Latest CG, the clearest example of P2W in ED to date?

[Agony_Aunt]

I think there is some degree, yes.

Thank you! Finally!

Is it as catastrophic as is made out to be, no, the reality that we're not all mindless robots doing the identical thing, ensures that.

Apart from the exaggeration and hyperbole i used in my OP, nobody's saying its catastrophic, and it was agreed many pages back that FD have introduced a number of much worse P2W mechanics into the game prior to the sale of the PC and this CG.

So no, its not catastrophic, its not even major, its just, as i said almost 20 pages back - a bit too on the nose and clearly an attempt to sell more PCs than otherwise would have been sold if it wasn't for the CG.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Unfortunately it works for FDEV. No other new ship in early ARXess has surpassed the bottom ranks on Inara so quickly.
View attachment 435891
But this won't change my stance. Pre ARXess for me is a no go.

That's quite impressive because 2% actually set it as their main, which requires you to actually go set that. "Current ship" is relatively low based on how many people are probably now flying them, but its worth keeping in mind that's across all Inara accounts, many of which will be long dead, as well as active accounts that haven't bought it. I think that number will jump a bit once the PC becomes purchasable for credits, but will always fluctuate because it will only be current when people are hauling.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Nobody is being compared against each other. I have no idea where you are currently or anyone else. The only ranking I will ever see is my own; therefore, not a competition.

Maybe not strictly a single contribution, but the people who don't get into the top 75% are going to be the people who don't care enough to bother.

CGs in general can get quite competitive, especially for those pushing for the higher positions.

Many times during CG's I've found myself looking at Inara for the threshold and pushing myself to get to a higher rank. And if i make it, i push someone else out of that rank, which might spur them to push more to get the rank back, either pushing me or someone else down a rank.

That sounds pretty much like competition to me.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

That sounds pretty much like competition to me.

That's more a meta-competition rather than an in-game one though.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

That's more a meta-competition rather than an in-game one though.

Its most definitely in-game because the actions are taken in game. Its indirect PvP in a way, like the BGS and Powerplay, moving numbers around to increase the "win" on your side and possibly reduce the "win" on the other side. The fact we have to go out of game to get estimates of the required numbers could simply be seen a lack of in-game information - a common criticism when it comes to ED and the information provided, which often leads to people using third party tools to get the info they want.

 

[hiCatte]

I can see where it looks pay to win; my Panther can carry 430 more tons than my Type-9.

I think there should be no competitive element to getting modules in the CG (top 100% should give all module / gameplay rewards.)
I also don't think the smaller factions should never get a chance at a banner for a powerplay CG.
The competition component to top 10, and unique things offered to top commanders, I think is valuable.

Is inventory space pay to win? I feel like many would agree; we have MMO examples (carts on Archeage comes to mind) of that;
but overall I just don't think the money or the change in supply from larger cargoholds affects other players enough to be considered a gameplay advantage.

If you get a Type-6 you will be in a Type-9 within a few trips , and if you are in a Type-9, you can casually haul and afford your carrier and anything else you need during this CG

 

[Mr Lindsay]

The 75% cut off has now gone up a few tonnes, but crucially tipped over from 2 max Panther loads to 3.
Which now means that the difference between making the cut in a Panther and a Cutter/T9 is a single trip.

FDev have pushed the buttons to make sure they get their Summer Holidays in, and we haven't had many CGs run for 4 weeks so I won't say it's 100% certain, but I expect that's where it'll stay.

One of the biggest CGs in a while, and the 'Pay to Win' was that you bought yourself at most 10 minutes... which you'd already wasted many times over in equipping and engineering a new ship.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Is inventory space pay to win? I feel like many would agree; we have MMO examples (carts on Archeage comes to mind) of that;

IIRC, didn't Elder Scrolls Online increase your inventory capacity if you had a subscription?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

The 75% cut off has now gone up a few tonnes, but crucially tipped over from 2 max Panther loads to 3.
Which now means that the difference between making the cut in a Panther and a Cutter/T9 is a single trip.

FDev have pushed the buttons to make sure they get their Summer Holidays in, and we haven't had many CGs run for 4 weeks so I won't say it's 100% certain, but I expect that's where it'll stay.

One of the biggest CGs in a while, and the 'Pay to Win' was that you bought yourself at most 10 minutes... which you'd already wasted many times over in equipping and engineering a new ship.

I hit top 75% last night with a few hours of play, hauling away in the Type 9.

Today I'm still in the top 75%. Not sure i'll stay there if i don't get more hauling done over the coming days as the requirements increase, will have to wait and see. The PC would mean i could be lazier about it, if nothing else.

Someone might say "A few hours to hit top 75% in a type 9? You're exaggerating!" - well, its rare i actually get a few hours uninterrupted. Family often want stuff from me and I can't say "No, I'm playing" - that would put me in the dog house. Best i can do is say "Just give me a min to get somewhere safe, then i'll come and do what you want."

