Arcade or Simulator game? The dangers of fan-service

[Ideas Man]

If FD designed the game you wanted, then credits wouldn't even be a part of the game. I see you post a lot on these forums, I mostly lurk myself, but I think you're the exact type of player FD should avoid listening too. There are plenty of games out there for you to "get your fix" and Elite: Dangerous isn't, nor should be, one of those games. ED is about immersing yourself into the game, becoming a space commander, and embracing ALL ASPECTS of the game whether that's combat, trading, exploration or missions. People like you just want the good without the bad and act entitled when someone suggests otherwise.

Refuel costs, repairs, ammunition - All these small aspects of the game give your credits purpose outside of purchasing ships. I actually felt like I was maintaining my ship and keeping it operational with the previous costs. I agree that repairs needed reduced for larger ships, 200k repair on a 40% Asp was crazy expensive, but FD has reduced repairs and fuel to the point of being trivial.

I agree that combat needed to be profitable, but T7 levels of profit seems kind of high. There is no purpose to the T6 or T7 now, unless you truly want to embrace trading. I can make 3.6mil an hour in my T7 on a one-jump route 2700t round trip. Now, I can make about the same just shooting ships in a RES. Does it break some monotony of trading? Sure, it does, but it doesn't remove the "grind". Instead of grinding trades, I'm just grinding bounties, and the same people who complained about the grind before will do it again when they get tired of bounty hunting... which gets old fast in my opinion.

In my heart-of-hearts I trust that FD know what they are doing and won't degrade the more immersive aspects of ED, but in my mind I know that this isn't the case. Shortly after the XBone announcement, we see these drastic changes. I expected this type of entitlement and whining from the console crowd when they showed up, but I never thought the community would be this needy from the PC crowd and early adopters of the game.

People like Yank and I want an immersive game that takes time and the achievement is in gaining your next upgrade, your next ship, or your next combat rank. Unfortunately FD are going for the throwaway approach to gaming. Spend 20 hours and you won't have the best ship, but you will have enough for something like the FDL or Python now, baring upgrades. It just seems to be the approach to game design these days, as a lot of vocal players don't want to embrace anything of substance or purpose.

I never once felt the need to ask FD for anything. I embraced the game for how it was designed and I loved everything about it. Nope, people like you would rather come to the forums kicking and screaming, because the game just doesn't play how you want.

It's sad to see FD compromise the game this way.

The problem is FD and a lot of others don't agree with you and that's why you are seeing these common sense changes coming in.
It's great.
Also it is a bit condescending of you to say we don't want an immersive game, we do, we just applaud FD for removing the hellish grind and buffing combat rewards.

 

[dioogio]

Whats the odds that most of those complaining (I will not use the word whining, its so childish) about the improvements to combat and ship prices are flying around in pythons, clippers and anacondas?
And how did they get them? Please when you complain about these issues, tell us your worth and what ships (plural) you own.

 

[Pumpkin]

I think that the people who had no interest in combat are feeling zero change to their game

In fact THIS is the problem: zero change.

 

[Blastbeats]

I dont understand why some of you play videogames. Is it to waste yours and everyone else's time? Or to enjoy?

What will you complain about next? Why does it take 3 seconds to load 200T of cargo? Should it simulate the hours it would take for the machines to load it while you sit and wait?

This is supposed to be a videogame, not a job. Unlike you (apparently), most of us have real jobs to do instead of grinding for endless hours to recover from one botched battle.

Right? lol. Also, since we are in zero-G environments a lot, we should be required to Dock and workout every week for a few hours. Since you lose muscle mass in Zero-g. Real astronauts run on treadmills in space, and so should we. Otherwise, your character can no longer pull the flight stick as far, until it eventually can't even grip the stick and all your ship does is fly straight.

We should also have to poop and pee in space at random times, as well as eat. Just like in H1Z1, you will lose hydration and energy over the course of an hour, and unless you eat, you will die. We should also be able to freeze to death if our canopy gets blown open and we don't dock for repairs in time.

Also repairs should take days to complete. That's a loooot of metal you have to wield back together, and in real life, it takes months, even years to build ships of that size.

Lastley, some of us should have i-game wives that randomly call our comm channel wondering when we're going to be home from space. It should be at random times, but usually when you just engage someone in PVP or start wailing on a conda. The more inconvenient, the more realistic.

