ANNOUNCEMENT Game Balancing

I'm pro Open-only Powerplay and BGS personally. I understand this is a long standing debate and know a few of the reasons it hasn't happened before. Maybe we'll be ready to have that conversation again sometime in the near future.

Lets assume this be the case, unless you overhaul Instancing to the point where it works and considering the current Block feature that can make entire Wings disappear if but one Pilot is blocked by another I see no problems with you making either part of the gameplay one-mode only.

Everyone can still play by themselves if they so wish and doesn't need to go to PG or Solo for to do that.
 
Thanks - we appreciate your comment. Ultimately, we have to just start making some changes to see what happens - estimates and predictions can only go so far. The long term is the most important thing.

Thanks for the update, Bruce. I'd like to make an observation. It's probably good to limit the financial progress of new players so that they appreciate more the first steps in this galaxy, although I'm a supporter of free will and letting players choose their own way of forging their paths. But why have payment limitations for experienced commanders? I'm triple elite, with 14,5bn credits in the bank plus another 4-5 in my carrier's balance. What would be the point of reducing rewards/payments in such case? I'm not in danger of "skipping" early ships.

I'd like to propose to make payments analogous to commander rank. Small payments in the beginning but an increase as rank gets higher, in the same principle as rewards when allied with factions.

Also, when you introduce increases and decreases, wouldn't it be better to increase the lower rewards first and then decrease the mining payments? That way change will be easier to accept by players.

Thanks for your time and efforts (you and the dev team) :)
 

Deleted member 254766

D
I know :) the point was nobody plays cqc and it was a huge mistake to create it.
Not at all - if they really wanted to - it could be developed into something that could be worthwhile in getting rewards from... And you can regularly get a game, so people do play it.
 
Doesn't really matter what aspect of the game gets balanced first if we're talking days and weeks instead of months and years. Balancing has to be a continuous and frequent, bold and data-driven activity managed by people who either are subject matter experts or who actively collaborate with subject matter experts.

I think this applies especially to combat. In PvE anything goes because the skill demands are so low, but in PvP you can't provide every player that kind of a power fantasy experience. When everybody wants to be set up for success and there is an obvious winning recipe or few, the game loses variety. Fixing this takes a lot of careful balancing work that can't be just a minor adjustment here or there slapped on the side of a generic twice-a-year update.

FDL. Shield/SCB/booster stacking. Thermal Conduit. PAs with their 60% absolute damage. I'm not saying just bring the nerf hammer down. No. But do provide comparable, competitive alternatives. I love flying my Prismo 5xPA 5 booster FDL but I hate only flying my Prismo 5xPA 5 booster FDL.
 

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
Thanks for the suggestion! For PvP payouts specifically, how would you account for players gaming the system with friends and alt accounts?
A bit late to the party, sorry :giggle:

As long as the bounty payout is paid out of the target's pocket, it will always be a net negative sum game, as the target will also have to pay a rebuy or lose their ship entirely when they are killed. If they can't cover the bounty on their head, they will need to start selling ships. Afaik, that mechanic is already in the game for that reason.

There are a couple of outlier situations. The biggest one is wing bounty hunting. It has never made sense that all wingmembers get the full bounty. This mechanic quadruples the bounty value on all targets, which is non-sensical. The total bounty should always be divided by wing members who have "tagged" (ie. fired a shot at) the target. That actually goes for both PvP and NPC combat, and will be even more important if you're balancing bounty payouts for NPCs.
Then there is the issue of someone going on a killing spree in a cheap ship and racks up a bounty of hundreds of million credits. As long as they are always forced to pay off the bounty they had on their head, including selling ships and/or modules, this is only an issue for those who don't own other ships. They however go bankrupt and end up in a starter Sidewinder. This part can be gamed to a certain extent, but the work involved in racking up high bounties on a low-end ship, going back to a starter Sidey and then do it all over again, is more than it's worth when there are easier ways of making money in the game. The time spent on an Alt-account to game this is more than it would take to just do other activities with your main account imho.

TL;DR in numbered list form:
1. PvP bounty claims increased up to the current bounty on the target's ship
2. Target has to pay all bounties claimed out of own pocket.
3. Target has to pay the rebuy of their ship or abandon it, either way they are paying for the loss of it.
4. If the target cannot cover the amount in credits, they will be forced to sell assets to cover the cost, regardless of whether they abandon their current ship or not.
5. If the target cannot cover the amount after selling all assets, they will go bankrupt and be reset to a loaner Sidewinder equivalent to what new players start with.
6. ALL combat bounties claimed in a wing get divided between the wing members having a valid hit on the target in the instance it was killed in.

Perhaps I am missing something, but this makes sense to me atleast.

