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

[Rat Catcher]

combine that with the potential massive hull HP inflation and FD have an impossible task making that lot playable but challenging for everyone.

Again, you have made a great observation.

Memory tells me that NPCs had to be tailored for the baseline player (so unengineered) in anything but CZ and 'special case' Pirate massacre missions.
I've taken unengineered ships into a Haz Res and survived, but not exaclty excelled in massacring many

My All Multi (G5 everything that matters) FDL can take out all 4 Spec Ops in a CZ without too much effort - but only if it can take them on 1 at a time!

I'm not one for 'meta' builds, I try to not fly a God ship and then whine about how there is no risk, even my best combat ship can (and has) be forced out to lick its wounds, it does make for a great experience, for me. (Others would be very derogatory about the builds as they are too weak, so are 'bad' builds)

 

[Jinx Chrome]

The point is, on the Panther you can get away with pretty much any bad build. I'm not necessarily asking for a Panther nerf. But the Beluga is the most extreme case of an older ship needing a buff to bring it more in line with modern offerings.

Personally, I don't believe that FDev has an intent to buff old(er) ships. First of all, it will use development resources (aka money). Second, it might reduce the sales of new ships and paint jobs/ship kits (which makes them money). Third, they need to deal with player outcries (bad rep)
And lastly, the old ships might be blockers for new game development aka ship interiors with meaningful game play because FDev needs to rework them without seeing any revenue.

But that are only my thoughts - I don't have any evidence.

 

[Rat Catcher]

A prime example why balance matters and how FDEV botched it in this case.

Yeah, you are right, nobody should be able to alter thier ships beyond that which an absolute newcomer might have, to preserve balance.
That way NPCs would represent a minor inconvenience to a highly skilled pilot, whilst giving the lesser player some challenge.

 

[zimms]

[...]

What I am saying (and I don't know why I keep having to say it because it should be totally obvious) is that it's a TASK, not a COMPETITION - haul N arbitrary amount of goods. Yes, N will grow depending on the amount of players involved and how much they haul, so sure, it's competitive in that sense, but it's not going to increase in any significant way that will make achieving it more difficult. Nor are you being ranked against anyone unless you're trying to get into the top 10, and that's purely for bragging rights. It's can you be bothered to spend a couple of hours hauling? It's not the Olympics.

Not sure why you are using the Olympics as an example. According to your definition, the Olympics are not a COMPETITION, they are a TASK. Just run the 100m in 0.1s and you will get your gold medal. If you can't be bothered, you clearly don't care enough.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Personally, I don't believe that FDev has an intent to buff old(er) ships. First of all, it will use development resources (aka money). Second, it might reduce the sales of new ships and paint jobs/ship kits (which makes them money). Third, they need to deal with player outcries (bad rep)
And lastly, the old ships might be blockers for new game development aka ship interiors with meaningful game play because FDev needs to rework them without seeing any revenue.

But that are only my thoughts - I don't have any evidence.

There were a few alterations in the past. Both the T7 and the T9 got a cargo capacity buff. The FdL got it's power plant upgraded from size 5 to size 6. That last one caused some controversy, concerns that the FdL had become too good. And initially it was, mainly because FDEV forgot to adjust the heat profile of the ship. In the months until that was adjusted, the FdL could spool up it's FSD while sitting in a star's corona, scooping at maximum rate and not overheat. Unless FDEV plan to phase out all the old ships by making new ones for every role that are better, I could see some changes happening again.

 

[Brrokk]

It runs on an armoured plant with thermal spread and still powers everything without requiring any kind of power management. There's still the whole range of overcharging the plant, so you could fit much much more still.

Having just seen the temperatures the PC goes up to when jumping, I wouldn't consider overcharging the PP. Some thermal reduction is essential and it's fortunate we can get that with armoured as well as low emissions.

As for power management, the way I see it that's a twitchy combat thing. There's not really any way for it to help when hauling and if it was essential I'd conclude that my build was badly flawed.

 

[GraXXoR]

People are getting sidetracked by talking about irrelevant specifics. It’s not the details but the general trend that I important here.

FDEV without doubt chose the timing of this CG very carefully. And in my opinion, which has no bearing on what anyone else feels, it was designed to “encourage” players to part with their cash, purchase ARX and purchase a panther clipper.

If they were operating entirely in good faith and not going for profit ( of course they are a business so profit is really their only motive), they would have waited for the panther clipper to come out out of ARX only mode and then created a CG for all the players who owned one regardless, whether or not they had purchased it with ARX or with in-game credits.

