C'mon, this is faintly ridiculous.

[Deleted member 182079]

The argument of not having a FC because of 'upkeep' should have died after the last 'balance' where 2 missions in a week pays for that week. At around 12 million it isn't exactly a 'grindstone' - but never mind, allegedly there are too many out there already, so perhaps we could spread the rumour even further that they are impossible to maintain without continuous grinding by the owner

Is the game to easy? Of course it is, but it isn't either - it just depends on the player, surely?

Indeed. Mine costs me around 18m p/w (plus 100k per jump), even when it was in the mid 20m range it's barely noticeable with both missions and activities paying the way they do.

The area where I would agree they're too expensive is the base price - 5bn was fine during the Borann/3LTD days but I'd probably knock one or a couple billion off that now, and increase the weekly upkeep instead. But in the likely event that neither of those things happen - works for me, and seemingly a lot of others judging from @Factabulous 's recent stats on carrier movements.

 

[Morbad]

Arguing with end game gear is quite pointless when only a fraction of players ever get there.

Anyone can get there, in short order.

It's not like it's some form of inherited privilege, the game has become radically easier over time. If someone doesn't have these "end game" assets it's because they did bother obtaining them. There are no poor or underprivledged CMDRs unless their player opts them into that state by avoiding the Monty Haul gameplay loops pushed on them, or the player doesn't have time for anything short of instantaneous gratification.

Maybe I'm just not interested in that nonsense pixel? Did that ever occur to you? That I just don't want to ever unlock it? Or that I know I won't ever unlock it?

And that's fine, but the game does present the option, and it wouldn't take you any more effort than it took anyone else...it would probably take quite a bit less.

First of all, that's how PVPers do it now. most combat tanks have crappy FSDs because that weight is just a burden in a hull re-inforced tanked out murder boat.

Heavier combat vessels, especially ones that expect to take hull damage, rarely run lighter than normal FSDs. The faster/lighter ships often do, and some people who consider high-waking unsporting do, but if it's more massive than an FDL/Mamba and/or made to absorb damage to the hull, it's more likely to have an overweight, shielded FSD, so it can last longer in a fight before losing the ability to escape.

So at the end of the day, the game really wouldn't change one iota.

Logistics, though certainly not as important as before, do still matter, otherwise no one would be complaining about transfer times or jump ranges.

The minute I'm doing something because I have to not because I want to? It's a job.

If you feel that your CMDR needing to do things isn't conducive to your entertainment, don't have your CMDR do them. It's not like your CMDR needs an FC for you to be able to play in the manner you previously enjoyed, especially if you aren't competing or cooperating with anyone on larger goals and thus have an excuse not to be concerned with what others have.

FCs on the other hand, do have quite an impact on the game as whole for all those other participants in the abstract multiplayer aspects, and do need some constraints to keep them from becoming even more prevalent than they already are.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Anyone can get there, in short order.

It's not like it's some form of inherited privilege, the game has become radically easier over time. If someone doesn't have these "end game" assets it's because they did bother obtaining them. There are no poor or underprivledged CMDRs unless their player opts them into that state by avoiding the Monty Haul gameplay loops pushed on them, or the player doesn't have time for anything short of instantaneous gratification.



And that's fine, but the game does present the option, and it wouldn't take you any more effort than it took anyone else...it would probably take quite a bit less.



Heavier combat vessels, especially ones that expect to take hull damage, rarely run lighter than normal FSDs. The faster/lighter ships often do, and some people who consider high-waking unsporting do, but if it's more massive than an FDL/Mamba and/or made to absorb damage to the hull, it's more likely to have an overweight, shielded FSD, so it can last longer in a fight before losing the ability to escape.



Logistics, though certainly not as important as before, do still matter, otherwise no one would be complaining about transfer times or jump ranges.



If you feel that your CMDR needing to do things isn't conducive to your entertainment, don't have your CMDR do them. It's not like your CMDR needs an FC for you to be able to play in the manner you previously enjoyed, especially if you aren't competing or cooperating with anyone on larger goals and thus have an excuse not to be concerned with what others have.

FCs on the other hand, do have quite an impact on the game as whole for all those other participants in the abstract multiplayer aspects, and do need some constraints to keep them from becoming even more prevalent than they already are.

Anyone can get there doesn't mean they can use it now. It's gameplay that is potentially unlockable, mostly after a serious time investment.

 

[Brrokk]

Anyone can get there doesn't mean they can use it now. It's gameplay that is potentially unlockable, mostly after a serious time investment.

These days there are people in Anacondas within a week and carriers in a couple of months. I neither criticise them or enjoy their kind of gameplay, I just mention it to indicate that you're out of date.

