My real concern is the Bounty situation not being able to be cleared until 7 days, can someone clarify what this means for friendly fire, contrary to what some people say friendly fire is easy to fall foul of. I notice the change log has a mention friendly fire but what does it mean? If I accidentally hit another ship at the moment I get a 200 CR bounty on my head, after 1.3 will I have to only dock at outposts or have 7 days trying to dodge scans? Or will 1.3 now mean that I get a fine instead of a bounty for friendly fire which would mean I could pay it off? If I have to limp around the system for 7 days over a 200 cr bounty then that would ruin the game for someone who isn't going down the criminal route.
News Elite: Dangerous Powerplay 1.3 Beta Incoming (changelog)
- Thread starter Edward Lewis
- Start date
- Status
Bounty Hunting and Combat Zones is still peanuts when compared to trading.
So nope they did not improve money making for me at all.
Sorry, but the Diamondback is useless with these pathetic stats. 26 LY jump range?
The 10% module thing should have been there at the start and is an incredibly good addition in making people think about what they are buying, let alone injecting some realism in the second hand module trade. This is the problem with releasing things too early, that people get used to things they should never have got used to in the first place. The real killer in the change list is the addition of progress bars to rank progression. Why Lord? Why? (Yeah, obsessing over the little things I know 
)
*Edit* Oh and fuel, repair and wear and tear costs need to go back up as well. Not as much as in 1.0, but they were nerfed waaaaay to hard. My further 2p. Which should be £2.
)*Edit* Oh and fuel, repair and wear and tear costs need to go back up as well. Not as much as in 1.0, but they were nerfed waaaaay to hard. My further 2p. Which should be £2.
Last edited:
Hyperlethal
Banned
Considerring the hours i while away testing different builds not to mention the time spent finding modules/hardpoints its alot less as this is now not possible to do especially on large ships.
Think about it, if i want to experiment with different hull armour and turrets on an anaconda im basically going to have to spend a week trading just to afford to do this. and im not going to do that. what i will do is get extremely frustrated everytime i fly out of dock to find a build isnt working well and now iv lost money because i hadn't considered one of the infinate variables effected when outfitting.
Play with the change for a week and see if it really hurts the experience. MB says it was supposed to be this way from the start. Selling a ship before repairing it should also incur a penalty. The game needs money sinks. The original design proposal was also that storing your ship would have a cost- why should that be free?
I don't see that this will hurt my fun factor. I actually thought it was already in place because I don't track my credits to the decimal place and never buy a module without doing a comparison first.
t is a game, yes, but everyone here is acting like this will cost them real-world money. The 10% hit on a 50,000 Cr module can easily be made up with one lower-level bounty or several tons of traded goods and that isn't like even an hour of play.
Would a solution be to offer a longer timeout than 10 minutes, or a virtual outfitting screen, maybe better data cards to help analyze purchases in-game?
OR go the other way, why not have a try before you buy option and let all players load up with whatever they want for a few weeks and able to return it even if they can't afford the purchase?
I just don't think this is something to panick over and worth all this angst until folks spend a bit of time with it. FD listen, so good everyone is giving initial feedback and FD may change it. But I highly doubt they do so until folks actually play with the update instead of just initial reaction. Anyone saying this ruins the entire game is using hyperbole as far as I am concerned. If this is the only thing players have to focus on with 1.3 then it is a good sign.
The 10% module thing should have been there at the start and is an incredibly good addition in making people think about what they are buying, let alone injecting some realism in the second hand module trade. This is the problem with releasing things too early, that people get used to things they should never have got used to in the first place. The real killer in the change list is the addition of progress bars to rank progression. Why Lord? Why? (Yeah, obsessing over the little things I know
I don't agree: progress bar is an helpful indicator; 10% penalty is a penalty!
This 10% change is just extremely disheartening.
I quite enjoy Elite Dangerous as it is, right this moment. I generally play for an hour or so in the evenings, and the flexibility that my multi-role Python offered allowed me to bounty hunt, trade, or explore as the mood struck me with a minimum of downtime, ranging across the entire galaxy as missions, trade routes, and the galaxy map led me.