So when we are number crunching, its really about optimal conditions.

Also didn't help i stupidly went to the wrong station once, which in the type 9 can add quite a lot to the turnaround time... its a bit of a brick as everyone knows.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

IIRC, didn't Elder Scrolls Online increase your inventory capacity if you had a subscription?

its OT for this thread but this is exactly why i binned the game. making potions and combining runes etc is a huge part of the game however the inventory is so limited you are constantly managing your inventory and having to decide which precious stuff to bin... essentially forcing you to pay a sub... it killed an otherwise decent game

if i could have paid a 1 off £15 to unlock unlimited storage in your home i would have bit!. Fallout 76 is sort of similar but not as bad

 

[hiCatte]

I

IIRC, didn't Elder Scrolls Online increase your inventory capacity if you had a subscription?

yes i believe so.

my hope is that FDEV does future CGs where all participants get all gameplay rewards, and competition is only for cosmetics or top CMDRs naming stations & megaships

otherwise , instead of being semantic about the definition of P2W, i will just add I don't think credits alone matter, but new fancy cargo racks, definitely do

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I



yes i believe so.

my hope is that FDEV does future CGs where all participants get all gameplay rewards, and competition is only for cosmetics or top CMDRs naming stations & megaships

otherwise , instead of being semantic about the definition of P2W, i will just add I don't think credits alone matter, but new fancy cargo racks, definitely do

How about a CG with a unique Cobra Mk4 ship kit as a reward!

I'm sure it would get unprecedented levels of engagement!

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

How about a CG with a unique Cobra Mk4 ship kit as a reward!

I'm sure it would get unprecedented levels of engagement!

Unfortunately the Cobra IV is now dead. What it had going for itself was the cargo capacity and the 5 guns on a small frame. The Cobra V has it beat in both regards, more capacity and flipping the ratio of small to medium guns from 3:2 to 2:3. And then it killed the Cobra III as well by being faster and more nimble.

 

[angusmadmac1]

How about a CG with a unique Cobra Mk4 ship kit as a reward!

I'm sure it would get unprecedented levels of engagement!

That's why they brought in the Mk5 so many people wanting the MK4 ...

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Unfortunately the Cobra IV is now dead.

Never! The CM4 lives! Long live the CM4!

 

[Stealthie]

I keep banging on about this, but that's what I would have expected. Someone at the top is almost certainly playing efficiently, and hauling direct is more efficient than using a carrier in the situation of this CG. The station distance is small and supply sources are only a couple of jumps away. I'm in the top 50% and I've never done more than 2 jumps*. I have a carrier, but it's parked a long way away.

Where some might be slipping up is with CMM composites. To get high in the percentages it's necessary to haul as many tons as possible, not make highest profit on every ton. Therefore, titanium or steel are better for CG advancement than CMMs which involve planetary landing or carriers.

* OK, my Panther has a Guardian FSD booster and a fuel scoop as well as DC and SCA. I build for versatility and ease, not minmax.

Personally, I just find it a PITA, trying to compete with the swarm of locusts hoovering up every source of commodities, further and further out from the delivery station as time goes on.
Maybe some people find it exciting, like some kind of treasure-hunt.
I just find it a nuisance.

 

[Brrokk]

Never! The CM4 lives! Long live the CM4!

So does the CM3!

 

[Jaffz]

It's NOT a competition! The people who end up below 75% are going to be the ones who just made a single contribution. Everyone who actually cares about getting the second set of racks will get them. You are not competing with anyone but yourself, and the ships others are flying are irrelevant.

I can't tell if this is a wind up or not

 

[Fizzatron]

Pay to Win is a bit of an exaggeration but there's no denying that buying a Panther Clipper will grant an advantage if someone wants to get to the top spot, so ultimately I won't quibble.

It's the thinnest end of the wedge as most people are going to try to get into that 75% and be happy with that, and you wouldn't need a Panther Clipper to do that. But, I still think it's good to point out because I think it is important that things are kept fair. o7

 

[Stealthie]

They need to be better to sell. They don't need to be better to be accepted and ideally, they should be somewhat balanced with existing ships and capabilities, otherwise you end up with power creep - then what happens is either the devs make the game easier by adding more powerful ships or they increase the difficulty leaving older ships in the lurch - ships we (in general) spent money on perhaps with paintjobs and ship kits as well as the investment in engineering and outfitting.

I'm quite surprised all the core systems on the PC2 are so capable.

I mean, even if they'd shrunk the PP and PD by one size they could have created a bit of a dilemma for players.
Fit 8A thrusters and you'll have to compromise of the shield and/or weapons.
Fit 8D thrusters and you can have a powerful shield or decent weapons.
Etc.

I guess it's nice that they aren't pre-nerfing the new ships but it does create a situation where older ships (and, by extension, the work dev's put into creating those ships as well as the effort player put into outfitting them) are now redundant, and that's kind of sad.