National shortage of Toffee Crisp multipacks.
Do you have a Carrier to lose?And after the balancing, let the Thargoids wreck the bubble and the banking system so that all the untold billions get wiped out along with the carriers.![]()
I'm not sure about relating payouts to risk. The way I do PvE combat I haven't lost a ship in over a year (big ship with A shields, SCBs, turrets, SLF), so if they buff payouts because of supposed risk it will just be free money for me.
Carrier-hate is the latest thing around here, isn't it.Do you have a Carrier to lose?
Yes, I'd like high-paying hard combat activities. I hope they do that instead of just multiplying-up all the mission payouts.Its because FD never imposed anything onto players, rather locking it behind POIs (which even then are mostly easy). General A to B PvE is so easy its untrue, mainly because the C+P is broken by engineering.
What FD could do is put in super hard missions above wing missions now, CZ captain level roaming NPCs that have full fat G5 ultra spanking engineering and give us proper payouts. This would require Thargs, CZs being adjusted upwards slightly too, but would give veterans a means to make combat pay without upsetting too much.
Well, at least a moderate one. The last CG should have been a case of deciding - shall I kill a few Interceptors or a lot of scouts - 200 scouts vs 1 cyclops is not a real choice.10,000CR for killing a Thargoid Scout definitely needs a massive credit buff.
And after the balancing, let the Thargoids wreck the bubble and the banking system so that all the untold billions get wiped out along with the carriers.![]()
Maybe he has, but has untold billions banked so could buy another fleet of them...Do you have a Carrier to lose?
I'm not sure about relating payouts to risk. The way I do PvE combat I haven't lost a ship in over a year (big ship with A shields, SCBs, turrets, SLF), so if they buff payouts because of supposed risk it will just be free money for me.
Yes, I'd like high-paying hard combat activities. I hope they do that instead of just multiplying-up all the mission payouts.
I doubt they can manage. They already unleash bulletsponges on unengineered commanders. Either there is a technical problem implementing some sort of difficulty choice or they are totally oblivious to such design. I mean you could tie it to e.g. anarchies - not everywhere so you don't lock out peasant players like me - and job well done, imo.Its because FD never imposed anything onto players, rather locking it behind POIs (which even then are mostly easy). General A to B PvE is so easy its untrue, mainly because the C+P is broken by engineering.
What FD could do is put in super hard missions above wing missions now, CZ captain level roaming NPCs that have full fat G5 ultra spanking engineering and give us proper payouts. This would require Thargs, CZs being adjusted upwards slightly too, but would give veterans a means to make combat pay without upsetting too much.
Conversely, the way I do PvE combat I have lost several ships in the past year - so am guilty of creating risk rather than completely negating it...I'm not sure about relating payouts to risk. The way I do PvE combat I haven't lost a ship in over a year (big ship with A shields, SCBs, turrets, SLF), so if they buff payouts because of supposed risk it will just be free money for me.
This downtime is obviously the implementation of the ship texture updates I read about.I love you guys
Fdev: We're going to be looking at balance
Forums: Right .. here is a list of all the code we want changed - this is all ESSENTIAL!
Fdev: .... but we were only planning on changing a couple of numbers ...![]()