Patch Notes Update 2.3 Beta 5 Change Log

[This Forum Sucks]

You need some cheese with your whine? So fun=credits for you, does it? How sad.

Are you honestly going to sit there and tell me that in this, a game where the overwhelming majority of player progression is through earning credits, that you don't find a fun activity more fun when you get paid for doing it? Because I think we both know that would be a lie. If this game is purely about the noble pursuit of fun and credits are entirely inconsequential, then tell me why a) the higher end ships and modules cost such a staggering amount of money and b) why you care how much other people are earning?

Also, I do appreciate the irony in you responding to my crack about the "fun police" by accusing me of having the wrong kind of fun. [up]

BTW, its people like you who got the 2.1 AI nerfed. "Oh, if I am not making at least X million credits per hour in an RES, then the game isn't fun....so giz us back our RES Farming".

I mean, sure, if you like. Is there anything else you need to accuse me of before you actually respond with an argument for why multicrew should earn less than regular wings for the same actions? I'll cop to the Kennedy assassination if it moves things along here.

Great patch! Balancing MC earnings according to other game activities is obviously the right thing to do, well done FD.

Explain to me how "doing an activity in multicrew should earn you less money than doing the exact same activity in a regular wing" is "balanced"? Because it seems like the exact opposite to me.

I am Agree with the game being hard to earn money, i don't want to see 50.000 anaconda in open mod, driven by 1 month player.
All the crying is from teenager player who want their big ship without playing the game.

Actually, I think if either side of this argument deserves to be painted as crying, whining, sulking or whatever other negative sounding words you can think of to disguise the fact that you'd rather not have a reasonable discussion about things, it's the side who got this change added by complaining in the first place, wouldn't you say? That aside, tell me why you think it would be bad if multicrew brought the game fifty thousand new players in a month? At a conservative estimate that's at least an extra million quid for Frontier to spend on the game (before any of those players drop money in the cash store) and then there's all the benefits the game itself gets from having a bigger player base, a more populated world, better social aspects, etc, so I'm not sure why you think that's so terrible? If it's because they'll all be flying anacondas then I'll have to ask a) why you care and b) how you'll know they've only been playing for a month?

Finally, in an attempt to drag you all back to an actual discussion instead of just accusing me of trying to connive my way onto easy street:

That ship has sailed my friends, though I strongly suspect you all know that already and are just trying to kick away the ladder.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Are you honestly going to sit there and tell me that in this, a game where the overwhelming majority of player progression is through earning credits, that you don't find a fun activity more fun when you get paid for doing it? Because I think we both know that would be a lie. If this game is purely about the noble pursuit of fun and credits are entirely inconsequential, then tell me why a) the higher end ships and modules cost such a staggering amount of money and b) why you care how much other people are earning?

Also, I do appreciate the irony in you responding to my crack about the "fun police" by accusing me of having the wrong kind of fun. [up]

I mean, sure, if you like. Is there anything else you need to accuse me of before you actually respond with an argument for why multicrew should earn less than regular wings for the same actions? I'll cop to the Kennedy assassination if it moves things along here.


Explain to me how "doing an activity in multicrew should earn you less money than doing the exact same activity in a regular wing" is "balanced"? Because it seems like the exact opposite to me.


Actually, I think if either side of this argument deserves to be painted as crying, whining, sulking or whatever other negative sounding words you can think of to disguise the fact that you'd rather not have a reasonable discussion about things, it's the side who got this change added by complaining in the first place, wouldn't you say? That aside, tell me why you think it would be bad if multicrew brought the game fifty thousand new players in a month? At a conservative estimate that's at least an extra million quid for Frontier to spend on the game (before any of those players drop money in the cash store) and then there's all the benefits the game itself gets from having a bigger player base, a more populated world, better social aspects, etc, so I'm not sure why you think that's so terrible? If it's because they'll all be flying anacondas then I'll have to ask a) why you care and b) how you'll know they've only been playing for a month?

Finally, in an attempt to drag you all back to an actual discussion instead of just accusing me of trying to connive my way onto easy street:
View attachment 117250
That ship has sailed my friends, though I strongly suspect you all know that already and are just trying to kick away the ladder.

As for the last question: because they'll whine about griefers, scream you need 9000mj godmode to kill a viper and insist insurance should be free.

 

[This Forum Sucks]

As for the last question: because they'll whine about griefers, scream you need 9000mj godmode to kill a viper and insist insurance should be free.

Let's assume (and this is a way more charitable interpretation than it deserves, by which I mean you're talking absolute rubbish) that's true, I still don't see why you care?

 

[Sabazeus]

"Bounty Vouchers and Combat Bonds are now awarded to MultiCrew members based on their combat rank."

I was expecting to bring some guy back to the game to help me out on the bridge of federal corvette, and help themselves out, so maybe they could afford a proper allrounder ship like ASPX at some point. Now it seems I can take them on tour a couple of times, but that's going to be about it.

Oh boy. I wish I could donate ship to these guys. One that couldn't be covered by insurance? Even a simple hauler might make a huge difference to them.