 

[Brrokk]

Personally, I don't believe that FDev has an intent to buff old(er) ships. First of all, it will use development resources (aka money). Second, it might reduce the sales of new ships and paint jobs/ship kits (which makes them money). Third, they need to deal with player outcries (bad rep)
And lastly, the old ships might be blockers for new game development aka ship interiors with meaningful game play because FDev needs to rework them without seeing any revenue.

But that are only my thoughts - I don't have any evidence.

I really hope they provide a way to make SCO work better in old ships. I'm never giving up my Pythons, Cobra or Asp, but it's frustrating that they divert all over the sky with SCO.

I'd be happy with a new experimental effect "SCO compatible" which would have to replace "mass manager", so drop jump range slightly.

Hmm, new range of ships "interior enabled"... ;-)

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Having just seen the temperatures the PC goes up to when jumping, I wouldn't consider overcharging the PP. Some thermal reduction is essential and it's fortunate we can get that with armoured as well as low emissions.

As for power management, the way I see it that's a twitchy combat thing. There's not really any way for it to help when hauling and if it was essential I'd conclude that my build was badly flawed.

Taking the Beluga as example again, giving the FSD the thermal spread experimental makes a massive difference if that is the only thing really heating up the ship.

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

Some would argue the Asp Scout has a greater need. If we keep adjusting the worst ship to be in line with new ships, surely that's worse than just adding new ships. Where does that end?

There comes a point where that ends up needing a gameplay overhaul, whereas now I can happily use the Beluga to ferry cargo for missions, deliver passengers, exploration without worrying about where the next scoopable stars are thanks to that massive fuel tank, complete pirate assassination missions and run through CZs. The issue with the Beluga is it's a multi purpose ship and we haven't needed multipurpose ships since having enough credits to buy dozens of ships to dedicate to a specific job.

The Asp Scout needs to be scrapped, plain and simple. The idea behind it is a medium ship that is as nimble as a small one. And it is. But the thing is also a huge target compared to an actual small ship while having the same weapon loadout as actual small ships. It has a class 4 PD, so it could fight more power hungry weapons than a Viper or Cobra III, but the DBX has that too, and the Cobra V completely obliterates the AspS. Buffing the AspS to be an actually viable medium combat ship could be done, but that niche is already more than full. With the Beluga you went hyperbole again.

 

[evanevery]

This CG is quite profitable (MkII Racks aside) no matter what you decide to haul with. With 10x selling prices ANYONE can make a nice profit regardless of which ship they are using. Where else are you going to make such a simple 9x profit when trading?

So much whining...

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

So much whining...

people giving different views on a game or features on the official game forums... go figure!.

personally i have no problem people agreeing or disagreeing with me... that is part and parcel of life however what triggers me more than anything are toxic people who just like to throw insults at people......(and for my sins i usually stoop to their level... case in point )

as it happens i am really glad i played this game at the start... elite in many ways was at its best then where money meant something, obviously it had less content back then, but what it did have was more meaningful.... destruction, repairs, refueling... they all had consequence..... The day i lost my Dangerous npc really stung (to a bug no less as well!).....

Obviously i am partaking in this CG because i would like to own the clipper one day and besides i am well past that early game anyway.......... but these insane profits would ruin the 1st 100+hrs or so of this game imo....... so i am glad i got to see it making some sense.

it also totally breaks the elite trade ranking as well... again, fine for me as i was already elite IV (now V i think) but had i been just starting that entire part of the game would be over now.

 

[SteveWW57]

In the tritium hauling CGs iirc, a newbie could progress from a sidey to a T9 rapidly and make shedloads of money in the process.

 

[Calebe]

I am doing the community goal and just made it into the top 25%, I did it with an Imperial Cutter. I took out everything but the kitchen sink, and haul 784 tons of cargo. I will never make it to the top 10 as I just started the community goal on Saturday, a late start and happy at being in the top 25% . I am happy with the hauling capacity and as it is a 1 jump to any destination (which changes all the time for the needed metals), and 2 jumps back fully loaded. I am having fun and made Elite 1 on trading (been Elite 5 in combat a long time) so a nice benefit and huge profits. So a win / win and will enjoy the extra cargo space when I get the reward.

I never saw this as an community goal to sell a hauling ship but to entice people to start hauling and if they like it to perhaps buy the new ship now or wait till can use in game money. It took 1 trip to qualify for the free cargo ranks, I would call that a very easy goal for all. To be in the top 10 would take (no pun intended) a ton of patience. It is for me a fun community goal and very rewarding financially, and that is a double win for me. Thanks FD for reminding me that hauling can be enjoyable as I haven't done it in a long time, as I have mainly been combat oriented at settlements (which by the way need a bump in rewards).