Realism FTW!

 

[jmg]

Preliminary notes : I really enjoyed the 1.2 globally. Had some great time with wings. Love the tweaks to galaxy map, the debug camera, and a lot of things.

This post is not about profession earnings.

***
​

I am concerned about a ongoing trend i'm beginning to notice.

A lot of the most recent changes seem to go toward a more "arcadey" game, at the detriment of the simulation aspect.

Refuel costs have been reduced so hard they almost became a non-factor. Without an actual cost, the whole refuel function has basically been reduced to a "click" in station. Don't forget to click on the refuel button, and you're good to go.
The fuel scoop module has lost almost all relevance. If you're doing anything else than exploring, why would you bother fuel scooping? A shame really (imo), as it was such a cool mechanic !

Repair costs have been reduced with the same magnitude. Why? I mean, a reduction obviously allows for cheaper repairs and more combat actions, but why SO HARD? If you lower values that much, they become neglectable. Who would want that in a simulator? Or maybe we do, as I seem to be completely off with what I want / what the community wants, and more importantly, what FD does.

With "no" actual cost, it's more of a nuisance than anything else. Dam, must click on those things.

Should we get an auto-repair, auto-refuel option, just as we auto-refill H2O when we dock at stations? I really don't understand why those costs have been reduced to such insignificant levels. This feels very "arcadey" to me, and a step in the wrong direction (imo).


The Vulture price... a lot has been said. It's great that people get to have the brand new ship. A lot of immediate positivity. I'm concerned about the general dynamic of the game. But whatever, the point is it feels quite a rushed and demagogic decision ("20M, no wait, they don't like it, 5M!") which in itself is not reassuring when you think long-term ; and it also feels... "arcadey", again. Maintenance cost reduced to insignificant levels, new combat ship cost cut by 4 by popular request.

I'm also concerned about the way you're allowing players who REFUSED to do anything else than shooting, to still be able to get more powerful gear. Instead of validating their hostile and seemingly exclusive habit, why not promote diversity, via buffing (not only credits, fun too) other sources of earning, like Mining for instance ? "Sure, you can do many things in Elite, but meh... tedious, boring. Might as well just shoot your way through - it's fun and i's now the 2nd best source of income, give it a try!".

Again, I'm sorry if you're the shooting type, I have nothing against you personally, I'm concerned about the general state of the game. Overall balance. Population types in Open. Player behaviour and habits. And not you being able to afford a ship or not.

More so, I could very well be wrong. Its only a concern, not the holy book I'm typing here.

***
​

Well I could go on and on, I'll cut short :

Please, do not sacrifice the simulation aspect of the game on the altar of simplification. - do something about those maintenance costs

Please, do not succumb to the mesmerizing sing of some sirens that only sees their own and immediate interest. - consider the whole picture twice before releasing potent combat ships (which directly threatens all the player base, these are no exploration, passenger nor mining ships, these are combat)

Please, do not censor this thread or consider it "inflammatory", I'm simply expressing my concerned opinion about my current perceived direction of the ]game.

Theres a lot about this game that is already arcady, forget the prices. The prices have nothing to do with whether the game is a sim or acrade.
To be honest, I started playing a few weeks ago, and really always thought this WAS an arcade game.. I've been biding my time waiting for SC to come out, beacuase that SEEMS to be a real sim... ED? a sim? REally? is this really what people think? I'm not trying to insult anyone, but this cannot be a real position...

For example:
1) you get shot if you loiter around the entrance to a station. That's not a sim, and although space stations are science fiction, no chance that would ever happen in real life
2) you get shot if you loiter too much INSIDE a stateion. See (1).
3)) you get to fly into a station manually. Again, seeing as these things probably cost more than most nations make in 10 years, no chance anyone in the future would ever be allowed to deadstick it into a station. And if they weren't, (1) and (2) wouldn't be an issue. JEsus, even today, if a ship (boat) pulls into a harbor, a harbormaster pilots it. but we build 100 billion dollar space stations and let ever yahoo and newbie pilot them in? sim, no. arcade? yes.
4) the instrument panel looks worse and cheezier than a 1985 corvette. google it, it's ED without the hologram. Again, arcade, not sim.
5)) that's a star map? Really? maybe the single most important piece of equipment on the ship, and it has less functionality than present day google. Nice. It's like the Russian's took over in the 70s and imposed communist industrial design all over ED.
5) the only thing the price does is lower the bar for people to own ships. do not play into sim vs. arcade. If you REALLY think this game is a sim, well, enjoy. ED is most certainly the furthest thing from a sim I've played... I thought these points were kind of tounge and cheek, and supposed to be arcady. Is there really any debate that this is game is "realistic" and a "simulator"?


A simulator starts with reality and attempts to let people experience it. Flight simulator, while borring to most, is an accurate depiction of flying a plane. an arcadey game (or, I guess, these days, maybe a table game or console game) makes people do things just for the sake of doing them, not necessarily to simulate reality. ED doesn't simulate anything of substance-- it ignores basic realitiy like the points above, for the sake of giving you something to do.

None of this, in my opinion, is necessarily bad. The only thing that matters is whether its fun. ED is fun. I enjoy it, and I will continue to play it. But do not mistake it for a simulator, because it is the furthest thing from it.

 

[Ghostlike]

The problem is FD and a lot of others don't agree with you and that's why you are seeing these common sense changes coming in.
It's great.
Also it is a bit condescending of you to say we don't want an immersive game, we do, we just applaud FD for removing the hellish grind and buffing combat rewards.

I'm sorry you are so bad at the game. Were you dying so much that fuel and repairs required you to grind?

Never once in my post do I declare that FD is foolish for reducing maintenance costs. I agree with their changes, yet disagree with how drastic they are and doing them all at once in combination with reducing ship prices. I'm really glad you responded to my condescending post though. Your lack of reading comprehension shows that maybe FD does need to simplify the game so people like you can feel all cozy inside when you play it.

 

[DefiledDragon]

If FD designed the game you wanted, then credits wouldn't even be a part of the game. I see you post a lot on these forums, I mostly lurk myself, but I think you're the exact type of player FD should avoid listening too. There are plenty of games out there for you to "get your fix" and Elite: Dangerous isn't, nor should be, one of those games. ED is about immersing yourself into the game, becoming a space commander, and embracing ALL ASPECTS of the game whether that's combat, trading, exploration or missions. People like you just want the good without the bad and act entitled when someone suggests otherwise.

Refuel costs, repairs, ammunition - All these small aspects of the game give your credits purpose outside of purchasing ships. I actually felt like I was maintaining my ship and keeping it operational with the previous costs. I agree that repairs needed reduced for larger ships, 200k repair on a 40% Asp was crazy expensive, but FD has reduced repairs and fuel to the point of being trivial.

I agree that combat needed to be profitable, but T7 levels of profit seems kind of high. There is no purpose to the T6 or T7 now, unless you truly want to embrace trading. I can make 3.6mil an hour in my T7 on a one-jump route 2700t round trip. Now, I can make about the same just shooting ships in a RES. Does it break some monotony of trading? Sure, it does, but it doesn't remove the "grind". Instead of grinding trades, I'm just grinding bounties, and the same people who complained about the grind before will do it again when they get tired of bounty hunting... which gets old fast in my opinion.

In my heart-of-hearts I trust that FD know what they are doing and won't degrade the more immersive aspects of ED, but in my mind I know that this isn't the case. Shortly after the XBone announcement, we see these drastic changes. I expected this type of entitlement and whining from the console crowd when they showed up, but I never thought the community would be this needy from the PC crowd and early adopters of the game.

People like Yank and I want an immersive game that takes time and the achievement is in gaining your next upgrade, your next ship, or your next combat rank. Unfortunately FD are going for the throwaway approach to gaming. Spend 20 hours and you won't have the best ship, but you will have enough for something like the FDL or Python now, baring upgrades. It just seems to be the approach to game design these days, as a lot of vocal players don't want to embrace anything of substance or purpose.

I never once felt the need to ask FD for anything. I embraced the game for how it was designed and I loved everything about it. Nope, people like you would rather come to the forums kicking and screaming, because the game just doesn't play how you want.

It's sad to see FD compromise the game this way.

That's utter tripe. Elite Dangerous wasn't, isn't and never will be just about trading. Go watch the promo video's on youtube and tell me how many times you see T9's docking and undocking until the pilots eyes bleed and he dies of boredom. Why shouldn't combat pilots be able to make money? Also, this "T6 earnings per hour is too much for a combat jock". What? Seriously, what? On your bike pal. If I'm flying an Anaconda in combat, I want to make as much money per hour as if I were flying one as a trade ship, end of. Why shouldn't I? I put the money into the ship, in fact, I probably put more money into the ship because let's face it, reflective armor, A rated shields and power distributers/generators costs a lot more than cargo racks. What's the matter? Are you scared that once the fun portions of the game are as financially viable as the boring parts, nobody will care about the boring parts anymore? Too bad. If you want to trade, fine, you trade pal, I really don't care how you want to play the game, stop worrying about how I want to play it, thanks.

Fuel prices? Seriously? If cars ran on water and people could freely collect rain or scoop their fuel from rivers/lakes, just how much do you think garages would get away with charging for it at the pump? That's right, next to sod all. Get a grip.

 

[Defacto]

Eh, easy is boring. Loosing is fun. Challenge is fun. I think this is a pretty important aspect of games, and possibly a difference between games and real life (for all you ''ED is like a second real-life proffession'' people)
Also: Arguments that go ''You said realism? Well then, we should add toilets and brushing our teeth'' are boring. I think everyone knows noone is asking about that. If you have to pull something to the extreme to prove that it's wrong, it probably isn't (well, unless you pull something to the extreme)

If grind's the problem, what do we solve by shortening the grind? Nothing! Fix the grind instead. Give things more purpose, if that's what they need. I think the thought that you have to do boring stuff in order to ''progress'' and then have your little skinner-box-esque ''fun'' ''endgame'' is a thought that has been introduced by certain games, I do not think these thoughts influence ED positively, and I think this is what the OP maye is discussing.
If there really is the freedom and purpose in the game we have been promised, then I don't think there can be any grind. I really don't feel that I am grinding very much myself, but I understand where people come from when they say that they do. I think that the solution to this is: Deeper features, more challenge in all aspects of the game, and a better connection to the world we are playing in. I don't think the solution is to shorten grind times ecause that isn't a solution.

 

[Philip Foster]

That's utter tripe. Elite Dangerous wasn't, isn't and never will be just about trading. Go watch the promo video's on youtube and tell me how many times you see T9's docking and undocking until the pilots eyes bleed and he dies of boredom. Why shouldn't combat pilots be able to make money? Also, this "T6 earnings per hour is too much for a combat jock". What? Seriously, what? On your bike pal. If I'm flying an Anaconda in combat, I want to make as much money per hour as if I were flying one as a trade ship, end of. Why shouldn't I? I put the money into the ship, in fact, I probably put more money into the ship because let's face it, reflective armor, A rated shields and power distributers/generators costs a lot more than cargo racks. What's the matter? Are you scared that once the fun portions of the game are as financially viable as the boring parts, nobody will care about the boring parts anymore? Too bad. If you want to trade, fine, you trade pal, I really don't care how you want to play the game, stop worrying about how I want to play it, thanks.

Fuel prices? Seriously? If cars ran on water and people could freely collect rain or scoop their fuel from rivers/lakes, just how much do you think garages would get away with charging for it at the pump? That's right, next to sod all. Get a grip.

Bit agressive but generally well put.

 

[Ghostlike]

That's utter tripe. Elite Dangerous wasn't, isn't and never will be just about trading. Go watch the promo video's on youtube and tell me how many times you see T9's docking and undocking until the pilots eyes bleed and he dies of boredom. Why shouldn't combat pilots be able to make money? Also, this "T6 earnings per hour is too much for a combat jock". What? Seriously, what? On your bike pal. If I'm flying an Anaconda in combat, I want to make as much money per hour as if I were flying one as a trade ship, end of. Why shouldn't I? I put the money into the ship, in fact, I probably put more money into the ship because let's face it, reflective armor, A rated shields and power distributers/generators costs a lot more than cargo racks. What's the matter? Are you scared that once the fun portions of the game are as financially viable as the boring parts, nobody will care about the boring parts anymore? Too bad. If you want to trade, fine, you trade pal, I really don't care how you want to play the game, stop worrying about how I want to play it, thanks.

