I got back into Elite after a couple years of not playing and it feels good to see new life being breathed into the game prior to OdysseyCan I just say THANK YOU? I've come back to Elite after a year since you guys started pumping life into the game again. This is what the game needs - feedback from Devs. What you are doing, why you are doing it, listening to feedback and occasionally (lets be real, some of our feedback is whining) going along with it. Please - keep up this atmosphere!
ANNOUNCEMENT Game Balancing
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I expect you'll find a few friends on the forums with that stance.
I'll be interested to hear what is proposed in that regard - and how it affects those players who don't enjoy PvP, in a game where other players, and therefore PvP, are an optional extra.
While I think of it, in terms of AX combat bonds, one of the main concerns that I've seen brought is insta-killing thargoids and it's possible means of exploiting it, wouldn't it be more efficient to allow thargoids to emit some sort of pusle wave to push back ships the moment damage is inflicted on it ? It's range is equal to effective damage range of weapons such as Shard Cannons, the common instagib weapon of choice.
Allowing this, would perhap enable combat to be more streamlined and effectively validate the skill and risk needed to fight thargoid interceptors in general. And in turn, such risks gives out the balanced reward needed.
![[VR] CMDR_SpaceGhostC2C](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/191/191465.jpg?1553527178){kind=avatar}
So here comes another nurf to mining, rather than a buff to all the other play styles.
This is normal FD tactics and nothing will ever become of it other than the nurf to mining, like always.
This is normal FD tactics and nothing will ever become of it other than the nurf to mining, like always.
Shard cannons are only used to instagib cyclops, everything above that is done using gauss cannons.
Currently, killing a Cyclops nets a bond of 2m Cr. This frequently does not cover the cost of repairs to hull & modules that the Cyclops causes, especially if the player is in a large ship and operating solo.
Would it be possible to pump up the price for rare relics like AI fragments that can only be found / stolen? I mean make them worth millions. That way people will be tempted to 'acquire' them and risk more to get them.
Ozric
Volunteer Moderator
Does that mean you're also happy with the incorrect 25% penalty attached to selling stolen goods.
I have started to outline higher risk stakes in my thread, and many other people have done over the years. They would need to be done together ideally, but even if initially you remove the 25% penalty then it will be a start.
Again, while I'm happy that Frontier are looking at balancing things, balancing the same things that have already been balanced many times over the previous few years. Means that the ones that have been left, are still being ignored. Despite the fact that many of them (Smuggling, PP, CQC) are main components of the game.
Buffing everything else just means people get to their Anacondas even faster.
It should take time, if you can grind a Anaconda in a day or a Fleet Carrier in a week there's an issue.
Oh also, I didn't read through everything, but I really appreciate the Devs approaching us with hard numbers, ahead of time.
Big surprises that affect how someone may play long run, and be working towards a task, then to have that unexpectedly whipped out from under them creates a bitter experience. Which has been done in Elite several times.
Again. I, for one, appreciate hard fact information like this.
Big surprises that affect how someone may play long run, and be working towards a task, then to have that unexpectedly whipped out from under them creates a bitter experience. Which has been done in Elite several times.
Again. I, for one, appreciate hard fact information like this.
Also salvage missions (from tip offs). Can you up the rewards? You have to be very proactive with them, and yet they pay hardly anything compared to delivering loo paper to the next system.
Please make sure you take Fun factor into consideration.
For example, mining might be rewarding, but is also boring as hell... especially laser mining, but core mining too (to a lesser extent tho)
That's why i always considered mining rewards having to be very big to be able to compensate for the Zzzz factor.
I know Fun Factor is rather hard to quantify - but i do think it's the main reason only a small percentage of the player base is a multi-billionaire - the vast majority cant stand mining and/or cant stand hunting for stations that can offer them a decent price (this is another issue) worthy of their effort.
There is a huge gap between Void Opal prices and LTD. And LTD can be Core Mined too.
