Page 89 of 174 FirstFirst ... 7985868788899091929399 ... LastLast
Results 1,321 to 1,335 of 2596

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: Mode switching for missions and Smeaton Orbital [200mill/hour]

  1. #1321
    Originally Posted by Mad Mike View Post (Source)
    FGS.... it was BROKEN before!........ and you are being presumably dishonest... the devs have said multiple times they will re-implement the distance scaling asap, this is just an interim bodge (which should have been put in place months ago) whilst the devs presumably get beta ready to go.

    it was nonsence the payments before, for ECONOMY missions...... the highest paying missions need to be the luxury cabin missions to give the actual luxury ships purpose and not refugees or what ever who are some how all multi millionaires.

    so yes right now they may still be broken, but, you either trust the devs that they made an honest mistake which unbalanced the game and are wanting to fix or assume they are liars. I choose the former... and as for the cry babies crap...... I suggest you look in a mirror

    As others have said, the big ships in the game were MEANT to take years to get, spanned out over 100s (1000s) of hrs play.... I have a child, house (which is a money pit) a job as well... but so what if it means i cant ever afford everything, cest la vie..... but giving player what was always meant to be long goal stuff in a mere few 100 hrs (actually far less lately) definitely ruins the game for some of us..... you have your own view and that is fine, but less of the personal digs.

    for many of us the goal of elite is to try to maximise our earnings as a CMDR trying to get by in a harsh universe - not deliberately be inefficient to stop us being millionaires in 10 mins- but at the same time many of us want the game to be a challenge as well.

    Personally i would love to see the game much closer to the earnings at launch, and preferred the launch price of the vulture and FDL... but I accept that there needs to be a compromise, something that some on here have no concept of.
    You make some good points

    The problem though is that the devs nerfed long distance smuggling and delivering patch after patch after patch after patch because people were getting 20-50mil an hour

    We used to get random back end nerfs to specific stations all the times where the devs would "fix" (ie bypass) the BGS to make it not as profitable.

    Now these types of missions are basically dead because for over a year the devs tried to push everyone to passenger missions - and they succeeded! But they let people earn a lot more per hour from them for MORE THAN A YEAR than they ever accepted from deliveries without saying "it's wrong, we'll fix it" or actually back end breaking the BGS!

    The BGS is such an awful broken mess it isn't even funny! You can go to a boom system that is a producer of stuff they should be exporting and you can be allied and if you are lucky you will be offered a mission for 120t of somthing for a mil or two.

    Or you can click passengers and you can find less than 10 economy passengers going somewhere for 10's of millions! Its like the old slave missions back in the day only a lot more exploitable due to the size of the stations (in general) the fact they all go to the same place, rather than 10 destinations +, the significantly less number of interdictions and the fact the devs mostly just ignored it because they wanted people to buy horizons!

    And the BGS for passenger missions seems even more broken than the one for delivery missions! Last week I picked up some refugees going from a to b, a was in a state of civil war. at b there were refugees wanting to go to A! What refugees go to a war zone? I mean really?

    And these aren't new issues.

    These are longstanding, delivery missions had them first too, but the devs didn't learn from those! Didn't want to learn, didn't want to listen!

    Now you say "trust the devs" now? Ok fine, I say trust but verify.

    And in several years of experiance of the devs trying to fix the BGS for different missions do I have confidence they will this time finally get it right?

    No. No I don't!

    And I say this as someone who "took the long road" I had almost a 1000 hours on my game clock before I got a conda...I only just recently got the rank for a cutter at 1600 hours, I generally avoid passenger missions because IMO they suck, but in all honesty...the devs did this! They broke the game, they skewed everything towards passenger missions deliberately and on purpose. They think that 5mil an hour is too much for basically any other activity no matter how dangerous, but have been fine for 50+ from passengers for over a year! They quite simply have no concept of risk v reward and what their target "earnings per hour" should be for various activites!

    You want to go back to how it used to be? Me too!

    I want it back when doing illegal stuff actually (sensibly) paid more! I want low risk activities like running passengers 1 stop with no interdictions to pay very little! Most passengers are actually pathetic amounts of risk so only those that take a longish amount of time should pay, I want combat to pay more to account for the risk you are taking! I'd like elite in exploration to actually mean somthing again rather than these days where people who've only done one trip and maybe to colonia at that have it! (though i think the payments should be kept as they are just the rank requirements re done) We need interdictions to be dialled up to make stacking missions more risky...remember when you'd be interdicted and you'd have 5+ ships drop down trying to get you? We need mission refreshing canned but we also need boards to generate PROPER MISSIONS!

    I'll say it again: The number of systems producing goods I've been too in the last 6 months that are in boom that I'm allied with that have no or very few poorly paying missions is frankly moronic.

    The entire system needs canning and redoing from scratch!

    But that's not "sexy" is it? That doesn't sell game units, or skins so the odds that will be done?

    Trust but verify....my verification experiance says "don't trust, believe it when you see it"

  2. #1322
    Originally Posted by Stealthie View Post (Source)
    Just to pick up on this...

