which discussions are actually valid concerns or just whining that everything costs more than 0.

 

[LeetNoob]

FD have already said the repair costs are a bug, they are looking into it. not sure why people are still defending it as good design.

 

[LeetNoob]

Not a bug.

yes. yes it is a bug

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

FD have already said the repair costs are a bug, they are looking into it. not sure why people are still defending it as good design.

No, they said they are looking into it. What's bug and what's not is hard to say here. But yeah, I agree that we should wait with FD fixing or clarifying situation.

 

[LeetNoob]

No, they said they are looking into it. What's bug and what's not is hard to say here. But yeah, I agree that we should wait with FD fixing or clarifying situation.

no it's a bug. They said it's not correct

"We are looking into the issue of repair costs. It was shifted to server moderated prices in 1.3 and is having some knock on effects which we thought we'd fixed but clearly not."

Why is it even when FD say it's a mistake people are still trying to argue it's working and it's perfect.