PS: A bigger issue in PvP bounty hunting is how a player with over 1b in bounties can either a)swap ships and be clean as a whistle, despite having committed the equivalent of genocide in the system and/or b)clean their status by removing modules and just cleaning them at a fraction of the cost of cleaning their hull.
a) is really non-sensical right up there with "anonymous docking" when wanted.
b) will need a change in how ships are cleaned, and perhaps a compele re-assesment of the ability to clean a ship at all
 
I'd disagree that Exploration needs a general buff to prices. It's already had a couple of huge ones, the most recent being in 3.3 where the figures shot through the roof. I went on a trip to the Crab Nebula and back, because mainly of how the FSS works and getting rewards for all bodies in a system just by pinging them, coupled with the massive boost for terraformable worlds, I earnt more credits in that one trip than I had in the previous 4 years of Exploration.
With exploration, you can do around 10-15 million Cr / hour, or around thrice that if you do the LYR grind. (Which does take time, so in practice it wouldn't be a clean 3x multiplier.)
Yeah, that sounds enough for a low risk profession, but depending on how much the other careers might be buffed, we could well be back to the old years when exploration paid pennies.

I do think that Codex vouchers need to be looked at though, because they are very low.
This is a popular opinion, but I disagree with this. Why? Because the vouchers could easily be farmed, it's just nobody's doing this yet simply because they aren't worth much. But as long as things stay the way they are, trying to make getting Codex vouchers into a decent source of income could easily put farming them into "gold rush of the month" territory. The way NSPs spawn and/or vouchers are awarded for them would have to be reworked first.

However the main thing that needs to happen, especially if they are going to buff payouts is the rank levels need to be changed. I did say this during the Beta "I have seen people who's highest value system is 27 million credits (I'm sure you could get higher), it only takes 10 million to get to Pathfinder, that's 5 ranks from 1 system!"
That is not right.
Yeah. Back when the payouts went through the roof in Beyond Chapter Four (around a 8-10x increase), rank levels weren't adjusted, and nowadays, Elite in exploration is around one non-rushed trip to Colonia. Or, if you were in more of a hurry, then a Sol->Colonia->Sagittarius A* trip.

Speaking of which, @Bruce Garrido : rank progressions should be looked at too. Exploration as mentioned above is swift, Trade became even swifter than that with the big money-makers as well, Combat is much, much slower (especially since you gain fewer points from the same targets the higher your combat rank is), and CQC... hoo boy.
Some balance along these four would be quite welcome, I believe.
 
Last edited:
I'm pro Open-only Powerplay and BGS personally. I understand this is a long standing debate and know a few of the reasons it hasn't happened before. Maybe we'll be ready to have that conversation again sometime in the near future.
It'll be interesting to see you pull that one off (if you try), but I won't hold my breath. Unless you have some really good networking ideas, I could play technically in Open and still not see (or be seen by) another player.

Personally, I (nowadays) wouldn't mind Open PowerPlay, but I'd draw the line at Open only BGS, unless you get a grip on instancing and rubberbanding (a revamp of C&P goes without saying). The last time I was in Open in a busy random combat instance (Ghost Ship), my perceived framerate (in VR) dropped to "unplayable". Deciat is usually tolerable.
 
@Bruce Garrido
As proven by recent archaeological works, thargoids are ancient and peaceful farmers & artists that have occupied areas of the galaxy for millennia - humans are an invading species that are forcing the thargoids in to aggressive actions.

When you come to look at missions, is it possible to have a couple of reworded massacre missions where players can act as hunt sabs and attack AX npc's?

Alternatively have all AX combat in open only so sabs can fight against the evil, bloodthirsty invading human forces.
 
It'll be interesting to see you pull that one off (if you try), but I won't hold my breath. Unless you have some really good networking ideas, I could play technically in Open and still not see (or be seen by) another player.

Personally, I (nowadays) wouldn't mind Open PowerPlay, but I'd draw the line at Open only BGS, unless you get a grip on instancing and rubberbanding (a revamp of C&P goes without saying). The last time I was in Open in a busy random combat instance (Ghost Ship), my perceived framerate (in VR) dropped to "unplayable". Deciat is usually tolerable.

I'd be against an Open only BGS, mainly as its not designed that way really.

Open Powerplay though? Game on.

By having both set like that you broaden the experiences ED gives you.
 
1B from 0 to Trade Elite needs looking at too, perhaps increase up to at least 5B to make the Elite rank actually mean something.
You do realise that 5B is beyond capabilities of MANY players. I don't do mining and TBH 5B is something I will never see in my bank. Doing this will make more people leave the game... Any sort of wall will do that so no, I do not support this idea. I am Elite so this is not affecting me but I do care about new comers..
 
Just a few things to cover:
  • Can we get AXCZ's back?
  • Can Gibbing Thargoids be fixed?
  • Can we have better bonds for the time and effort it takes to kill the higher level Thargoid Interceptors?

- Can we give whiny gankers something to do other than shoot at unshielded starter-level ships and claim they're skilled :p
 
Hmmm. I'd still knock a zero or two off those mining prices. And knock a zero of pretty much every other activity in the game. Credit earning inflation was a main reason I stopped playing - the rewards all got a bit silly compared to the price of commodities.
 
Back
Top Bottom