Now, I'm faced with throwing my entire play style out the window. The gameplay that attracted me to ED to begin with is untenable now; I don't make enough money to take a 10% hit every time I respec my ship. I don't stay in one place long enough that multiple ships are viable.
You've completely taken the wind out of the Powerplay update sails for me.
Also, there is a certain irony that the only other real money sink in the game, refueling/repairing, was nerfed to be almost inconsequential not too long ago.
I quite enjoy Elite Dangerous as it is, right this moment. I generally play for an hour or so in the evenings, and the flexibility that my multi-role Python offered allowed me to bounty hunt, trade, or explore as the mood struck me with a minimum of downtime, ranging across the entire galaxy as missions, trade routes, and the galaxy map led me.
Now, I'm faced with throwing my entire play style out the window. The gameplay that attracted me to ED to begin with is untenable now; I don't make enough money to take a 10% hit every time I respec my ship. I don't stay in one place long enough that multiple ships are viable.
You've completely taken the wind out of the Powerplay update sails for me.
Also, there is a certain irony that the only other real money sink in the game, refueling/repairing, was nerfed to be almost inconsequential not too long ago.
But that´s just it, there is no economy in this game. You can´t improve something that doesn´t exist.
Last edited:
(Typed on a phone...excuse spelling)
I've read the arguments on both sides for the 10% and both sides have a point.
Imo both arguments are also flawed:
- I agree a true "multirole" ship means it has everything on it at one time...not 10 min later after modules were swapped.
If I have a multi tool it means it has everything it should right now.
I don't need to mod it to add a knife or a screwdriver. It has both at the same time.
That is the definition of multirole
- arguing modules should sell for less because it's realistic is true...but it's also realistic to store things you have purchased.
We shouldn't have one without the other
- the outfitting window is SEVERELY lacking in information.
Yes a 3rd party tool exists but why isn't something like that IN THE GAME?
You want a 10% penalty? I'm all for it. I also want to know what my max speed will be with x thrusters, or what my shield recharge is with y shields, and so on.
If this information can't be given in the game, then there should be no penalty to "trying out" different builds
My suggestion as a final solution:
1. Introduce an inventory that is attached to the ship (like cargo space)
2. Assign all modules and parts with a volume. The ships cargo can only hold so much volume and you must plan out what kind of modules you want to fill up your cargo hold with (this simulates the traditional inventory weight limit for fantasy Mmo games)
3. Add a charge for swapping the modules themselves while docked.
Think of this like the labor fee for mechanic to change your muffler.
It acts as a money sink and it makes sense.
Set the fee as a flat rate so it doesn't scale as a % against the value of the part, or set fixed rates that scale with the class size of module, i.e. It would cost more to replace a class 5 shield then a smaller class 2
...in the meantime, as long as an inventory system doesn't exist and the outfitting window is so primitive in the information it gives, this 10% should be removed until a system is in place to support such a penalty.
Right now it's penalty and no system to support it.
You can't have one without the other.
I've read the arguments on both sides for the 10% and both sides have a point.
Imo both arguments are also flawed:
- I agree a true "multirole" ship means it has everything on it at one time...not 10 min later after modules were swapped.
If I have a multi tool it means it has everything it should right now.
I don't need to mod it to add a knife or a screwdriver. It has both at the same time.
That is the definition of multirole
- arguing modules should sell for less because it's realistic is true...but it's also realistic to store things you have purchased.
We shouldn't have one without the other
- the outfitting window is SEVERELY lacking in information.
Yes a 3rd party tool exists but why isn't something like that IN THE GAME?
You want a 10% penalty? I'm all for it. I also want to know what my max speed will be with x thrusters, or what my shield recharge is with y shields, and so on.
If this information can't be given in the game, then there should be no penalty to "trying out" different builds
My suggestion as a final solution:
1. Introduce an inventory that is attached to the ship (like cargo space)
2. Assign all modules and parts with a volume. The ships cargo can only hold so much volume and you must plan out what kind of modules you want to fill up your cargo hold with (this simulates the traditional inventory weight limit for fantasy Mmo games)
3. Add a charge for swapping the modules themselves while docked.
Think of this like the labor fee for mechanic to change your muffler.