Fuel prices? Seriously? If cars ran on water and people could freely collect rain or scoop their fuel from rivers/lakes, just how much do you think garages would get away with charging for it at the pump? That's right, next to sod all. Get a grip.

ED is about immersing yourself into the game, becoming a space commander, and embracing ALL ASPECTS of the game whether that's combat, trading, exploration or missions. People like you just want the good without the bad and act entitled when someone suggests otherwise.

Yup, I definitely said ED is all about trading. Did my post heat you up so much that you felt the need to respond with this irrelevant psycho-babble?

I actually never wanted to trade, but I ended up doing it and enjoyed making the credits. Never once did I feel the need to complain to FD that I didn't enjoy a single aspect of their game and it interfered with how I wanted to play. I embraced it, because that's how the game is designed.

 

[jmg]

Theres a lot about this game that is already arcady, forget the prices. The prices have nothing to do with whether the game is a sim or acrade.
To be honest, I started playing a few weeks ago, and really always thought this WAS an arcade game.. I've been biding my time waiting for SC to come out, beacuase that SEEMS to be a real sim... ED? a sim? REally? is this really what people think? I'm not trying to insult anyone, but this cannot be a real position...

For example:
1) you get shot if you loiter around the entrance to a station. That's not a sim, and although space stations are science fiction, no chance that would ever happen in real life
2) you get shot if you loiter too much INSIDE a stateion. See (1).
3)) you get to fly into a station manually. Again, seeing as these things probably cost more than most nations make in 10 years, no chance anyone in the future would ever be allowed to deadstick it into a station. And if they weren't, (1) and (2) wouldn't be an issue. JEsus, even today, if a ship (boat) pulls into a harbor, a harbormaster pilots it. but we build 100 billion dollar space stations and let ever yahoo and newbie pilot them in? sim, no. arcade? yes.
4) the instrument panel looks worse and cheezier than a 1985 corvette. google it, it's ED without the hologram. Again, arcade, not sim.
5)) that's a star map? Really? maybe the single most important piece of equipment on the ship, and it has less functionality than present day google. Nice. It's like the Russian's took over in the 70s and imposed communist industrial design all over ED.
5) the only thing the price does is lower the bar for people to own ships. do not play into sim vs. arcade. If you REALLY think this game is a sim, well, enjoy. ED is most certainly the furthest thing from a sim I've played... I thought these points were kind of tounge and cheek, and supposed to be arcady. Is there really any debate that this is game is "realistic" and a "simulator"?


A simulator starts with reality and attempts to let people experience it. Flight simulator, while borring to most, is an accurate depiction of flying a plane. an arcadey game (or, I guess, these days, maybe a table game or console game) makes people do things just for the sake of doing them, not necessarily to simulate reality. ED doesn't simulate anything of substance-- it ignores basic realitiy like the points above, for the sake of giving you something to do.

None of this, in my opinion, is necessarily bad. The only thing that matters is whether its fun. ED is fun. I enjoy it, and I will continue to play it. But do not mistake it for a simulator, because it is the furthest thing from it.

I should also add in the very realistic thrusters and maneuvering.

 

[Ideas Man]

I'm sorry you are so bad at the game. Were you dying so much that fuel and repairs required you to grind?

Never once in my post do I declare that FD is foolish for reducing maintenance costs. I agree with their changes, yet disagree with how drastic they are and doing them all at once in combination with reducing ship prices. I'm really glad you responded to my condescending post though. Your lack of reading comprehension shows that maybe FD does need to simplify the game so people like you can feel all cozy inside when you play it.

I didn't mention repairs or fuel ONCE either, kid.
And you talk about reading comprehension? Lol, excellent, run along now.

 

[SiriusSeven]

Refuel costs have been reduced so hard they almost became a non-factor. Without an actual cost, the whole refuel function has basically been reduced to a "click" in station.

Agreed. This choice was regrettable.

Repair costs have been reduced with the same magnitude. Why? I mean, a reduction obviously allows for cheaper repairs and more combat actions, but why SO HARD?

Agreed again. The ideal repair cost is somewhere between where it was and where it is. Let there be no mistake, it was too expensive.

The Vulture price... a lot has been said. ... the point is it feels quite a rushed and demagogic decision ("20M, no wait, they don't like it, 5M!") which in itself is not reassuring when you think long-term ; and it also feels... "arcadey", again. Maintenance cost reduced to insignificant levels, new combat ship cost cut by 4 by popular request.