 

[Riverside]

Anyone can get there doesn't mean they can use it now. It's gameplay that is potentially unlockable, mostly after a serious time investment.

While you may consider the time and/or effort required to still be higher than you would wish to reach any given personal goal, it is nevertheless more easily achievable now than it was (in 2015 for example).

The game offers the potential for players (like me) to set themselves enormous challenges, and work towards achieving them.

The challenge of some goals has been diminished over time (an example would be reaching Beagle Point, jump range inflation reduced the total number of jumps but it was still a significant time investment, Carriers now mean is it possible to dock on a carrier, log off & log back on at BP when the carrier arrives).

But the challenges remain, provided they are qualified. The trip to BP in an unengineered ship is still a significant one, even with neutron boosted jumping (which can be avoided) & a 20,000ly route plotter to help cross the Abyss.

The game can still be played that way, only the motivation to actually do so (in a less than optimal way) is reduced. So I try to find bigger challenges.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

While you may consider the time and/or effort required to still be higher than you would wish to reach any given personal goal, it is nevertheless more easily achievable now than it was (in 2015 for example).

The game offers the potential for players (like me) to set themselves enormous challenges, and work towards achieving them.

The challenge of some goals has been diminished over time (an example would be reaching Beagle Point, jump range inflation reduced the total number of jumps but it was still a significant time investment, Carriers now mean is it possible to dock on a carrier, log off & log back on at BP when the carrier arrives).

But the challenges remain, provided they are qualified. The trip to BP in an unengineered ship is still a significant one, even with neutron boosted jumping (which can be avoided) & a 20,000ly route plotter to help cross the Abyss.

The game can still be played that way, only the motivation to actually do so (in a less than optimal way) is reduced. So I try to find bigger challenges.

It's not me who designed this game to take place in a galaxy. Naturally you'd assume there'd be some way to actually visit the galaxy - what's the point of it when it's actually unachievable for most players. Yes, you can go to Beagle Point for a challenge. I liked reading about it. Would I go there myself? No. For me a much smaller world would be completely sufficient. ED is oversized for my taste. Call it a challenge if you will. Actually it's better to call it like that rather than make believe running around in FCs and max engineered ships is the new normal. Because the normal is still pressing the "J" key countless times until you go sick seeing the same loading screen again.

 

[theBreadSultan]

NEVER underestimate the subtle power of whinging!

I don't get "Grinding". I mean, if it's not a fun game don't play it. But just pursuing a high score doesn't sound like fun to me. I just like to around and enjoy myself. You make your own choices, but repeatedly doing something you don't enjoy in game in order to get a not-real reward for doing it - nope.

It's really a very different game now. I do enjoy the rewards you get in it - but also kinda miss the challenge. It's like when Del Boy sold his watch and became a millionaire suddenly - his life lost it's meaning.

The grinding is in relation to the time you have to sink in, before doing something you want.

If players notice grind, it's a sign of bad game design - so less grind = better game.

Grind is often also used by game developers, to hide a lack of actual content.

Grind is NOT a challenge. Its just a time sink.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

What exactly defines grind is very subjective though. Some even explicitly enjoy grind i.e. don't consider it a negative.

The older I'm getting, the more I consider single player games storylines a grind to endure from a dev perspective then, it's very difficult to balance as YMMV quite significantly on a personal level.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

These days there are people in Anacondas within a week and carriers in a couple of months. I neither criticise them or enjoy their kind of gameplay, I just mention it to indicate that you're out of date.

Hey, it's not me who dumped more and more grind into the game until they realised it simple isn't doable and makes players give up. The credit inflation is just the bandaid to fix the insane amount of busywork required to play even basic gameplay loops like combat because no matter what, the stupid engineers is FD's measure of progression now.

 

[Morbad]

Anyone can get there doesn't mean they can use it now. It's gameplay that is potentially unlockable

I'm not seeing how that's a problem. Even games with fast paced progress are still paced, somehow.

Of course, I don't consider it a problem to not have all of my CMDRs ships immediately available either, which is what prompted the original exchange.

Indeed, I think ships are generally too easy to move around and replace. As I've mentioned before, I'd find the setting more believable if everything had to come from somewhere and this is not at all conducive to instant availability (for either transfers or rebuys), unless a destination already has all the requisite parts in stock and can offer that, with the title of the original ship transferred as collateral.

mostly after a serious time investment.

What constitutes a serious time investment is debatable. It's difficult to play the game without being showered in credits and most regular players would find themselves with the funds for an FC before they had come close to mastering most other gameplay loops pushed by the game. Making credit acquisition a specific goal will radically reduce that time.

The grinding is in relation to the time you have to sink in, before doing something you want.

If players notice grind, it's a sign of bad game design - so less grind = better game.

Grind is often also used by game developers, to hide a lack of actual content.

Grind is NOT a challenge. Its just a time sink.

I do agree with this, in principle.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I'm not seeing how that's a problem. Even games with fast paced progress are still paced, somehow.

Of course, I don't consider it a problem to not have all of my CMDRs ships immediately available either, which is what prompted the original exchange.

...

No, but you don't go advising to unlock an Anaconda "you do x trade runs in your Anaconda". If you want to tell me there is an option to go to galaxy centre without setting up a macro or snooze off then don't tell me I do it with my FC. Tell me I can hop on your FC or use one of the auto-routes FD forgot to implement.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

The thread is this long because not everyone agrees it's too easy.

I don't see how credits make the game easy though, that's what nobody has explained. People were just telling stories about those who rushed into "noobacondas" without enough game experience, and were still having a tough time and complaining.

I know I thought I was hot stuff when I got an FDL after barely any time played. I had no clue what I was doing, nor the nuances of combat in Elite, and got my butt kicked a lot.

I'm learning to mine today, there's a LOT to it. Lot's to manage and be aware of etc etc. Yes, I'm mining for the first time ever in Elite and I'm doing it in a Cutter I purchased just for the task. Which may sound absurd to some, point is it's not making mining "easier" for me because there are things I still have to learn. Maybe more convenient and safe? Sure, but not easier as far as game mechanics and techniques etc etc.

If those who believe reducing income in Elite will honestly lead to a happier healthier playerbase think we're about making Elite "easier", then I think we have a fundamental misunderstanding.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

It's difficult to play the game without being showered in credits and most regular players would find themselves with the funds for an FC before they had come close to mastering most other gameplay loops pushed by the game. Making credit acquisition a specific goal will radically reduce that time.

This is how out of touch you are with the average player experience in Elite, especially for new players. This isn't even remotely accurate, it's just not.

Indeed, I think ships are generally too easy to move around and replace. As I've mentioned before, I'd find the setting more believable if everything had to come from somewhere and this is not at all conducive to instant availability (for either transfers or rebuys), unless a destination already has all the requisite parts in stock and can offer that, with the title of the original ship transferred as collateral.

In the game setting of Elite, ships would be as easy to acquire and move about as motor vehicles are today. They would have to be, or else there's no way you could hold all these systems together with any kind of viable Government or economy.

 

[Riverside]

I don't see how credits make the game easy though, that's what nobody has explained. People were just telling stories about those who rushed into "noobacondas" without enough game experience, and were still having a tough time and complaining.

I know I thought I was hot stuff when I got an FDL after barely any time played. I had no clue what I was doing, nor the nuances of combat in Elite, and got my butt kicked a lot.

I'm learning to mine today, there's a LOT to it. Lot's to manage and be aware of etc etc. Yes, I'm mining for the first time ever in Elite and I'm doing it in a Cutter I purchased just for the task. Which may sound absurd to some, point is it's not making mining "easier" for me because there are things I still have to learn. Maybe more convenient and safe? Sure, but not easier as far as game mechanics and techniques etc etc.

If those who believe reducing income in Elite will honestly lead to a happier healthier playerbase think we're about making Elite "easier", then I think we have a fundamental misunderstanding.

There's always been plenty more challenges in the game than just earning enough credits to be able to afford better equipment. But it used to be that the player needed to take credits into account - could they afford to restock ammo for a CZ, could they afford to refuel their Python with the extra profit from fitting a cargo rack instead of a fuel scoop, that kind of thing. I miss that.

However, it is undeniable that the game is more popular now than it was. It could be argued that is is not as good a game as it used to be. It's subjective, there is no right answer.

 

[Boff'in]

I’m doing the human tech-broker unlocks and the repetitive strain of getting materials from surface especially the tier5 stuff in large quantities, and that’s AFTER they slashed the unlock price.

These human made modules to tackle the thargoid were surpassed by the Guardian unlocks, which then became the “new” currency and was much more fun activities to attain.

It’s just a shame when the old currency’s and the game loops that power them are left in the dusty by another currency.
Human tech broker and power play are just two of them

 

[killerofstars]

Okay, first of all: I gotta agree with ObiW on one point. Look, I don't have a ton of gametime, but there literally is no privilege in this game: everybody more or less has the same opportunities and you CAN make it to the top. I have 4.5 billion in the bank. It took me seven years to make.

That said, I did make almost all of it by grinding, doing a boring activity for hours on end over and over until I'd made enough money that I could forget about it for a while which...isn't good. So the idea that money just rains out of every hole in this game is...wrong. Why, I just last night logged on to discover My 10-15 mill an hour easy missions had totally vanished from my home station, prossibly forever.