 

[This Forum Sucks]

Oh boy. I wish I could donate ship to these guys.

It's way past time they give us the ability to transfer credits, to be honest.

 

[ZeroAi]

Just wanted to post again a thanks to FD for all the hard work going into this release!

(don't mind the outspoken and mostly grumpy people arguing - it's what they do! I mean, if we all had the same opinions the forums would be much less entertaining)

 

[Vandaahl]

Explain to me how "doing an activity in multicrew should earn you less money than doing the exact same activity in a regular wing" is "balanced"? Because it seems like the exact opposite to me.

Because you might be doing the same thing, but not the same way? No?
Why you should get the same amount when you are helping out a buddy, but he has to pay the overhead costs? Repairs, rebuy, ammo and all that... Or are you paying for the overhead as well?

 

[Ian Skippy]

"Bounty Vouchers and Combat Bonds are now awarded to MultiCrew members based on their combat rank."

I was expecting to bring some guy back to the game to help me out on the bridge of federal corvette, and help themselves out, so maybe they could afford a proper allrounder ship like ASPX at some point. Now it seems I can take them on tour a couple of times, but that's going to be about it.

Oh boy. I wish I could donate ship to these guys. One that couldn't be covered by insurance? Even a simple hauler might make a huge difference to them.

Then give six tols of palladium and they have their ship. Or help them do a mission. Or fly around for an hour scanning planets. Everything will give people their hauler/adder/viper in an hour or two. And if they dont like any of that, they wont like anything else in this game either.

 

[Lightspeed]

Could you please help me understand why you care whether someone plays "the whole game" or not? What difference does it make to you whether a new player makes 100k in an hour or 1M? Either way, I think you would continue to enjoy the game just the same.

Is it a problem because it offends your sense of fair-play? Just throwing that guess out there, I'd really like to hear it in your own words.

No, it's not an issue of other people making more credits compared to me. It's an issue of game balance for the majority.

If one sector is making credits too easily, others complain about the need to inflate their income: mining, exploration and trading being the big three. The game becomes unbalanced because the one easy-money feature creates a credit inflation problem for everybody else.

Furthermore, a sudden raft of new players making easy credits to advance through the game quickly to purchase bigger ships without the accompanying piloting skills will make for easy target practice, because they won't have learned sufficient tactics to handle those ships well. So that's not a problem for me.

It does, however, become a problem for me later when they start whining the game is too hard, the AI are too difficult, and other pilots are causing them grief.

Then the whole game suffers because it has to be rebalanced once again to satisfy their woes.

 

[wstephenson]

Well argued, Lightspeed.

It drags the whole game down. And these 'friends who will only buy the game if they can earn like an endgame player via Multicrew' will tire of it and leave again promptly, probably posting negative reviews on steam about how shallow the game is.

Now consider whether the situation would be improved if the multicrew payouts were scaled by your total assets in game instead of combat rank .

 

[Lightspeed]

Well argued, Lightspeed.

It drags the whole game down. And these 'friends who will only buy the game if they can earn like an endgame player via Multicrew' will tire of it and leave again promptly, probably posting negative reviews on steam about how shallow the game is.

Now consider whether the situation would be improved if the multicrew payouts were scaled by your total assets in game instead of combat rank .

Yes, ^^^ this too ! Thankyou.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Well argued, Lightspeed.

It drags the whole game down. And these 'friends who will only buy the game if they can earn like an endgame player via Multicrew' will tire of it and leave again promptly, probably posting negative reviews on steam about how shallow the game is.

Now consider whether the situation would be improved if the multicrew payouts were scaled by your total assets in game instead of combat rank .

This isn't an argument over the depth of gameplay. Changing the payout does not add or remove depth to the game mechanics.

Changing the payout merely balances between fun and progression. That isn't a depth issue as it doesn't change how the gunner mechanics work, and it doesn't change the mechanics of multi-crew. All this changes is time spent vs. reward factors.

If people perceive more "depth" vs "shallowness" in that, then it is merely a psychological illusion.

 

[This Forum Sucks]

Because you might be doing the same thing, but not the same way? No?
Why you should get the same amount when you are helping out a buddy, but he has to pay the overhead costs? Repairs, rebuy, ammo and all that... Or are you paying for the overhead as well?

I'm not seeing how "everyone, including the ship owner, earns significantly less while multicrewing" helps your buddy out with his repairs, rebuy & ammo costs? Though your point does support my assertion that people will be less likely to open their ships to multicrew, because why would they bother if they're going to earn a lot less but their running costs are the same?

No, it's not an issue of other people making more credits compared to me. It's an issue of game balance for the majority.

If one sector is making credits too easily, others complain about the need to inflate their income: mining, exploration and trading being the big three. The game becomes unbalanced because the one easy-money feature creates a credit inflation problem for everybody else.

Furthermore, a sudden raft of new players making easy credits to advance through the game quickly to purchase bigger ships without the accompanying piloting skills will make for easy target practice, because they won't have learned sufficient tactics to handle those ships well. So that's not a problem for me.

It does, however, become a problem for me later when they start whining the game is too hard, the AI are too difficult, and other pilots are causing them grief.