It was rushed. It also was the right choice. We needed a 5m fighter. Glad to have one now. If not the Vulture, then something else. It was FD's mistake to think otherwise.

I'm also concerned about the way you're allowing players who REFUSED to do anything else than shooting, to still be able to get more powerful gear. Instead of validating their hostile and seemingly exclusive habit, why not promote diversity, via buffing (not only credits, fun too) other sources of earning, like Mining for instance ?

Mining will be getting some love. I wish it had received love already. However, this game always intended to enable equal access to equipment and earnings potential across all the professions. This goes back to Kickstarter.

 

[Philip Foster]

Eh, easy is boring. Loosing is fun. Challenge is fun. I think this is a pretty important aspect of games, and possibly a difference between games and real life (for all you ''ED is like a second real-life proffession'' people)
Also: Arguments that go ''You said realism? Well then, we should add toilets and brushing our teeth'' are boring. I think everyone knows noone is asking about that. If you have to pull something to the extreme to prove that it's wrong, it probably isn't (well, unless you pull something to the extreme)

If grind's the problem, what do we solve by shortening the grind? Nothing! Fix the grind instead. Give things more purpose, if that's what they need. I think the thought that you have to do boring stuff in order to ''progress'' and then have your little skinner-box-esque ''fun'' ''endgame'' is a thought that has been introduced by certain games, I do not think these thoughts influence ED positively, and I think this is what the OP maye is discussing.
If there really is the freedom and purpose in the game we have been promised, then I don't think there can be any grind. I really don't feel that I am grinding very much myself, but I understand where people come from when they say that they do. I think that the solution to this is: Deeper features, more challenge in all aspects of the game, and a better connection to the world we are playing in. I don't think the solution is to shorten grind times ecause that isn't a solution.

Trading isn't boring or easy, pirates see to it that this is the case. Which is one of the reasons we need pirates I hasten to add. Without them then yes. Trading would be boring.

 

[DefiledDragon]

Yup, I definitely said ED is all about trading. Did my post heat you up so much that you felt the need to respond with this irrelevant psycho-babble?

I actually never wanted to trade, but I ended up doing it and enjoyed making the credits. Never once did I feel the need to complain to FD that I didn't enjoy a single aspect of their game and it interfered with how I wanted to play. I embraced it, because that's how the game is designed.

Not at all and if I offended you, I apologise. I've been playing as a bounty hunter since pretty much day 1. I did a stint in a Type 6 for a while because I was desperate, yes desperate, for a bit of cash to upgrade my Cobra and it was the ONLY way I could actually make a half decent amount in any kind of reasonable time frame. I was all but ready to give up, then FD had an epiphany and decided that they had got it wrong after all and that combat careers should actually pay reasonably well.

All I've seen since on these forums is bitterness and resentment from people who have no interest at all in combat. Why? What's the problem? None of the changes to the combat mechanics has affected anybody other than those who play as combat pilots and yet all I've seen so far is traders complaining about it. I really do not understand what the problem is. Are traders all bloody minded sadistic masochists who not only want to force themselves to suffer but want to force everybody else to suffer right along with them? Combat earnings are now at a fairly realistic level, combat bonds could probably do with a slight buff, but apart from that, combat is now an actually viable career choice. It's still not as lucrative as trading, but it should be, so should exploration and the much neglected mining. This is a game, it's not a social experiment. There should be no class system. All career paths should offer equal satisfaction and progression to the people that choose to take them and I really can't and never will understand why so many traders have this massive chip on their shoulder about it.

I love this game, it's ing brilliant, forgive me if my passion for the game spills out into my responses from time to time, I genuinely mean nothing by it.

 

[SiriusSeven]

Trading isn't boring or easy, pirates see to it that this is the case. Which is one of the reasons we need pirates I hasten to add. Without them then yes. Trading would be boring.

Given some of the posts I've seen where traders profess bordem, it would appear there are too few pirates

 

[Philip Foster]

Not at all and if I offended you, I apologise. I've been playing as a bounty hunter since pretty much day 1. I did a stint in a Type 6 for a while because I was desperate, yes desperate, for a bit of cash to upgrade my Cobra and it was the ONLY way I could actually make a half decent amount in any kind of reasonable time frame. I was all but ready to give up, then FD had an epiphany and decided that they had got it wrong after all and that combat careers should actually pay reasonably well.

