In your opinion, do you think this game needs a player market?
No.
Absolutely not.
If you want to see this game ruined in record time, this is how it would start.
There are a few people posting in this thread recently who clearly don't know how anything works. They should learn first, then speak.
One person's argument is nothing more than smoke and mirrors - I hope it at least sounded good in their head.
Riôt
Absolutely not.
If you want to see this game ruined in record time, this is how it would start.
There are a few people posting in this thread recently who clearly don't know how anything works. They should learn first, then speak.
One person's argument is nothing more than smoke and mirrors - I hope it at least sounded good in their head.
Riôt
With the BGS in play I think that any trading system expansion needs to be tied to the BGS.
One of the biggest things coming from EVE around a player controlled market is that a small number of dedicated players can totally screw up local economies and sometimes even whole game economies. I do think that trading could be expanded to include engineered modules, mats, data etc but it should be part of a BGS system update IMO.
One of the biggest things coming from EVE around a player controlled market is that a small number of dedicated players can totally screw up local economies and sometimes even whole game economies. I do think that trading could be expanded to include engineered modules, mats, data etc but it should be part of a BGS system update IMO.
Yes. It would have to be done carefully to avoid exploit though.
Do not let sellers choose a buyer. Items get auctioned for a set time that is set by the seller. Seller can also set a minimum price. Time has a minimum of 12 hours (no instant gratification). No option to end early or "buy it now" available. Anything a player can own should be auctionable: ships, materials, data, commodities. Once an item is up for auction it is no longer available to the seller (held in escrow). Auctions that fail to receive a bid are returned to the seller.
Do not let sellers choose a buyer. Items get auctioned for a set time that is set by the seller. Seller can also set a minimum price. Time has a minimum of 12 hours (no instant gratification). No option to end early or "buy it now" available. Anything a player can own should be auctionable: ships, materials, data, commodities. Once an item is up for auction it is no longer available to the seller (held in escrow). Auctions that fail to receive a bid are returned to the seller.
Buh, what? Every other MMO I've played when there is an expansion pack, anybody in the common areas is in the same instance. It's only if you try to go to the new areas that you get locked out. For instance in World of Warcraft, beginning players on PvP servers are now getting griefed by level 110 players, instead of only level 100 players.
Untrue IME - Both GW1 and GW2 expansions introduced new features that were exclusive to them and applicable to existing areas as well as old ones (even in common PvP areas).
In any case - the so called advantages of "combat related" engineering upgrades typically also come with disadvantages too (most upgrades involve some form of trade-off even at L5). The main balancing issues are with at least some of the randomised experimental benefits but FD have been trying to make sure all the benefits are not too OP and have nerfed/tweaked them at least a couple of times in the past year.
I am sorry, but while I may agree to a degree that the Horizons add-on is worth the investment I do disagree with the general stance that it is a pay to win situation. I kind of agree with the principle that Horizons and non-Horizons owners should perhaps be segregated but it not being the case is far from a clear Pay-to-win situation.
Overall though, the pay-to-win argument is irrelevant to the topic at hand - where the OP's original proposal is concerned their proposal would not actually achieve the claimed intended goal - to create a Credit sink. In addition, those games that do have player markets typically do have issues with the likes of PvP bank incursions. Elite is one of the few MMOs that seems to have completely avoided it so far.
Pretty innovative idea. Some people might want to non-exploitatively give/loan stuff to a friend, but it's not essential, and your system would work pretty well otherwise.
If I knew nothing at all about this subject, I'd still be listening more to the side of the debate that's actually presenting ideas and a real argument, than the side that really... isn't.
Odd – do you really mean to suggest that engineered ships are balanced with non-engineered ships, by din of their upgrade's disadvantages? I'd rebut that idea but... you can't possibly believe it, can you?
Well, let me rebut it briefly. Stick efficient on all your weapons, stick advanced low power on your shield, replace three shield boosters with one Heavy Duty one, roll a dirty drive with a Grade 1 low emissions power plant... you have a superior ship. No experimental benefit, not even any of the best upgrades. Engineered ships are stronger – potentially far stronger. Do you disagree?
As to 'pay to win', I guess the term is a bit emotionally charged. I've laid out my definition and a case for why Horizons does fit it, but also why it isn't actually much of a problem. But imagine if CQC was the main game, and CQC fighters had paywalled upgrades on the level of heavy engineering. Would you really be reticent about calling that pay to win? The difference, I'm suggesting, is that the main game isn't really about winning.
Last edited:
No.
Just no.
Never.
Players are as responsible with market prices as Ted Bundy was with hugs.
Just no.
Never.
Players are as responsible with market prices as Ted Bundy was with hugs.
I agree fully on that but let me add the constructive part on it.
Does the game need an expanded market system?
Yes.
I sketched it already earlier here and am not going to repeat it.
Regards, Miklos
Since this topic keeps resurfacing on the forums I did put the idea forward (with some structure) some time ago:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...materials-trading?highlight=materials+trading
Yes; I do realise that the BGS would probably require some extensive re-coding but the structure I put forward works to avoid exploitation.
Wouldn't say the game needs a player market, but it could be alright. Some people would abuse it no doubt, so it would probably be too much in time and resources to add to the game. Also depends on what was able to be sold. Some things - like modules and ships - would have to be off limits for sure.
Maybe something like a player trade option for materials and data would be ok, treat them like commodities that can't be sold in a market to avoid any impact on the bgs. I'm always discarding mats and it feels like such a waste, be good to be able to give them to someone who needs them or trade for something I do need.
Maybe something like a player trade option for materials and data would be ok, treat them like commodities that can't be sold in a market to avoid any impact on the bgs. I'm always discarding mats and it feels like such a waste, be good to be able to give them to someone who needs them or trade for something I do need.
No IMO.
This game needs a credit *sink*? Are you serious?
Buy a Cutter and do some PvP! You'll lose money faster than you can complete a jump!
Yes, you might be able to get 30MM per hour when
-stacking missions
-exploiting the rebuy mechanic with a small ship (saving the trip back)
-knowing where to find the right system state and station/outpost constellation
-are willing to do criminal activities
Other than that, you can get maybe 10 million per hour *if you're lucky*. That means, for every Cutter death you'll need 2-3 hours to grind for money. And when doing some serious PvP you can expect to lose a Cutter every 1-2 hrs... so there is your money sink.
Of course, if you use the Cutter only for seal clubbing then there's no risk and using the exploits above you'll swim in money. But this is *your* choice.
Buy a Cutter and do some PvP! You'll lose money faster than you can complete a jump!
Yes, you might be able to get 30MM per hour when
-stacking missions
-exploiting the rebuy mechanic with a small ship (saving the trip back)
-knowing where to find the right system state and station/outpost constellation
-are willing to do criminal activities
Other than that, you can get maybe 10 million per hour *if you're lucky*. That means, for every Cutter death you'll need 2-3 hours to grind for money. And when doing some serious PvP you can expect to lose a Cutter every 1-2 hrs... so there is your money sink.
Of course, if you use the Cutter only for seal clubbing then there's no risk and using the exploits above you'll swim in money. But this is *your* choice.
Last edited: