What is everyones ideal credits per hour rate?

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

So it seems that a recent post guessing at a more classical figure was a bit naive. It might be interesting to provide frontier with some feedback on what the credits per hour value honestly makes people happy. Avoid right or wrong but just be honest.

Stuff to think about:

• Current saves and balances don't matter, this is only for new players and new saves. Anyone who has tried to make credits is more rich than they have uses for now. Couldn't even give the stuff away.
• Reference your best experiences whatever they may be, and also what you would personally like.

More radically:

• Should credits just be removed?
• If engineering didn't exist, would you be okay with progressing on ships rather than power? Just not both.
• Are people just concerned with credits because of gold rush dope, ie, playing a game because the community is excited about a new way to earn money surf the wave of hype, and because there is zero real world need for credits, the game itself becomes chasing credits, and there always needs to be an ever increasing rush, because its only about the rush.

Speaking of ships:

• Would you happy if you just got one of every ship and free rebuy on every save? Unlimited ships.
• Is doing something token still interesting, maybe story based to experience getting it instead? Sounds okay to me.
• For anyone who doesn't want them for free, how much time do you think its fair to earn each ship?
• Many issues raised often reference a specific ship, the Anaconda. If the anaconda was bulk produced on a special pilots federation grant for 1 million each, does this change the dynamic of the problem? Maybe it would.....

So what's everyones favourite credits per hour? Example options.

• 20 million per hour.
• 60 million per hour.
• 100-150 million per hour.
• 200-250 million per hour.
• 300-500 million per hour or more?

Me? I think its one or the other.. either mandatory ship progression both horizontally and vertically throughout the tiers is reinstalled (20 million per hour). From playing this for 6 months plus, maybe longer, the progression experience was great. I think i had bought horizons even, but decided i wasn't ready for it and didn't bother engineering anything apart from the fsd. Only started engineering properly when i was ready, and yeah i still love elite.

If that is not possible, then yeh the sky is the limit. Might as well play credit rush, as obviously they're not needed by anyone for gameplay.

While grinding for my second character, after staring at the mission board for too long i think it seemed like sanity just to chop off the the last 6 digits of the numbers and round the minimum mission payments up to 1. Real world countries where the currency has inflated like that typically have negative associations.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

If FD went down the road of making credits meaningless (which they practically did with mining) then what you're more looking at is some sort of sandbox game. Its not what i really am interested in with ED.

I think credits should have meaning, otherwise a lot of activities in ED are devalued. Rebuy is meaningless these days thanks to how easy credits are, caution can be thrown to the wind unless you worry about what you are carrying (bounties, exploration data, cargo), and that would more be from a BGS perspective where losses still matter (as loss of stuff means loss of time). Loss of some bounties isn't really that much of an issue when you are rolling in billions. Exploration data, yeah, explorers of course care about that still, but not usually for the credits.

New players could/can get into an Anaconda in a week with a little effort. That seems wrong to me.

I don't think it should go back to how it was near launch, where it took me a year to get enough credits for an Anaconda. While i see value in such slow progression myself, i know a majority would not like that.

So, i'd advocate for something like 10-20 million per hour without resorting to exploity mechanics like Robigo passenger runs and perhaps FD can look at doing something about edge cases like that.

HOWEVER! I feel that if earnings come down like that, Fleet Carrier prices would need looking at as well as tritium prices for refuelling.

Someone a while back also suggested giving missions a good look at and balance payouts largely around missions, with higher rep/rank missions paying correspondingly more. This would help ensure early game can't be rushed past, but once you gain some rank/rep, things speed up. Non-mission based activities only pay out baseline rates, perhaps a few million per hour (exploration might need to be a special case).

Its all largely dreams though, i don't think FD would do anything like this, and i remain unconvinced FD can balance the game in such a way that a majority will be happy without there being some sort of way of earning hundreds of millions per hour. As FD tweak one thing, players will find a way to make bank out of it.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

The problem with this particular issue is the prevalent min/max attitude.

A seemingly reasonable 10M/hr gets boosted by any number of stacking effects, metas, and out of game reference resources and is suddenly more like 100-200M/hr.

Setting the earnings bar too low to cater for that turns the game into a horrible grind for those who just play the game and not the meta.

 

[metatheurgist]

Already said in another thread that I thought 50M a week was the sweet spot.

No credits shouldn't be removed. Yes, it will suck for the people that miss out but they get a more enjoyable game where they won't get everything on a platter and will learn to appreciate every ship they buy and learn how to actually fly them.

 

[Morbad]

The number of credits per hour is ultimately meaningless. At current prices, I'd say one million cr an hour without backbreaking labor would feel about right, but an actual dynamic economy should adjust to constantly changing patterns of supply and demand.

Also, I don't see anything at all wrong with a min/max attitude. I have a problem with the narrow scope of gameplay 'progress' this can be applied to and the utter lack of trade-offs. There is nothing at stake, no risk, in our choices. Our CMDRs cannot suffer meaningful setbacks and I feel this is at the heart of most balance issues. Success should not be guaranteed and I hate the idea of participation rewards in gaming.

I think a year of regular play, for a competent player that balances profit vs. risk, would be about right for getting that Anaconda. Some could get it faster, if they were exceptionally skilled, or very lucky. Some would never be able to have their CMDR afford one, if they were unusually inept, or particularly unfortunate.

Fleet carriers are something I don't think should exist at all, but I would liked to have seen the effort required to obtain and maintain one exceed that which would be practical for most single CMDR, or even smaller squadrons.

 

[Jmanis]

Already said in another thread that I thought 50M a week was the sweet spot.

No credits shouldn't be removed. Yes, it will suck for the people that miss out but they get a more enjoyable game where they won't get everything on a platter and will learn to appreciate every ship they buy and learn how to actually fly them.

Yep, 50m, for a min-maxed activity. That's what I rekon.

Though, I'd also propose that that should be the average, and that activities should distinguish by how much variance they see in that.

For example, bounty hunting may fetch you 40-60m, if you're just going out and hunting in Threat 5&6 PAs with a murderboat... but miningcould do with varying between 20 and 200m, based on some luck and mechanics considerations. Specifically, maybe laser mining earns more in the 40-60m range like bounty hunting, but core mining is more of a treasure-hunter style activity, and can lose you out big, or have you hit big.

 

[CMDR Karrde Sun]

The problem with this particular issue is the prevalent min/max attitude.

A seemingly reasonable 10M/hr gets boosted by any number of stacking effects, metas, and out of game reference resources and is suddenly more like 100-200M/hr.

Setting the earnings bar too low to cater for that turns the game into a horrible grind for those who just play the game and not the meta.

That's a great point. Its probably telling of frontier using the core mechanic of credits for marketing goals and then achieving engagement metrics for every new feature. Bad performance reviews maybe. Anyway yeah pulling credits out of the careless masters grip or periodic stat squishes would be required in this kind of environment if you were going to keep face.

I think blizzards done it twice for wow just as an example. That classic problem of stat inflation..

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Should scale up. Bigger ships get exponentially more expensive too.

 

[Mr T]

People on this forum (and lately FD too) keep talking about balance. However, if you look back at the history of ED there has always been something that makes more money than another activity. Think back to Robigo smuggling or Sothis / Ceos biowaste runs for example. Eventually it gets squished and then something else pops up its head. I think this charade will continue to happen while this game is being developed. You can bet when Odyssey drops for instance there will be a way of doing things that pays more than others.

 

[Nadreck]

Surely it depends on whether you are actually trying to earn credits at the time?

No matter what the rate is, players will eventually reach the stage where they've bought all the stuff they need and no longer play for credits. Until then, they need to feel that they are making reasonable progress.

Carriers change things somewhat, because of upkeep and fuel costs. Those need to be achievable without too much effort, or the game becomes a treadmill. There should be plenty of time every week to go off and do other things that don't earn credits (which is why the initially-proposed upkeep had to be reduced).

There isn't a "one size fits all" answer, because different people have different views on what their preferred style is. Are you a lone space vagrant in a T6 trucking grain and scrap metal, or are you a billionaire industrialist with a fleet of large ships and presumably hundreds of (invisible) staff working for your company?

 

[gooddoc]

Six years playing with nearly 11k hours on the gameclock.

Never looked into my credit/hr earnings & never will do.

Once you do, you start looking & comparing what other player's are doing & earning. Then you start doing what they do in order to achieve those earnings..........then the game becomes a grind because you're not doing what you really enjoy & want to do yourself.

I play my game how I want to, thanks very much!.........other's can do how they see fit

 

[Chazzie]

Good post, I’d say around the 60 to 80 Million Cr per hour, with the latter paid to higher rank missions. It’s a tough one to balance for everyone though.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

It's a tricky one, and for me the main problem lies in the gulf of price between ships (base hull, not all A rated) and a Fleet Carrier.

Without FC I would say around 50m per week does seem reasonable, but with it in the equation...

I might consider resetting my account for Odyssey but the road to regrind a FC again (apart from the navy rank grinds) is too intimidating for me with the current 5bn price tag.

 

[Snowygerry]

If you have to count your money per hr. clearly you're not rich enough, but working class

 

[Jmanis]

It's a tricky one, and for me the main problem lies in the gulf of price between ships (base hull, not all A rated) and a Fleet Carrier.

That's coz an FC is actually only worth about 1b, not 5b.

 

[Nadreck]

For those suggesting a value "per week": how many hours per week do you envisage that person to be playing?

A couple of hours every Saturday evening, 2 hours per week?

Four hours every evening, maybe 6 evenings per week, 24 hours per week?

Or are you suggesting passive income, where earnings per week aren't too dependent on hours played?

 

[Deleted member 182079]

That's coz an FC is actually only worth about 1b, not 5b.

I would put it at around 2-3bn, given an A-rated Cutter is about 1bn, but yeah. 5bn is too high and I imagine the out of control mining earnings were quite a big factor in arriving at that figure. I do consider the FC running costs to be spot on though.

 

[gooddoc]

Worth is subjective.........apparently work's by Banksy are worth 1000's - name your price, to me his work's worth , he's just a criminal, vandalising places with his 'art'.

 

[goemon]

exactly the same here:

It's a tricky one, and for me the main problem lies in the gulf of price between ships (base hull, not all A rated) and a Fleet Carrier.

to quote myself:

- so, yes, a FC should be much less costly in my opinion. a most expensive outfitted cutter is supposed to be 1 mrd. credits. an FC should be 1,5 or 2 Mrd. make the FC not so much more expensive than a ship.

- along with that i'd like to reduce income to something like 10 mio cr. per hour max. that would get a FC to something like 200 hours play for credits, while making ships again worth something.

so, in terms of shipprices, I'd go with
-10 mio per hour maximum (optimised).

to bring forward 2 experiences:

- yesterday i tested for myself how long it takes to refinance a perfectly build bounty hunting cobra in a High RES. took me single run, 20 minutes. This can't be right.

- after FC update i reset one account. idea was to have him unlock those engineers gating the ones in colonia, before moving there. maybe get him into a cobra. besides engineer unlocks and levelling i only did salvage and ring surveys. i owned a sidey, cobra, dbs and t6 maxed out before i had the materials to engineer. This can't be right.

 

[CMDR Xerix]

250m per hour for the most skilful and difficult tasks (i.e Anti-Xeno). How that would break down into credits for each thargoid type im not sure about.

Laser mining around about 100m/h, SSD Mining about 150m/h and Core should be 200m/h.

NPC Combat (whether that's bounty hunting or combat missions) should be around about 200m/h also.

Trading should be very dynamic and fluid and not really calculatable in cr/h as you might buy some commodities one week, store them on your carrier and sell them at a later date when the prices have changed for huge sums of money. Or the other end of that being you lose huge amounts of money. In terms of just going back and forth between stations trading, I think best case scenario being maybe 150-200m/h in the absolute ideal conditions that occur rarely, a "goldrush" if you will.

I know its hard finding the balance between end game players and ones just starting out, leading many people to suggest we should have low cr/h for most activities, however a 50-100m/h isn't really going to cut it for those paying fleet carrier costs. Those with fleet carriers are end game players that will participate in end game activities such as anti-xeno or bulk trading. These end game activities should be the best ways in making credits per hour and should reflect the money end game players need.