All I've seen since on these forums is bitterness and resentment from people who have no interest at all in combat. Why? What's the problem? None of the changes to the combat mechanics has affected anybody other than those who play as combat pilots and yet all I've seen so far is traders complaining about it. I really do not understand what the problem is. Are traders all bloody minded sadistic masochists who not only want to force themselves to suffer but want to force everybody else to suffer right along with them? Combat earnings are now at a fairly realistic level, combat bonds could probably do with a slight buff, but apart from that, combat is now an actually viable career choice. It's still not as lucrative as trading, but it should be, so should exploration and the much neglected mining. This is a game, it's not a social experiment. There should be no class system. All career paths should offer equal satisfaction and progression to the people that choose to take them and I really can't and never will understand why so many traders have this massive chip on their shoulder about it.

I love this game, it's ing brilliant, forgive me if my passion for the game spills out into my responses from time to time, I genuinely mean nothing by it.

Hold on a moment. You could afford a T6 but you couldn't afford to upgrade your Cobra. How does that work?

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Given some of the posts I've seen where traders profess bordem, it would appear there are too few pirates

Maybe it's just me then.

 

[DefiledDragon]

Hold on a moment. You could afford a T6 but you couldn't afford to upgrade your Cobra. How does that work?

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Maybe it's just me then.

I wanted everything A rated, it took what felt like a lifetime to scrape together about 4 million credits, when I saw the price of the upgrades for the Cobra I figured I didn't want to spend another 2 lifetimes to get the remaining 8 mil together so I bought a Type 6 and traded for it instead. Yep, it sucked, but it was the only realistic option available to me at the time. Incidentally, I'm very happy that's no longer the case.

 

[Philip Foster]

I wanted everything A rated, it took what felt like a lifetime to scrape together about 4 million credits, when I saw the price of the upgrades for the Cobra I figured I didn't want to spend another 2 lifetimes to get the remaining 8 mil together so I bought a Type 6 and traded for it instead. Yep, it sucked, but it was the only realistic option available to me at the time. Incidentally, I'm very happy that's no longer the case.

I fly a Cobra kitted for multi role and I trade rares as a 'day job'. 16ton cargo capacity gets me about half a million an hour if I am prepared to put the time in and I don't lose the ship. I've got good weapons, shields, upgraded bulkheads, chaff launcher, point defence turret, a good fuel scoop hell I've even got an intermediate discovery scanner and an FSD interdictor. I could go A rated on everything but going A rated isn't always the best option, especially when you have an eye on jump range. I've never even looked at a T6 as an option. An Asp yes but never a T6. Spend your money on the Cobra.

 

[Ghostlike]

Not at all and if I offended you, I apologise. I've been playing as a bounty hunter since pretty much day 1. I did a stint in a Type 6 for a while because I was desperate, yes desperate, for a bit of cash to upgrade my Cobra and it was the ONLY way I could actually make a half decent amount in any kind of reasonable time frame. I was all but ready to give up, then FD had an epiphany and decided that they had got it wrong after all and that combat careers should actually pay reasonably well.

All I've seen since on these forums is bitterness and resentment from people who have no interest at all in combat. Why? What's the problem? None of the changes to the combat mechanics has affected anybody other than those who play as combat pilots and yet all I've seen so far is traders complaining about it. I really do not understand what the problem is. Are traders all bloody minded sadistic masochists who not only want to force themselves to suffer but want to force everybody else to suffer right along with them? Combat earnings are now at a fairly realistic level, combat bonds could probably do with a slight buff, but apart from that, combat is now an actually viable career choice. It's still not as lucrative as trading, but it should be, so should exploration and the much neglected mining. This is a game, it's not a social experiment. There should be no class system. All career paths should offer equal satisfaction and progression to the people that choose to take them and I really can't and never will understand why so many traders have this massive chip on their shoulder about it.

I love this game, it's ing brilliant, forgive me if my passion for the game spills out into my responses from time to time, I genuinely mean nothing by it.

It's all good. We're all passionate about the game, and that's why we're here.