Can we just keep 1.2? 1.3 appears worse.
- Thread starter Quizzical Coconut
- Start date
The vast majority of people on forums find that 1.3 is a good evolution
Tee hee hee that's like being sat in a restaurant and asking the waiter if you can please have the tepid tap water and Boca Burger instead of the Dom Pérignon and Filet mignon.......it's just not done
Based on what, we take a poll on a variety of different ideas and then decide on which choice has the largest percentage, No thanks. Let's not destroy the game by having player minorities dictate the games direction on development.
Last edited:
Your entire ship to A well done...Now take into account ONE A module reactor for a Anoconda is 16m alone. To retrofit this is a 4 days play assuming 2 hrs a night pure trading alone, nothing else and this assumes 100% trade fit.
The 10% is utterly utterly regressive, it brings nothing to the table in anyway shape or form.
Please dont start quoting reallife or realism it zero place in the discussion oh and weak argument.
The 10% is utterly utterly regressive, it brings nothing to the table in anyway shape or form.
Please dont start quoting reallife or realism it zero place in the discussion oh and weak argument.
No, you aren't the only one, as dipping into the Beta forums where anguish is widespread will indicate; However this community is utterly intolerant of any criticism of the game, and even if you answer the predictable question of whether you've played Beta or not, they'll still answer that your personal opinion is somehow objectively wrong because they self associate with this game to a horrendous degree.
But the objective truth is not everyone has the amount of free time to grind decaying reputation, as well as earn back the cost of a 10% game-play tax added to the modules; at time of writing this, I have spent 206,849,581 on Outfitting, which at 10% would be 20,068,396 credits more I would have needed to have spent over the same timespan to have the same gameplay. Which even at my most efficient, in a Python now, is another 6 to 10 more hours of grinding play, just to do what I've already done. But that doesn't take into account the fact that the inefficiency is an upfront cost. If you swapped to an Explorer loadout, you drop 10% of the sold modules, so have to do the extra grind for the covering 10% of income before you can do so; Swapping to a new ship? 10% more again to afford it's loadout, as you can't just transfer over the old equipment (yet). Flying in a Sidewinder as a taxi to move one of your ships again? 10% more unless you leave it stock. Thus for someone starting the game today you've effectively slowed down their experiencing variety in the game by a constantly escalating amount over their whole game lifespan.
Now the only thing breaking up the tedious and shallow grind for me was the ability to swap out between roles... In the original Elite the Cobra Mk III could do it all, as it was the only ship you had. In First Encounters you had far more content than we currently do (Photographic missions, base bombing etc; missions now are just repetitions of what you can already do), and whilst E : D will move to a little more content in Powerplay, the benefits of it will also decay. Imagine being stuck in a trading roll for much, much longer. Horror inducing, yes? But the community here, having backed the game, having believed cultishly in it for so long, and being somewhat prone to enjoying grind instead of gameplay, will defend it. It'll result in even less positive public perception of E : D, as the average player will hate the even more grindish experience. Yet look at the sulking over Steam keys for instance; It was always going to happen, it's great business sense, but even the idea of decent customer service upset the community here. I've never known a community which, whilst not obviously toxic as say MOBA forums, has hated their own potential audience quite as much. It's honestly made me very, very wary of crowd sourced games entirely, as it's hard to see where genuine productive criticism for them is tolerated, so how are they going to positively develop?
As it currently is, I'm waiting to see how income is when the game goes live; It won't change my gameplay much, as I long ago saw all that trading and exploring has to offer. I'll keep shooting away in my combat Python then. But looking at it now, as I keep the older ships I've had, I need to permanently invest at least the full cost of an Explorer Asp loadout which will have to stay on it, the full cost of a Mining vessel (with one use drones draining the finances no less!) if I want to try that, and if I save up for an Anaconda, decide which role it's going to be in, because eating 10% of the cost of an Anaconda's modules is terrifyingly expensive. If income isn't seriously improved then, I'm looking at weeks or even months of gameplay to afford all that. And this game is just not worth it, especially with the community it has here that refuses to accept anyone who'd like to improve it. My time with E : D is already nearly over then. Shame.