    It'd be nice if FDev could take the opportunity to take a step back and rethink the way ALL this stuff works.

    Right now it seems like we've just got 3 types of mission; cattle transport, annoying VIP transport and annoying VIP tours.
    It'd be nice if there was, instead, a range of mission-types available with a range of different tiers (requiring the different cabins) as well.


    The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of just making the cattle transport missions into "charters" with big volumes of people to fill up ships in one go.
    You go to the passenger lounge and, instead of stacking"X refugees want to go to Y" missions together, it'd be "World's End Tours wants to hire your ship to transport 131 passengers to X for Cr40m".
    If you accept, you've hired your ship to the company so you simply can't take any more missions until you complete that charter flight.

    They could deliberately offer the charter missions in group sizes of around 20, 60 and 140 to suit the max capacity of the Dolphin, Orca and Beluga - paying, say, Cr10m, Cr20m and C40m respectively.
    And if the configuration of your ship doesn't allow you to take biggest group, that's just tough cookies.
    This is basically what they tried a few months back when they massively upped the number of VIPs to try and reduce stacking. Odd that at the same time they didn't do what they've done with delivery and a mission that used to be for 2-10 you now take 120 cargo for less money! They could have upped the passenger numbers needed way back fairly easily. But they didn't.

    Because IMO Passengers sell units. Simple as that

  3. #1323
    Originally Posted by Conch View Post (Source)
    If they remove boardhopping, theyshould make a way to fill all cabins.. leaving half a ship empty is just silly. Its means you can use a smaller ship for the same task..
    I didn't board hop, and I rarely made a trip without a full ship (Beluga). I just visited three or four stations until i was full and then headed to Smeaton. Always made more than 100 million, sometimes over 150.

    If there isn't demand, you can't fill all cabins. Sometimes a small ship is more appropriate.

  4. #1324
    Originally Posted by FatFreddysCoat View Post (Source)
    If Quantas can charge a hell of a lot more for flying people to Australia over 24 hours you’re basically saying they shouldn’t charge more than Ryanair who charge a hell of a lot less for flying people to Scotland in an hour.

    Makes no logical sense to penalise something that pays bigger because it takes a big investment in time.
    British Airways London to Glasgow Tickets from 75 pounds...c400 Miles equals nearly 19 pence/mile
    British Airways London to Sydney Tickets from 700 pounds...c10,000 Miles equals nearly 0.13 pence/mile

    Cost doesn't rise Linearly with distance

  5. #1325
    I'm just glad that after 1836 hours in the game, I finally managed to get into a decent cash cow before it dried up..

    I now have a 1.3 billion bank roll to play the game my way....

  6. #1326
    Originally Posted by jasonbirder View Post (Source)
    British Airways London to Glasgow Tickets from 75 pounds...c400 Miles equals nearly 19 pence/mile
    British Airways London to Sydney Tickets from 700 pounds...c10,000 Miles equals nearly 0.13 pence/mile

    Cost doesn't rise Linearly with distance
    Depends on the demand, time, day of the week,month,year. and start and finish point. If the finish point isnt the best and they struggle to fill the plane on the return journey they raise the price. Also basically bidding wars between airlines. Elite doesn't have bidding wars to drive prices down. Smeaton doesn't have the demand to leave so filling up is harder. Its the same as taxis here in Australia if you want to go somewhere were they aren't guaranteed return fare either they refuse to take you or they have a bigger flagfall. Same as peak times.

    Also here in Australia say you want to fly to broome from perth in the same state. It costs more than flying to adelaide in a different state. Or it costs more to fly to sydney from perth than from sydney to perth.

  7. #1327
    A 25% reduction would defiantly re-balance the missions.

    Honestly I think FDev's heart is in exploration and they won't let one branch be more profitable than exploration.

    Furthermore I think this has to do with 3.0 quarter 4 update; in that, they don't want everyone having a fleet carrier.

  8. #1328
    Originally Posted by vagabond07 View Post (Source)
    A 25% reduction would defiantly re-balance the missions.

    Honestly I think FDev's heart is in exploration and they won't let one branch be more profitable than exploration.
    Given the history of exploration in elite I find this one of the most amusing comments I've ever seen!

  9. #1329
    Originally Posted by jasonbirder View Post (Source)
    British Airways London to Glasgow Tickets from 75 pounds...c400 Miles equals nearly 19 pence/mile
    British Airways London to Sydney Tickets from 700 pounds...c10,000 Miles equals nearly 0.13 pence/mile

    Cost doesn't rise Linearly with distance
    Ahh but A380 has 544 seats therefore $38 per mile (sorry no GBP sign on this keyboard) and that assumes all economy to fit the regional example
    A320 has 150 therefore only $26 per mile.

    Then we have longer distance = costs you more.

    But that said price gouging airlines are possibly not the best example, I've paid $1,000 to fly Perth (WA) to Exmouth (WA) about 1200km just because it was peak time mid week, for another $200 I could have flown to the UK 14,000km.

