Why is there more malice aimed at people wanting mining the way it was than towards the people who exploited it?

[Techmonkey]

Does it really matter if a new player watches half a dozen youtube videos then goes from sidewinder to Anaconda in mere hours?

Why should it matter how they choose to play - "Blaze your own trail" is the slogan emblazoned across all of the 'official' propaganda regarding ED - so why consider, because a new player doesn't have to follow the slug-like progress from the game even just under 3 years ago, they are 'doing it wrong'?

Once upon a time I thought this was a 'happy place' for new players to visit... Now that these players can 'earn' credits on a scale those of us a few years ago weren't able to, it has really brought out the true 'killjoys' who appear to bemoan how they didn't get their fleet handed them off a LTD encrusted spoon...

To a point it does. Now I don't give if anybody get their anaconda in 2h, but the problem is that traditionally those people tend to go to the forums and voice their discontent over unfair PVP PVE combat, and how a player Vulture or Python is not supposed to blast their one of the big three to the rebuy screen You know I don't make it up, and this issue is not exclusive to Elite. I witnessed this phenomena in some games already, where a certain amount of player skill is required to operate the desired gear.

 

[Rat Catcher]

To a point it does. Now I don't give if anybody get their anaconda in 2h, but the problem is that traditionally those people tend to go to the forums and voice their discontent over unfair PVP PVE combat, and how a player Vulture or Python is not supposed to blast their one of the big three to the rebuy screen You know I don't make it up, and this issue is not exclusive to Elite. I witnessed this phenomena in some games already, where a certain amount of player skill is required to operate the desired gear.

My Courier will blast a poorly fitted Anaconda into scrap...

Of course those who watch a video, mine until they are catatonic, then buy everything that isn't rank-locked, will discover there is more than just having the shiny stuff, and yes, they are likely to come here and complain how unfair it is...

But it is their choice, and if they have played any other multiplayer game (preferably another MMO) they might, just might, remember that skill helps

 

[Old Duck]

Other professions, missions and the whole game needs a profit adjustment/boost.

Would you support my original suggestion that these boosts have a curve applied to them? We already have that to an extent, with mission payouts increasing per faction as your reputation increases with that faction. I'm totally fine with an allied faction paying much more than they currently do for bounties, missions, etc. To balance this I would want reputation increase to see a bit of a nerf. It should take some effort to become allied with a faction, but then the faction should treat you like their best friend, offering very lucrative payouts.

I also think reputation should affect market prices. If I become renowned for delivering chicken eggs in the most careful and cared for fashion, people will pay me more for those eggs knowing that they are getting quality than they would if I was just some stranger on the street peddling unknown eggs. This would allow higher prices for things like Void Opals and LTDs for allied players, perhaps even prices close to "gold rush" prices.

We could also get payout bonuses for superpower rank in superpower systems, Powerplay rank, etc.

This curve would give a true sense of progression, which goes a long way to reduce the sense of grind (though I'm sure somebody will turn it into a grind because that's just what people do).

 

[SgtMajRaz]

I think you assume that everyone who cares about game balance also cares about how you play the game. Granted, the ebb and flow of the conversation in this thread has included discussion about individual player preferences, but I'm pretty sure nobody in this thread is specifically charting your own ship progression to determine whether or not you are worthy of "malice".

Personally, I could give a rat's behind what you do in the game or how you do it. What I care about is the game itself, so when a bunch of people come on the forum and tell Frontier to switch ED to easy mode where we all go from Sidewinder to Python in a day, well, those of us looking for a more challenging, immersive simulation are going to push back. Are you one of these people? I honestly don't know, as your posts in this thread seem contradictory in places. It sounds like you are not, since every time I bring up this argument you deny that's what you want. But there are people who do want "easy mode", and that changes MY game, so here I am saying, "No thank you."

That said, I personally have no problem with "pay to win", because ED is a PvE game for me, so you winning does not mean I'm losing. Heck, if people could buy a Cutter with real cash like Star Citizen, this would not bother me a bit. I'll just assume they are children of Donald Trump (their game characters, not the RL players) who inherited a fortune. In fact, that's more immersive for me than all of us starting off in the same Sidewinder, which makes no sense. I also don't have any problem with gifting credits in the game, as that also is immersive and real life. I just don't want ED to be rewritten to become a casual "easy mode" "can be finished in a weekend" kind of game. Though having said that, even this is less than a deal breaker for me now than it was a year ago, seeing that I've already "finished" the game myself. I'm personally thankful that progression was hard back in the day, as that challenge is what made ED worthwhile for me and many others. YMMV of course.

Anyway, I keep trying to quit this thread, but I really want to make sure everybody involved understands this point of view before I do. Your Bugs Bunny characterization is more like Bugs Strawman IMO, and it does nothing to diffuse the "malice" you seem so concerned about.

Going to respond to this eventually when I'm in front of a keyboard and not on mobile.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

You know, a long time ago, I remember it very vaguely, I used to benefit from participating in these events that happened on a regular basis. I'd be able to boost my credit balance much more compared to what I would normally be able to make, and as an aside it was quite a social experience also.

Community Goals I believe they were called.

(goes without saying that what used to be a fortune in ye olde days, say 10-20m credits if you put some effort in, won't even get many CMDRs out of bed any more, but that could be easily rectified)

 

[Jmanis]

You know, a long time ago, I remember it very vaguely, I used to benefit from participating in these events that happened on a regular basis. I'd be able to boost my credit balance much more compared to what I would normally be able to make, and as an aside it was quite a social experience also.

Community Goals I believe they were called.

(goes without saying that what used to be a fortune in ye olde days, say 10-20m credits if you put some effort in, won't even get many CMDRs out of bed any more, but that could be easily rectified)

Maybe that's why FD don't run CGs anymore... they know people aren't going to slog an activity for a week, to be rewarded =~ 20-30m in credits.

 

[Old Duck]

Going to respond to this eventually when I'm in front of a keyboard and not on mobile.

Check my last post (right above this one) as it gives my version of an idealized progression curve. It's probably not what you are looking for, but at least you'll know exactly where I stand when it comes to the game itself. This is based mostly on my desire for an immersive, internally-cohesive challenging gameplay environment (which includes economy) rather than any perceived interest in the progression rate of other players.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

Would you support my original suggestion that these boosts have a curve applied to them? We already have that to an extent, with mission payouts increasing per faction as your reputation increases with that faction. I'm totally fine with an allied faction paying much more than they currently do for bounties, missions, etc. To balance this I would want reputation increase to see a bit of a nerf. It should take someto become allied with a faction, but then the faction should treat you like their best friend, offering very lucrative payouts.

I also think reputation should affect market prices. If I become renowned for delivering chicken eggs in the most careful and cared for fashion, people will pay me more for those eggs knowing that they are getting quality than they would if I was just some stranger on the street peddling unknown eggs. This would allow higher prices for things like Void Opals and LTDs for allied players, perhaps even prices close to "gold rush" prices.

We could also get payout bonuses for superpower rank in superpower systems, Powerplay rank, etc.

This curve would give a true sense of progression, which goes a long way to reduce the sense of grind (though I'm sure somebody will turn it into a grind because that's just what people do).

Hm, in theory I'm in favor of a progression system based on reputation, but I have no idea how well this would go along with mining, because to be frank, I don't do that much mining. I did some LTD mining on my alt, but stopped after I had the money for most medium ships. Don't care for FC, it would just be a burden.
I would assume double/triple hotspots are quiet rare, so aren't most players selling their goods at a select handful of stations anyway?
But in general I agree that reputation and allegiance should have stronger effects and consequences in ED, yes.
Or make mining more dangerous? Yes. I would be all for it.
Gutting the income after mosts of the existing players benefitted from it? Nah.

 

[VirtueXOI]

Check my last post (right above this one) as it gives my version of an idealized progression curve. It's probably not what you are looking for, but at least you'll know exactly where I stand when it comes to the game itself. This is based mostly on my desire for an immersive, internally-cohesive challenging gameplay environment (which includes economy) rather than any perceived interest in the progression rate of other players.

I'm with you on this progression style , just see some problem with FC and trading elite being super fast if you have rich friend.

 

[Techmonkey]

On top of that many eithe

Maybe that's why FD don't run CGs anymore... they know people aren't going to slog an activity for a week, to be rewarded =~ 20-30m in credits.

Good point. While this thread was going on I made about a billion by playing on and off (I thought i'll stock up my wallet just in case). Also from my understanding the CGs were demanding on manpower which is now required for other projects.

 

[Old Duck]

You know, a long time ago, I remember it very vaguely, I used to benefit from participating in these events that happened on a regular basis. I'd be able to boost my credit balance much more compared to what I would normally be able to make, and as an aside it was quite a social experience also.

Community Goals I believe they were called.

(goes without saying that what used to be a fortune in ye olde days, say 10-20m credits if you put some effort in, won't even get many CMDRs out of bed any more, but that could be easily rectified)

My first community goal bought me a Keelback, which served as my favorite ship for some time, so don't knock CGs!

 

[VirtueXOI]

For CG , some could be created by the game itself , and be profitable , like station repair , or very hight demand in a station. Without the CG system we had before but just some in game aim with great reward.

 

[MishaTX]

Game progression is up to each player anyway. Nobody has to go after gold-rushes.

No, they don't, you're absolutely right about that. But when everything becomes easy mode and I have to deliberately gimp myself to keep a challenge going, then the game is not a challenge anymore and it loses my interest real fast.

If I want that kind of a challenge, I could start "challenging" myself to cook a dinner with both hands tied behind my back while refusing to light the stove.

For free.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

CGs weren't without their problems, but the good thing was, over time it balanced itself out.
I remember on CG where we reached Tier 8 on Friday evening, so a lot of players didn't even have a chance to take part in it.
I had a week off and made 60 millions in that CG and could afford my first Python. The forum was outraged. Good times.

 

[Old Duck]

No, they don't, you're absolutely right about that. But when everything becomes easy mode and I have to deliberately gimp myself to keep a challenge going, then the game is not a challenge anymore and it loses my interest real fast.

If I want that kind of a challenge, I could start "challenging" myself to cook a dinner with both hands tied behind my back while refusing to light the stove.

For free.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Maybe that's why FD don't run CGs anymore... they know people aren't going to slog an activity for a week, to be rewarded =~ 20-30m in credits.

My bet is that the 50 man team responsible for CGs and IIs (some of those were actually pretty good I thought, credits weren't the main motivator for me at that point) were rationalised and/or moved onto Odyssey. Or maybe not, who knows.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

No, they don't, you're absolutely right about that. But when everything becomes easy mode and I have to deliberately gimp myself to keep a challenge going, then the game is not a challenge anymore and it loses my interest real fast.

If I want that kind of a challenge, I could start "challenging" myself to cook a dinner with both hands tied behind my back while refusing to light the stove.

For free.

See, that's where we disagree. This game is all about setting my own goals/challenges and trying to achieve them. It's a sandbox.
If I only cared for progression, I would have stopped playing this game 4 years ago.

Describes Elite Dangerous perfectly, IMO.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

My first community goal bought me a Keelback, which served as my favorite ship for some time, so don't knock CGs!

I'm not knocking them, I sorely miss them! Well, their hipster version of it, called Interstellar Initiatives. That Guardian one, as useless as the outcome ultimately was, created some of the best memories I have in the game.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

For CG , some could be created by the game itself , and be profitable , like station repair , or very hight demand in a station. Without the CG system we had before but just some in game aim with great reward.

It breaks my heart when I see unused, excellent game assets readily available but squandering in the basement of Frontier.

Those burning stations - why do they have to be limited to Thargoids? Make it part of a CG/II, we already have the state called infrastructure failure/terror attack. Maybe I'm oversimplifying how easy/difficult it would be to implement... it's just such a shame.

 

[SgtMajRaz]

Check my last post (right above this one) as it gives my version of an idealized progression curve. It's probably not what you are looking for, but at least you'll know exactly where I stand when it comes to the game itself. This is based mostly on my desire for an immersive, internally-cohesive challenging gameplay environment (which includes economy) rather than any perceived interest in the progression rate of other players.

I've got no issues with you, OD. In fact, I think we agreed earlier in this thread about what you just recently outlined just above. It's just that earlier in this thread you seemed to go off the deep end about a full pay to win scheme and that's not what I was at all peddling.

The entirety of this game was developed with asking for a certain amount of money and in return, you got rewards for it. I can't actually look right now, but I also think the KS rewards included in-game credits. Not saying that FDev needs to go this route, but just reminding people this game wouldn't exist otherwise.

As for telling people how to play, well, just look at the first three pages of this thread. Or the need thread of that other new player that was curious about the changes. I actually had to step in and give him a little protection and remind him not everyone is out to berate and mock you just because you play a certain way. There are plenty of opinions and own experiences surrounding the game. Hell, one of the craziest for me is going from a PC and an X-52 when this game first released to an underpowered Xbox and a controller. All experiences matter. All of them. What I take exception to is when you cross the line and think that your experience should, in any way, equate to my experience. Easy mode is a reference I keep seeing here and I'm laughing like, okay mining was easy, but everything else still isn't! Why does enjoying mining trigger so many people to thinking that's all people ever do and that it will somehow degrade the way YOU play.