But the objective truth is not everyone has the amount of free time to grind decaying reputation, as well as earn back the cost of a 10% game-play tax added to the modules; at time of writing this, I have spent 206,849,581 on Outfitting, which at 10% would be 20,068,396 credits more I would have needed to have spent over the same timespan to have the same gameplay. Which even at my most efficient, in a Python now, is another 6 to 10 more hours of grinding play, just to do what I've already done. But that doesn't take into account the fact that the inefficiency is an upfront cost. If you swapped to an Explorer loadout, you drop 10% of the sold modules, so have to do the extra grind for the covering 10% of income before you can do so; Swapping to a new ship? 10% more again to afford it's loadout, as you can't just transfer over the old equipment (yet). Flying in a Sidewinder as a taxi to move one of your ships again? 10% more unless you leave it stock. Thus for someone starting the game today you've effectively slowed down their experiencing variety in the game by a constantly escalating amount over their whole game lifespan.
Now the only thing breaking up the tedious and shallow grind for me was the ability to swap out between roles... In the original Elite the Cobra Mk III could do it all, as it was the only ship you had. In First Encounters you had far more content than we currently do (Photographic missions, base bombing etc; missions now are just repetitions of what you can already do), and whilst E : D will move to a little more content in Powerplay, the benefits of it will also decay. Imagine being stuck in a trading roll for much, much longer. Horror inducing, yes? But the community here, having backed the game, having believed cultishly in it for so long, and being somewhat prone to enjoying grind instead of gameplay, will defend it. It'll result in even less positive public perception of E : D, as the average player will hate the even more grindish experience. Yet look at the sulking over Steam keys for instance; It was always going to happen, it's great business sense, but even the idea of decent customer service upset the community here. I've never known a community which, whilst not obviously toxic as say MOBA forums, has hated their own potential audience quite as much. It's honestly made me very, very wary of crowd sourced games entirely, as it's hard to see where genuine productive criticism for them is tolerated, so how are they going to positively develop?
As it currently is, I'm waiting to see how income is when the game goes live; It won't change my gameplay much, as I long ago saw all that trading and exploring has to offer. I'll keep shooting away in my combat Python then. But looking at it now, as I keep the older ships I've had, I need to permanently invest at least the full cost of an Explorer Asp loadout which will have to stay on it, the full cost of a Mining vessel (with one use drones draining the finances no less!) if I want to try that, and if I save up for an Anaconda, decide which role it's going to be in, because eating 10% of the cost of an Anaconda's modules is terrifyingly expensive. If income isn't seriously improved then, I'm looking at weeks or even months of gameplay to afford all that. And this game is just not worth it, especially with the community it has here that refuses to accept anyone who'd like to improve it. My time with E : D is already nearly over then. Shame.
Now this is the sort of comment that should be given far more consideration and attention and effect that it probably will be,, i`m sure that like yourself, there are quite a number of players that like, more than like the game, and can only spend the reasonable amount of time playing it that real life and family and all other things will allow,,,,, and this and this alone ,, sometimes,, should be a primary consideration as to how much more work has to be put in to reach goals on here,, personal or otherwise,,, take my example plz lol,, Had the game pretty much since it was released,, and how long ago was that now,,,,,grinding since then,, usual path,, Hauler,, Cobra ,, T6 ,, Asp ,, T7 ,, Clipper ,, Python ,, T9,, and have only now,,today 2 june,, got enough credits to get a low end Conda,, or a very respectable Python,,,,, `id love a Conda,,, but faced with the "fast track" of 60 to 80, 100 even hrs more trading, and thats in a 528 T9,,,,so combat Python it is,,,for now,,, keeping the T9 too, pays the bills, and keeps that high end Conda in reasonable sight, just