Then the whole game suffers because it has to be rebalanced once again to satisfy their woes.

I'm pretty sure income has been nerfed far more often than it's been buffed - just look at all the "exploits" they've had to patch and ask yourself why people rush to them the way they do? I'll give you a hint, the answer isn't "because kids today don't understand the true character building value of mind numbing tedium".

And these 'friends who will only buy the game if they can earn like an endgame player via Multicrew' will tire of it and leave again promptly, probably posting negative reviews on steam about how shallow the game is.

This is the most laughably terrible argument I've heard in a long while. You don't want people to play the game because they'll play it wrong and leave bad steam reviews? Isn't that a self-correcting problem from your (admittedly badly thought out) viewpoint?

 

[andrak]

How FD managed to create (and evolve) one of the greatest games of this decade is beyond me sometimes. It feels like amateur night sometimes.

They are only amateurs when it comes to playing their own game.

 

[Lightspeed]

This isn't an argument over the depth of gameplay. Changing the payout does not add or remove depth to the game mechanics.

Changing the payout merely balances between fun and progression. That isn't a depth issue as it doesn't change how the gunner mechanics work, and it doesn't change the mechanics of multi-crew. All this changes is time spent vs. reward factors.

If people perceive more "depth" vs "shallowness" in that, then it is merely a psychological illusion.

I think he's giving an example of how new players would likely react, if they came into the game only to enjoy multi-crew and then tired of this one feature.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

I think he's giving an example of how new players would likely react, if they came into the game only to enjoy multi-crew and then tired of this one feature.

If they tire of it, surely that would most likely be because they don't enjoy the feature or because they find the time spent vs reward factor too low?

 

[stormyuk]

I think he's giving an example of how new players would likely react, if they came into the game only to enjoy multi-crew and then tired of this one feature.

Surely no one would come into the game for that one feature though? Seems a bit silly to me.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Cross-posting for clarity.

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the feedback, it’s exactly why we run betas like this… to test out features, and find the right balance with support from the community.

With regards to multicrew, we felt it was important to balance the amount of credits you receive after joining a session for a few reasons.
Without this balance players would quickly be able to skip the initial progression in the game. This is something that was designed to teach players how to engage with the Elite Dangerous galaxy, and allowing players to jump in to someone else’s ship and earn millions of credits in no time at all would allow them to skip this progression entirely and hop straight in to a larger ship, without having learned how to make money in normal gameplay. These new players won’t have learned the intricacies of each ship, the intricacies of combat, exploration or trade, and most importantly they won’t feel like they’ve earned the right to sit in the mighty Anaconda. It would truly change the early in-game progression, and knock the balance of the game for the worse… for both new and experienced players.

The multicrew feature would be used as an exploit if rewards stay as high as they were in previous betas. We understand that this will still happen a little anyway, but reducing the reward will further reduce the frequency of people appearing on ships to simply earn as many credits as possible before being kicked.

We also think it’s important to find the right risk-reward balance. When you join a ship as a crew member you no longer have to worry about rebuy costs if you’re destroyed, and that reduces the risk vastly. For this reason, the rewards should be reduced to match that.

Also, I thought I'd correct a couple of things that have been said in here about how it works, just to make sure everyone is on the same page. Firstly the helm always gets the full reward, 100%, whatever their rank, as they have earned the ship, and are taking the rebuy risk etc. Their rank doesn’t affect this – after all they have already earned enough money for a big enough ship to multicrew in the first place. The money their crew gets is additional to this. Secondly, all players, crew or helm, still earn rank upgrades with only one exception, which is when the helm cashes in exploration data this would be an exploit for people that have merely joined their ship for the short time needed to cash them in, so crew are excluded from this, so exploration rank is not affected. Hope that clears up a few things!

Multicrew is an incredibly fun feature to use, take part in with your friends, and meet new Commanders to help explore, fight and trade… we want to continue rewarding players for taking part in Multicrew (because let’s face it earning credits for blowing up ships is still a lot of fun), but finding the right balance is incredibly important. Thanks for your patience.

 

[sedilbur]

Thx Frontier

The only feature I was waiting (despite the obviously unfunny behavior of some of the gameplay faces ... autolock for not saying it)

You just destroyed the appeal of Multicrew. The risk and reward... did you evaluate it for the helmet ? with auto lock gunner system, sure it much more risky than normal crew...


Let's imagine this. Before 2.3.
Two new players

1. One go for trader elite rank
1. One go for combat elite rank.


In the 2.3. When they both will play Multicrew, they will earn different rewards for the same job. So the trader will just go back to the trading. Even if they both played as good as they can.
it's called "discrimination" in some part of the world. The only way for them will be to join "normal crew" and avoid your restriction. That's silly to put a bullet in your own feature. (But we know the final result ... just look at Powerplay).

Oh maybe the trader can do multicrew mining...the reward is so so much interesting when looking at it. (for the record, that was ironical).

Can we now hope a live release before you destroy something else ?

 

[zimms]

it's called "discrimination" in some part of the world.

Hahaha, oh boy. Some people really make it their job to be outraged and offended.