Why is Combat still a Low Paying High-Risk activity?
- Thread starter TrailBlazer 143
- Start date
I think I can paraphrase Phisto's comment to: " For the effort involved, I get paid enough". The fact that he enjoys the effort has an impact on that calculation.
That's an excellent way of putting it. Thank you!
I'll add I've been playing the game long enough where credits are irrelevant - if the activity is fun, I do it. If it's not fun, I don't do it.
Get a smile on that slappy ham, Ash! But yeah, wing massacre missions can also be done solo and pay fairly well. I just did one in a little over an hour that paid 21m for 35 ships. Plus 5 or 6 mil in bounties because each level 3 mission target signal starts with at least one Elite Anaconda. Level 4 mission signals start with a swarm of pythons and other ships that just mill about and don't aggro all at once so you can pick them off one by one.
Actually threat level 4's are less dangerous than threat level 3's. Because in a threat level 3 you start with a lone Elite Anaconda, sure. Sometimes in a wing. But then a group of ships pops in and all insta aggro. Mostly eagles, some cobras, but also sometimes more Elite 'condas. And tanking 8 ships to the face can get hairy depending on your setup.
Last edited:
You say, "An inexperienced trader has the same increase in risk as an inexperienced fighter."
If that's the case, why shouldn't combat pay as much, if not, more than the trading activites? (this includes Passenger Missions)
You say "Those hoops you mention [refering to missions boards and reputations] have to be jumped through by traders, passenger haulers, and miners as well. Any activity rewarded through missions face the exact same obstacles to get the best paying offers."
I ask, what about Void Opals [mining]? or the Road to richest explorations? or the past gold rushes [Rubigo, sothis]. When has Combat seen a "gold rush" that was non-mission related?
You say "outfitting costs the same for all endeavors. An A rated Distributor cost the same for all."
That's not true. Different ships use different sized internals making the price of internal fluctuate. And most ships are used for different roles meaning some items won't be bought or can't be bought.
But that aside, are you insinuating that since any player can buy anything, that the risk vs reward is the same across all boards, regardless of activity?
Last edited:
This statement makes me believe that if you were a new player, or a player wanting to get a new ship or module, that you WOULD care about credits and "balanced pay". Am I correct?
Until Frontier states this, I can't take your words to Fact.
I was talking about the relative change in risk being the same when considering an inexperienced player. I'm not going to heap gold rushed and the like into a conversation about general levels of viewed through a 'risk v reward' filter. That's part of my point about 'scatter shot logic'. Just throw anything on the pile, and see if it burns, Huh?
Would you feel better if I edited that post to say: "An c6 A rated Distributor cost the same for all"? Because with out being pedantic, that is what I meant.
Yeah, and explorer can certainly equip Reactive Surface Composites, but if they don't they've decided that the investment is not worth the risk. When caught out being attacked, they may have to 'pay the piper'. When a player outfits the large benefits of better armor, along with the large cost involved, it's part of their calculations. You seem to have an 'absolutist' view on values, rather than the 'relative' view I am describing.
But, you are perfectly willing to assume combat is a 'high risk' activity without FD saying so....
Who was that guy that complained combat was too hard when 2.0 came out & nerfed his ability to steamroll over "highly skilled" Corvettes...
In his Type 6
Armed with a Pulse laser
& a mining laser...
In his Type 6
Armed with a Pulse laser
& a mining laser...
I have to until Frontier says otherwise. from my experience, combat was the hardest thing to get a grasp on, but that's MY OPINION and PERSONAL EXPERIENCE though, so that really doesn't matter in general.
Last edited:
Grasp and cost are not in the same column. You may find, and I do, that by example FD describes an activitie's 'risk factor' by what they pay. If your experience says it is payed as a low risk venture, maybe FD is trying to tell you something? I don't argue that combat may reap lower absolute pay, but in the 'risk v reward' continuum, I consider combat pay as relatively even with the rest of the jobs out there.
Last edited:
Void opals are rare, or will be after BGS tweaking, so the effort is (will be) quite high, and the rings will deplete as well in the new system, if I understand right, so it's a diminishing return.
Same goes for road-to-riches. You can only do it once.
What you're comparing, still, is effort, not risk.
Last edited:
As I have said, my knowlege to grasp something means nothing. Some are good some are bad, but looking at the facts, I feel Combat is an underpaid job all around.
I can't make those feelings go away, I can only offer what my experience shows me. I believe there is a decent enough relative balance.
Nope.
If I were a new player I'd be focusing on learning how to fly my ship and navigate the game universe. Discover it as I go. Who cares about credits and balanced pay when they crash into the station every time they try to land? [haha]
...in fact, that's exactly what I did when I first fired up the game. I would also advise any person starting the game to take it slow, enjoy the journey, and learn to play. The stuff will come in time.
Last edited:
I’ve got over a billion space bucks in cash and 1.8 billion in assets and according to my stats, the bulk of it was made via bounties and combat missions. Over 2 years, well, it’s no Robigo run, but surely I’m not an isolated case? I’ve never focused on credits per hour or anything like that, just played the game wherever it led me at the time.
It's almost like playing to enjoy the game is more rewarding than treating it as a second job.
Sterling MH
Banned
If you think PvE combat is risk free, try it like the majority who engage in PvE combat do it: in a low shield trade optimised ship. Use a T6. Nice enough to fly, unlike the 7 and 9. Then tell me it's riskier than a PvPmeta ship in PvP combat.
Oh, and if the PvP is risky, explain how people are complaining about the fight taking so long that everyone has time to high wake. Which, for some reason, nobody wants to chase a HW. Instead of a shield booster, get a wake scanner, and put some fuel in your machine, lighten it up a bit, so they can't out range you, yes this is not optimal combat build, but you complained that they left before the fight finished. So their shields will be down or SCB shots fired. Go after them or lose the fight because you specialised too far.
And if you want your PvP to affect the galaxy, that means you want your player actions to affect the environment. Playing vs the Environment. That's PvE. Do that instead. The only way PvP could change the galaxy is if there were no rebuy, you just started again in the freewinder.
Oh, and if the PvP is risky, explain how people are complaining about the fight taking so long that everyone has time to high wake. Which, for some reason, nobody wants to chase a HW. Instead of a shield booster, get a wake scanner, and put some fuel in your machine, lighten it up a bit, so they can't out range you, yes this is not optimal combat build, but you complained that they left before the fight finished. So their shields will be down or SCB shots fired. Go after them or lose the fight because you specialised too far.
And if you want your PvP to affect the galaxy, that means you want your player actions to affect the environment. Playing vs the Environment. That's PvE. Do that instead. The only way PvP could change the galaxy is if there were no rebuy, you just started again in the freewinder.
Sterling MH
Banned
No, you're not alone, you're probably a large if not vast majority. However when it comes to complaining, those who want change will have reason to speak up, whilst those without a problem won't see a need to speak. So you'll hear more gripes and they will be all from people who don't do like you so, if they're complaining about things like this thread's "OP" comment. Selection bias. Nothing else.
Problem is that this thread now has the OP not changing their mind and people telling him that he's not being sympathised with.
If combat is the least pay worthy profession (and I'd include bounty hunting and piracy in that), then it means that people will be "forced" to play other roles. Since piracy and other forms of PvP combat require someone to hit, this lack of payment can make the universe more target rich. Any PvPer who only trades in Solo to hide from that is merely part of the problem and their complaints about PvP can be ignored. If you do that, either stop and become part of the target environment or just realise that we too don't want to be someone else's content. We just don't bother complaining nobody will become part of ours...