FDev: Credit rebalancing incoming, "more reward for higher risk" activities

Finally. All good changes.

But I do agree with an earlier post in this thread:

Include buffs to PP rewards. AND CAN WE PLEASE DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT HORRIFIC "FAST TRACK NEXT QUOTA" SYSTEM??
 
I VOTE FOR PEDRO

iu
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Which makes G5 engineering a pointless waste of time if for some reason it means you earn less from it.
Depends on the level of opposition - I'd hope that some tasks could be very much less likely to be completed in a less capable ship.

Reducing risk to ones CMDR is one possible consequence of Engineering - and some players want all the advantage they can get....
 
Depends on the level of opposition - I'd hope that some tasks could be very much less likely to be completed in a less capable ship.

Reducing risk to ones CMDR is one possible consequence of Engineering - and some players want all the advantage they can get....

The problem is this- NPC engineering tops out at G1 max, leaving a giant gap which is filled with nothing. Its here where NPCs need to be made harder to actually make a game of them.

That, and that it would be nice to have a mission wrinkle that says (and rewards for it) to hit the target in a certain ship. For example take out a general in a passenger ship, or one that does not lead back to them.
 
If reward is linked to risk then should mean that players in G5 murder boats would get less reward for the same activity than a player in a less capable ship.
This would be just plain.... ....
Someone works for weeks to engineer his ship and is then penalized for using it?
Geez.
That goes for engineer trader ships as well? "Sorry Cmdr, you have G5 FSD, that'd be 22% less for that food you just brought in."
 
Personally I think the higher your combat rank, the more credits you should make from bounties. The best bounty hunters should make more because of their experience and skill. It would be more realistic imo, but I hesitate to use the word "realistic" in a video game.
 
This is really great stuff!!

I’m absolutely delighted that FD have acknowledged there’s balance problems and are attempting to fix them!

I really don’t care that they might not/won’t get it right on the first try because until I read this post I thought they’d basically given up, its been a mess for so long.

Surprised and delighted!! 👍👍
 
Reducing risk to ones CMDR is one possible consequence of Engineering - and some players want all the advantage they can get....

My CMDR would like risk to be zero and will take whatever measures he can to work toward that goal.

That doesn't mean that I, as a player, want him to succeed, because that would be boring. I just want to be able to play a game to the best of my ability, through a character I am playing as a pragmatist (especially when it comes to combat), and still be challenged.

The problem is this- NPC engineering tops out at G1 max

I'm fairly certain this is not the case.
 
Personally I think the higher your combat rank, the more credits you should make from bounties. The best bounty hunters should make more because of their experience and skill. It would be more realistic imo, but I hesitate to use the word "realistic" in a video game.

Few are going to pay more for the same work just because one is overqualified.

The higher paying bounties should be difficult for more novice or under-equipped pilots to collect.

The only ships that are G5 are ATR, and not really in general circulation.

Are you certain random NPCs are limited to G1? What's your source for that?
 
Are you certain random NPCs are limited to G1? What's your source for that?

I don't have a source to hand, but I was under the understanding (plus from observations) NPCs of Dangerous and above had mild engineering sometimes. Its most apparent with wing assassinations and CZs, but for the vast majority of the time you hardly see any engineering or unusual Powerplay weapons.

ATR are most certainly G5 though based on the weapon range falloff (i.e. they hurt at max range).
 
Based on what's been said (and inferring from what was not), the takeaway seems to be:

Look at what exploration is currently generating and expect everything else to be brought roughly in line with that.

My biggest concern with all of this is that they're going to catastrophically break a whole bunch of things (unintentionally) in the process.

Regardless, if you're looking to stack some cash via mining, you'd probably best do it before Monday.
 
Back
Top Bottom