    So whilst it isn't linear by any stretch it is most definitely more expensive overall due to the scale needed.

    Ask BA to fly you to Sydney in a A320 and they will give you a hell of a quote for the privilege, ask them to do a 1 hour hop in an A380 you'll get the same ridiculous quote.

    However Passenger missions here aren't BA or Qantas on a scheduled route, this is passengers lining up outside the charter offices at the local dustbowl airstrip wanting a daytrip or a "fast jet anywhere as long as it leaves now" and these puppies will charge you both by the hour, distance, by the number of people being hauled and any "risk" involved. Believe me they will make your eyes water with the amount they may ask for this type of service. No place for short hands and deep pockets if you want to fly in a hurry or if it is a no questions asked trip.

    So yeah in reality it is a linear cost both in terms of time , distance, numbers and risk.

  10. #1330
    Originally Posted by raymondo the great View Post (Source)
    Given the history of exploration in elite I find this one of the most amusing comments I've ever seen!
    Agreed. Exploration is far from best. Time verses profit.

  11. #1331
    Originally Posted by Rittings View Post (Source)
    It needed nerfing
    No it did not.

  12. #1332
    Originally Posted by Will Flanagan View Post (Source)
    Hello commanders,

    As some of you are aware, Passenger Bulk missions are currently generating extremely high credit rewards that we feel are excessive of what we would consider reasonable and balanced.

    After a detailed investigation, we can confirm that this is due to an element in our mission generation algorithm that rewards credits based on the distance of the destination system from the star.

    Due to this, we will be disabling (until further notice) the aforementioned element of Passenger Bulk missions to reduce the amount of credits offered as a reward. Commanders will still be able to select and complete Passenger Bulk missions, but will see less excessive credit rewards.

    In the meantime, we will be reviewing the Passenger Bulk missions and correct the previously mentioned element – hopefully in time for you to test in the Beyond Chapter One beta.

    Thanks to all the players who reported the issue.
    Good. (with a grumpy cat face)

    But not soon enough. "Give free money" -buttons are never good for any game. Players get bored too soon and start complaining that there's no content (because they just skipped it all with the free money button).

    Idea: Make the crazy paying passenger missions to require luxury cabins or whatever they were, and make them to require privacy = you can get only one set of passengers at a time.

  13. #1333
    Originally Posted by Will Flanagan View Post (Source)
    Hello commanders,

    As some of you are aware, Passenger Bulk missions are currently generating extremely high credit rewards that we feel are excessive of what we would consider reasonable and balanced.

    After a detailed investigation, we can confirm that this is due to an element in our mission generation algorithm that rewards credits based on the distance of the destination system from the star.

    Due to this, we will be disabling (until further notice) the aforementioned element of Passenger Bulk missions to reduce the amount of credits offered as a reward. Commanders will still be able to select and complete Passenger Bulk missions, but will see less excessive credit rewards.

    In the meantime, we will be reviewing the Passenger Bulk missions and correct the previously mentioned element – hopefully in time for you to test in the Beyond Chapter One beta.

    Thanks to all the players who reported the issue.
    Frack you Fdev. You Frackers "fixed it" once already remember Reha?...you said "It is now working as Intended." Thanks for another lie. the Devs clearly don't give a flying frack about this off portion of their player base. I seriously doubt anyone capable of making real game changing decisions is going to read this thread. Much less pay any fracking attention to the good suggestions that are in it....


    Braben :"Grab the trusty Nerf Hammer Sandro it's time to go out and patch some bullet holes with Band-Aid's." Random passerby "I don't think a band-aid is the proper solution to the problem..." * A loud Swoosh ..... BOOM* as the Nerf Hammer is brought into play on the passerby* instead of blood excessive salt Rains from the sky*

  14. #1334
    Originally Posted by Jorge Palu View Post (Source)
    I'm just glad that after 1836 hours in the game, I finally managed to get into a decent cash cow before it dried up..

    I now have a 1.3 billion bank roll to play the game my way....

    this!!!

  15. Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #1335
    Hello everyone,

    I've gone through your responses based on the statement that I made yesterday and wanted to thank you for your feedback, critical and positive. We hear what you’re saying on multiple issues raised in this discussion and we'll take all feedback we've received onboard.

    There are a few things I want to clarify in case there’s any confusion:

    1. As I said in my original post, we don’t feel that this is an exploit, but an imbalanced element of our mission reward algorithm. 'Distance from the star' is a mission reward element we want to keep, but as said yesterday, we feel it needs balancing so we’ve temporarily turned off that particular mission reward element. We're not removing it; we just need to test it before reintroducing it back into the game. As a result you will see reduced credit rewards for Passenger Bulk missions for the time being while we find the right balance.
    2. As this is not an exploit, but a balancing matter, we won’t be removing credits from those who have earned credits in this way.
    3. Regarding 'mission board switching', we’ve passed the feedback onto the team and we'll update you when we have more information.

    If there's additional feedback you want to share on the matter, please do so but make sure it’s constructive and civil. Thanks!