Not sure the current ratio of LTD asteroids in a Void Opal Hotspot, but before all the ... changes... that happened immediately after Carriers launch that lead me to stop mining all together - those LTD asteroids happened a lot in a Void Opal hotspot
So either consider an increase in the number of fragments dropped by LTD cores (80-100% more fragments than those released Void Opal cores) or even consider removing LTD as a core mining resource
@Bruce Garrido with regard to the mining balance...
Currently I can laser mine Painite at approx 200t per hour which with peak trading at 600KCr = 120MCr
Some nights I’m lucky to find 1 core asteroid in a hour that yield VO in their hotspot which would yield less than 20MCr
Are there plans to increase core asteroids?
Will hotspots have more of the correct core asteroids?
Will tonnage per hour be reduced for laser mining?
Will the PWA be fixed to find the core asteroids to help us test this properly?
Thank you for some much needed balance work and good luck
Currently I can laser mine Painite at approx 200t per hour which with peak trading at 600KCr = 120MCr
Some nights I’m lucky to find 1 core asteroid in a hour that yield VO in their hotspot which would yield less than 20MCr
Are there plans to increase core asteroids?
Will hotspots have more of the correct core asteroids?
Will tonnage per hour be reduced for laser mining?
Will the PWA be fixed to find the core asteroids to help us test this properly?
Thank you for some much needed balance work and good luck
Last edited:
IMO Powerplay is a player versus player game mechanic, so why are players able to avoid PVP when hauling? Patrolling contested systems seems like a wonderful way to promote organic PVP, but it's just pointless now and forces players devoted to Powerplay to haul. Currently hauling in open is an honor code and players are perfectly free to haul in Solo.I expect you'll find a few friends on the forums with that stance.
I'll be interested to hear what is proposed in that regard - and how it affects those players who don't enjoy PvP, in a game where other players, and therefore PvP, are an optional extra.
Note the word 'personally'. Its an opinion. So yes its serious. Whats wrong with having an opinion....especially different opinions?
As long as the 1x is equal to now in CQC at least. Theres a tiny pool in CQC as it is and on Consoles even less. Other PVP I dont do so wont comment. Also in CQC does encourage battering the new player even more...they may not come back after all if they dont enjoy it. Better balance in CQC is quicker recharging Power-Ups or it resets for another player immediately, or get rid of them altogether. And make the maps smaller with less obstructions or better radar, Id like to see one 'inside' a Dyson sphere or something, where the hideaways are on the outskirts and the battles mostly takes place in the centre where you can see all round. Much better if 2 or 3 players as can easily find each other and good for 8 all going at each other.
There's probably other balance issues that need addressing in the BGS before modes are considered. I'd love to see weighting applied to "relevant" transactions under the right circumstances, but most transactions don't matter what mode you're in as the majority of the work is done outside the system of interest. The main exceptions are those related to scenarios in the system such as conflict zones, installations, assaults/murders, and so on.
Applying a weighting to conflict actions that scaled with the amount of traffic in open versus private/solo would be interesting if it were such that a backwater player group that weren't being opposed in open could play in private without being affected, while people playing in open would receive favourable weighting over those in other modes, but that still wouldn't address other platforms, people on consoles without premium, and so on.
My instinct is that the axis that the game's balance has been built on to date has been boredom/reward. So bulk trading and mining pay the most, becasue they're the most sedate, whereas AX and piracy pay the least, because they're the most 'thrilling'.
This new balance effort from Frontier aims to change that, to move the axis from boredom/reward to skill and effort/reward.
Personally, I'm happy to trust that they will not go too far the other way - but you are right that the more 'sedate' activities should not be nerfed into oblivion.
While I applaud the effort to finally look into balancing credit earning, have you also considered looking into credit spending? Currently the only real recurring spending you can do with credits is FC upkeep, which is IMO a big contributor to the credit inflation problem we've seen over the years. There's just not enough to spend credits on! This got worse with the introduction of materials, which are in practice the real valuable currency since credits lost their meaning for most long-time commanders.