Second of all: Everybody going aw the carrier upkeep fees are fine.
Yeah cool. Don't get bored with the game and take a few months off to go try something else out. Or worse, don't get sick. From mid november, through all of december, and up until a week or two ago, I was laid up with a (non covid) illness and unable to use my computer. My carrier probably would have despawned in that time and given me a good incentive never to come back to the game.

See that's the thing. It's an obligation. It becomes a job.
The real time carrier upkeep fees are anti-player, and they don't need to exist to limit the prevalence of carriers: they're designed to force continual logins to the game. So? If a player doesn't login for a month, the carrier can despawn and respawn when the player logs back in. EASY. There's literally zero reason it can't work like this.

I still remember people saying fleet carrier fees were fine because "I can grind up a billion in a few hours mining!" And I just laughed because I knew, after years of experience, that next major patch Frontier would nerf mining. Annnnnnd they did!

I wanna make this clear, so I'm gonna repeat it. It doesn't matter how you slice it, or how non-onerous and easy it is: having to log on regularly to dump credits in your carrier is STILL A chore, and that makes it work. Being work makes it a job. This is a game. That you payed money for to play. This should never EVER be a job.

Factabulous: Well, people were disputing the argument that "The game is super easy!" Also the speed at which you can obtain money doesn't make the game "easy" or not. Pointing out areas of difficulty or annoyance or NPE is on theme.

 

[CMDR Big Mike]

it just depends on the player, surely?

After 30 pages, this is the only response that has made sense

 

[Deleted member 182079]

I mean, those are your views and if that works for you that's fine, but they don't have to be that way - if missions at my home station (I used to base myself out of Jameson's for a long time, but since FCs have become a nomad) dry up, I move elsewhere, or if I really need money now, I just go mining, bounty hunting, or find a lucrative trade loop. You don't need a mission board for those.

If I get sick or can't otherwise play the game due to RL issues, the ability of maintaining my FC will be the last thing on my mind. Happy to be wrong about this but I think if people lose their carrier due to inactivity there is no penalty on your credit balance, only if you actively decommission it. I haven't tried either so can't be certain.

And even if that were the case that I'd lose my carrier and some of my credit balance - I still enjoy the core gameplay enough to get back into it, it wouldn't put me off playing the game losing one of the many tools, be that outfitting modules, ships, or indeed my FC. None are lost forever, only temporarily. In fact, I'd look at it differently in that I'd have an actual goal again (rebuy a FC).

Whether in games or IRL, a lot of people put way too much value in 'stuff'/assets. As long as the activity at hand is fun (and I guess I'm lucky in that I pretty much enjoy all of them, but I also mix them up regularly so I don't burn out - i.e. I don't grind them) then all is good.

Edit - @killerofstars

 

[killerofstars]

I mean, those are your views and if that works for you that's fine, but they don't have to be that way - if missions at my home station (I used to base myself out of Jameson's for a long time, but since FCs have become a nomad) dry up, I move elsewhere, or if I really need money now, I just go mining, bounty hunting, or find a lucrative trade loop. You don't need a mission board for those.

If I get sick or can't otherwise play the game due to RL issues, the ability of maintaining my FC will be the last thing on my mind. Happy to be wrong about this but I think if people lose their carrier due to inactivity there is no penalty on your credit balance, only if you actively decommission it. I haven't tried either so can't be certain.

And even if that were the case that I'd lose my carrier and some of my credit balance - I still enjoy the core gameplay enough to get back into it, it wouldn't put me off playing the game losing one of the many tools. In fact, I'd look at it differently in that I'd have an actual goal again (rebuy a FC).

Whether in games or IRL, a lot of people put way too much value in 'stuff'/assets. As long as the activity at hand is fun (and I guess I'm lucky in that I pretty much enjoy all of them, but I also mix them up regularly so I don't burn out - i.e. I don't grind them) then all is good.

So one, if it decommissions due to neglect it minimum takes out the negative balance in the bank which I believe is 250 million credits. Not sure how that effects carrier upgrades, fi they're just lost or not.

The missions thing is just an illustration that nothing is guaranteed and things change. Yeah, I need to find some new payday now.

Last thing on your mind, aye it would have been mine too. But it still is ty that it would happen and something you'd want to avoid. Doesn't matter if you're okay with a negative thing in the game, that doesn't stop it from being a negative thing. And in the case of upkeep? A totally unnecessary negative thing.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

But it used to be that the player needed to take credits into account - could they afford to restock ammo for a CZ, could they afford to refuel their Python with the extra profit from fitting a cargo rack instead of a fuel scoop, that kind of thing. I miss that.

I completely understand that feeling but how would someone like you get it back? Bullets would go up in price progressively based on your income? Serious question.