News Elite: Dangerous Powerplay 1.3 Beta Incoming (changelog)

[This Forum Sucks]

It was always meant to be like this and applies in the same way as the ship selling.

Michael

That doesn't make it any less terrible, especially with the ludicrous prices of some components on bigger ships. Does it at least not apply until you undock? Or are we just expected to leave the game to pre-plan our ship loadouts on third party websites now?

 

[lakofsth]

It was always meant to be like this and applies in the same way as the ship selling.

Michael

So balance the change.

 

[Adept]

Then why wasn't it? A change of this magnitude this deep after release is ridiculous. You've killed all flexibility. This change should have taken place after we have the ability to store spareparts. Experimenting with load outs will be far too costly now. Hello homogenization.

Hyperbole!!!

 

[Quineloe]

I hope it does. I'm tired of whiners shaping and changing this game. FD need to stick to their guns, especially when this was planned from the start.

Try to be less trolly, please. I don't mind the change _if_ it comes with the ability to store modules. Just like Cargo marking in 1.2 should not and did not come without some way to get around it.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

- Apply 10% price penalty when selling modules


Here's another idea thrown out there...

Any final sale price of a piece of equipment is far more dynamic that either "100%" or "90%" of original value. Instead, it depends on its "flight time in use".


If that's too complicated, then this:

If you buy a piece of equipment but don't actually take off and use it, you get your money back, no questions asked. Allows us to play mix-and-match in "outfitting" without penalty. Once we launch, the outfitters draw a line under those items sold... deal is done.

 

[faluc]

- Apply 10% price penalty when selling modules

This one only makes sense to me if we can store modules. Then I don't mind the 10% loss on module selling.

And the outfitter has to allow free experimentation to play with power and weight values when buying new stuff and only apply the changes on checkout. (I guess we aren't supposed to build our ships on 3rd party sites from now on, right??)

 

[Quineloe]

People complaining about the 10% loss on modules ...
I have to ask ... do you not think getting a 10% discount when you buy them, and not having that 10% loss applied when selling them ... isn't that a bit cheaty?

That's not even a thing. The module remembers what it was purchased for.

 

[Ozric]

No it doesn't. you have no idea of how that class A thruster will make the ship feel to fly as against a class C, or how many seconds that power dist will take to recharge your weapons loads out. The number only give a guide, not a personal view which is why testing is so important.

Right OK, so you essentially like the idea of being able to kit out a ship how you think you might like it, fly around for a while (putting wear and tear on the modules) and decide that actually you feel like trying something else and you should be able to do that without any cost involved to you at all. No outfitting service will ever be able to tell you how a ship will feel when you fly it.

 

[Rubbernuke]

That change log was so long it needed a second cup of tea

 

[INSTG8R]

"Apply 10% price penalty when selling modules"

If this goes in as described, you've killed the game for me. It'll cost me a minimum of 8 million dollars to switch between my trading Python and my combat Python loadout.

Every single time.


I did the math on my combat-to-trade Python downgrade: 5 million for generator downgrade from 7A to 5a, 1.6 million for downgraded thrusters, another 1.6m for shield downgrade from 6A to 4A, misc. losses everywhere else.

That's like four hours of straight trading just to break even.

Yep I am on the exact same page as you with my Python. I don't like this change one bit...

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

Can we please have some feedback on the update and how people are finding it rather than concentrating on the minuscule detail of the 10% penalty !

I found it by hitting the 'Upgrade' button on my launcher.

As for how good it is: no idea. Download is still under way, nearly an hour after I started. It abandoned it once after getting no data for 10 minutes.

 

[Skuli]

What a bunch of whiners? Since when was it ever stated that there should be a 'buy and try' policy in this game? There isn't in the real world. The same whiners are the ones who harp on about immersion. I think this is a really positive thing in the game. At tleast those nonsense threads about 'should I upgrade my asp or go for python' might actually have a point to them now! Seriously guys, come on?

It was stated every time you bought or sold a module.

There was no loss. There was never any mention that there SHOULD be a loss that I'm aware of...

Duh.

 

[Starf]

Thank you FD!

 

[Odin Eidolon]

I agree with the inventory/hangar system.

 

[Stoli]

- Apply 10% price penalty when selling modules Come on, we're surely capable of doing better than "No, no, put the old way back!".

A simple ability to buy and store modules as many are saying would be a quick fix. I mean think about it, if you've got a large *multicrew* multipurpose ship. It'd make sense if you could have spare parts around.

If they added the ability for me to keep my parts in storage, I'd be more than happy to welcome this change. But as it is right now, if I wanted to switch from say combat to trading. I'd have to make 10 mil+ just to recoup my loss, before I even begin to make a profit.

 

[Fosdyke]

Can we please have some feedback on the update and how people are finding it rather than concentrating on the minuscule detail of the 10% penalty !

Totally agree.

 

[Skuli]

This one only makes sense to me if we can store modules. Then I don't mind the 10% loss on module selling.

And the outfitter has to allow free experimentation to play with power and weight values when buying new stuff and only apply the changes on checkout. (I guess we aren't supposed to build our ships on 3rd party sites from now on, right??)

You'll be travelling all the way across the galaxy to get your power distributer, then somewhere else to get your thrusters, then somewhere else for that 7A shield.
It'll be worse than simply having multiple ships.

 

[Upora]

When I was kitting out my FDL I had to spend an hour buying items, launching, flying outside the firezone, trying them out, swapping them for something else, changing shield boosters, up and downsizing scanners etc just to get a load out that would work properly because of the lack of power. I must have made about 15 changes in total.

The 10% module fee without any extra thought for returns and or storage is just taking away from the gameplay, and making the game worse not better.

You could live with ships requiring a lot of thought on load out, but loosing 10% just for trying out a weapon for an hour or so is no good at all. I get 28 days on most products at home, this 10% immediate loss for returning a product would make this game less enjoyable especially on multirole and ships requiring a lot of thought on the loadout.

I dont post alot but I agree on all counts with this 10% loss. Absolute rubbish!

This completely contradicts us to buying multirole ships especially end game ones. Im not going risk loosing millions just because i want swap back from combat to trading. Absolute rubbish. SMH....

 

[Gerila_Oi]

Great job FD! Downloading now

 

[Ozric]

Try to be less trolly, please. I don't mind the change _if_ it comes with the ability to store modules. Just like Cargo marking in 1.2 should not and did not come without some way to get around it.

Hahahahahaha. That's the best thing I've ever seen on these forums. Shame he won't see it as he's blocked me for pointing out his manufacturing of "facts", but Quineloe accusing someone of being a troll has really made my day.