It acts as a money sink and it makes sense.
Set the fee as a flat rate so it doesn't scale as a % against the value of the part, or set fixed rates that scale with the class size of module, i.e. It would cost more to replace a class 5 shield then a smaller class 2
...in the meantime, as long as an inventory system doesn't exist and the outfitting window is so primitive in the information it gives, this 10% should be removed until a system is in place to support such a penalty.
Right now it's penalty and no system to support it.
You can't have one without the other.
Last edited:
Largest jump range of any fighter class ship, in, or below that size, right?
Ozric
Volunteer Moderator
It has nothing to do with immersion for me, there are other types of players than the 2 camps people want to seem to break it down into. I detailed in the post I made before my last why I don't think the introduction of this will be as big an issue as people are making out, before even seeing how it interacts with all the other elements of the game.
You know what? I'd LOVE to test this change out and offer my perspective, but Frontier (in their infinite wisdom) has closed beta access to anyone who didn't buy in when they had the chance.
In essence, they're only receiving beta feedback from the same group of people that they've always received beta feedback from. Nobody newer than launch, at least, has access do they?
And when hangar space owned by the station costs an ongoing fee? Or when buying a hangar is just like say swapping out 200 modules at the 10% penalty.
Folks will scream if they have to buy/rent hangars just like this change.
I am actually ambivalent about it. But since I sometimes don't play for weeks and want to be playing the game for years, I would rather pay a 10% fee on used part swapping than pay an ongoing fee to rent or own hangar space when it comes about. With ongoing costs you could end up in debt just from not playing for a while.
I'd feel better about the 10% increase if I could do two things...
1. Storage (at a modest rate dependent on value of stored modules). Perhaps stored modules are even shipped to your designated homes system (to keep them from getting lost).
2. A simulator. Nothing major, a few drones flying about and some asteroids to practice maneuvers. This way you could test and see if that 6A thruster upgrade is really worth it to you.
Outside of those, I see much more credit grinding to get the same flexibility I get today...which is generally fine for my play style but is ultimately creating an even further narrowness to the game.
1. Storage (at a modest rate dependent on value of stored modules). Perhaps stored modules are even shipped to your designated homes system (to keep them from getting lost).
2. A simulator. Nothing major, a few drones flying about and some asteroids to practice maneuvers. This way you could test and see if that 6A thruster upgrade is really worth it to you.
Outside of those, I see much more credit grinding to get the same flexibility I get today...which is generally fine for my play style but is ultimately creating an even further narrowness to the game.
They listen to all feedback and when it hits the full player base they will continue listening. It isn't like they only listen to those with Beta access.
So are we getting some sort of module storage or shipping service in game? Adding that outfitting penalty 6 months after release with no way to keep modules if they're not in a ship seems counter productive for all. So now, when one wants to refit a multipurpose ship like a python, they're going to need to spend at least a million on depreciation. It would make more sense for them to store the modules, as they will want them again in the future. Kind of the point of a multi purpose ship.
It also devalues things like the taxi hauler, and especially makes me cringe at how expensive it will be to outfit something like the clipper just to make a trip and refit for purpose at my destination. For instance, I'll load it up with a class 7 scoop so I can get where I'm going faster to actually play the game, and then refit with cargo or shields at my destination depending on what I'm doing there. Now that trip is going to cost a few hundred thousand credits at least. Even if it cost a few thousand credits to have a "shipping service" bring the modules I ultimately need to the destination station, it would be way better, and something people have actually been asking for since release.
It also devalues things like the taxi hauler, and especially makes me cringe at how expensive it will be to outfit something like the clipper just to make a trip and refit for purpose at my destination. For instance, I'll load it up with a class 7 scoop so I can get where I'm going faster to actually play the game, and then refit with cargo or shields at my destination depending on what I'm doing there. Now that trip is going to cost a few hundred thousand credits at least. Even if it cost a few thousand credits to have a "shipping service" bring the modules I ultimately need to the destination station, it would be way better, and something people have actually been asking for since release.
Last edited:
- Status