 

[Jinx Chrome]

There were a few alterations in the past. Both the T7 and the T9 got a cargo capacity buff. The FdL got it's power plant upgraded from size 5 to size 6. That last one caused some controversy, concerns that the FdL had become too good. And initially it was, mainly because FDEV forgot to adjust the heat profile of the ship. In the months until that was adjusted, the FdL could spool up it's FSD while sitting in a star's corona, scooping at maximum rate and not overheat. Unless FDEV plan to phase out all the old ships by making new ones for every role that are better, I could see some changes happening again.

"Player outcry" was my weakest of the arguments. Your examples come from long ago.
The financial reasons weigh in much more.

 

[Greasetrap42]

P2W discussion is always fun to watch and then walk away from.

The Original Post did not say the Panther Clipper dominates the game, making everybody that owns it will "win the game". The whole tangential argument about what P2W means becomes silly. It doesn't matter what other people say P2W 'means', the OP made their statements with their meaning explained. Perfectly reasonable when the OP knew misunderstanding would otherwise occur. And yet some people still want to argue definitions.

The OP did say:

The new CG is in effect an extra reward to those who opened their wallets.

Which is absolutely true. The CG is an extra reward for anybody that purchased the PC II and participated in the CG. A player using the Panther Clipper will reach their desired level in the CG quicker an/or make more credits than other players not using this ship.

 

[Jinx Chrome]

I really hope they provide a way to make SCO work better in old ships. I'm never giving up my Pythons, Cobra or Asp, but it's frustrating that they divert all over the sky with SCO.

I'd be happy with a new experimental effect "SCO compatible" which would have to replace "mass manager", so drop jump range slightly.

Hmm, new range of ships "interior enabled"... ;-)

I am not working for FDev, only speculating and giving my thoughts how I would continue the development if I was tasked with it:
I'd keep the old ships but would not develop interiors for them unless they are really popular ships where players might want to spend money on. E.g. the Anaconda. Maybe release an SCO update for them at some point but it may be a much smarter approach to create an Anaconda MkII / Boa based on SCO and 'interiors ready', let players spend money on that ship and use the revenue to develop the interiors DLC. At some point in time, switch over to 'modern ships only' and get rid of the legacy. Doesn't sound nice but one has to see that from a commercial perspective because in the end, FDev needs to earn money.

 

[Jinx Chrome]

P2W discussion is always fun to watch and then walk away from.

The Original Post did not say the Panther Clipper dominates the game, making everybody that owns it will "win the game". The whole tangential argument about what P2W means becomes silly. It doesn't matter what other people say P2W 'means', the OP made their statements with their meaning explained. Perfectly reasonable when the OP knew misunderstanding would otherwise occur. And yet some people still want to argue definitions.

The OP did say:

Which is absolutely true. The CG is an extra reward for anybody that purchased the PC II and participated in the CG. A player using the Panther Clipper will reach their desired level in the CG quicker an/or make more credits than other players not using this ship.

P2W is an absurd discussion with the Panther Clipper. Because I already won the game. 6 months ago

 

[Cmdr. Numa]

I am not working for FDev, only speculating and giving my thoughts how I would continue the development if I was tasked with it:
I'd keep the old ships but would not develop interiors for them unless they are really popular ships where players might want to spend money on. E.g. the Anaconda. Maybe release an SCO update for them at some point but it may be a much smarter approach to create an Anaconda MkII / Boa based on SCO and 'interiors ready', let players spend money on that ship and use the revenue to develop the interiors DLC. At some point in time, switch over to 'modern ships only' and get rid of the legacy. Doesn't sound nice but one has to see that from a commercial perspective because in the end, FDev needs to earn money.

Longterm players may not look so kindly on making all their old ships fully obsolete that took a lot of time engineering and then having to do it all again on the new ships. That already happened when engineering V2 came in, and it wasn't pretty.

 

[Jinx Chrome]

Longterm players may not look so kindly on making all their old ships fully obsolete that took a lot of time engineering and then having to do it all again on the new ships. That already happened when engineering V2 came in, and it wasn't pretty.

I am a player since beta and not angry if the old ships would disappear in favour of new game play and engine updates. Second, I didn't say that the engineered modules would have to disappear, too - they can be transferred to the modern ships.