ANNOUNCEMENT Game Balancing

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Looking forward to these long over due balancing adjustments!

Mining has been the only decent money earner for a long time.
It'll be nice for the wealth to be spread more evenly so players can choose the activities they enjoy the most.

I enjoy combat primarily, and for a long time, it's been the worst paying, yet highest risk activity.
I mean, if I want to go Thargoid hunting, I have to go mining first, just to cover the losses.
(Spoiler; I'm still 80+ million credits in the red for AX!)
(Double spoiler, I suck at AX)

And don't get me started on those ridiculous kill missions, that do pay well, but tie you down for several hours to kill 80+ NPC's. Lol

Freedom to choose is good.
I don't even mind if mining is nerfed, because I'd rather be able to mix up my play style for a slightly lower income, than just repeatedly do the one same activity over and over again.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Thanks for the suggestion! For PvP payouts specifically, how would you account for players gaming the system with friends and alt accounts?

I actually solved this problem once. Quite complicated, but also quite fool proof. Lol
I highly doubt I can find the post though...

To Google!

Update:

i give up. Lol

 

[Haresus]

Some quick thoughts: Smuggling should become far more profitable. Illegal goods should be sold at a premium on the black market. Everyone loves the idea of being a space smuggler, and it brings some extra excitement to the normal trading routine, but for some reason it's just not profitable at all. Add some extra difficulty to smuggling too: If you smuggle a lot to the same system, authorities should get more suspicious and interdict/scan you more often. If they catch you and scan you, have them ask you to drop some cargo as a bribe or confiscated evidence.

Trade should be far more affected by low demand. I've spent the last couple days selling Agronomic Treatment to stations with 0 demand, and still making a massive profit. Preferably they shouldn't buy it in the first place, but at least it shouldn't be sold at a profit.

Trading in rarer commodities should probably also be more profitable than it currently is. The more stations you travel between and the higher variety of goods you carry, the more "skillful" the trading is.

Also, stations that are further away from the main star should offer better prices. If I have to travel for 20 minutes to some backwater station a couple 10k ls away, it better be desperate to buy/sell. Could also base this on how long ago a player visited. If a player hasn't visited in months, prices should be better. This would encourage traders to explore for better trade routes.

When a player bounty is collected, the killed player should have to pay, say, 200% of that bounty to buy back their ship. This avoids the pitfalls of a friend blowing you up to help get rid of a bounty, since it doesn't transfer money to anyone. I could see some pirates and gankers using cheaper, disposable, ships to avoid the rebuy cost, but that would probably just be a good thing for everyone.

I trust the AX people in that AX rewards are currently far too low. I'm a complete beginner to that kind of gameplay, but it took me 20 minutes (plus several hours for grinding Guardian materials) to take out a single Cyclops and the reward is a measly 2 million credits. Obviously better players than me can do it far faster, but there are also far more dangerous Interceptor variants.

 

[alexzk]

skip

To make you short - measure must be time spent.
Yeh, I was thinking about. They should hire 20 avr gamers and make them play for all activities, recording time. Then using this measures balance all payouts on "per minute" basis.
"RIFT" game did that. They have 120 plat/hour no matter what you do. And well, people just don't do because they know limit exact. And quit.

 

[Airtroops83]

then re-purposing the abrasion blaster into a combat weapon.

Oh That would be awesome, exactly the stuff I was talking about on page 12. You could take the projectile make it a bit faster and call it a laser cannon, hold to overcharge and then release to fire. it would need a larger and cooler model, but man that would be sweet.
I still think the biggest thing, even more that credit payout, to bring back combat needs to be more weapons/weapon variants and a complete balance pass of all the weapons, changing some fairly durastically (unified speed on all cannon sizes, torpedos worth using, etc.). How long would you stay entertained in another game where there were only 3 weapons that you are pretty much hamstrung into using? I want to see some funky stuff with engineering too, like a slider for missile speed vs payload, armour piercing and other stuff besides the boring stuff like "mag size, (very small) rate of fire, efficiencyy, etc."

 

[alexzk]

..yeh, as many above said, time to do something must be accounted. If player spends 1 minute for 2 different things (of anything) those 2 things must pay out +/- same.
However it should account all times, including drive there, prepare etc.
For example laser mining can be 5 hrs straight "next rock". Not possible with 2 other minings as need to go for recharge.

 

[Drelthar]

I must repeat myself, sorry. Mining introduces "new money" in the hundreds of millions per hour. Nobody is addressing this as a problem.
Why then with the (relatively insignificant) player bounties?

It's not exploitable by building up a large bounty, then having your buddy kill you for it.

 

[Drelthar]

Someone (you?) earlier suggested making them pay significantly more than their bounty. Effectively the authorities take a tax.

Yeah, saw that, similar idea.

People also mentioned the issue of giving the full bounty to wing members, that's always been silly anyway, so nix that for player-player bounties too, just split it.

 

[Jhaelen]

The same does not apply to anything that generates rewards. You're not "gaming" a PvE system simply by playing it, and it's much easier to balance.

Zero sum PvP is an interesting take and definitely cancels any risk of manipulation but is a huge disincentive for the activity overall.

Then add pvp rewards to Powerplay to direct the pvp community there. Pvp is better when both sides want to participate and Powerplay is the perfect venue for that.

 

[T'kael]

I like the idea of player-set bounties on the surface, but have no doubt this would become malicious very quickly.

What if players could set some sort of take-down reward on themselves (as a way to invite and incentivize PVP), in addition to any bounty reward? Any Pilot's Federation member who takes me down gets these credits that I've set aside as a reward for besting me.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

The credits aren't coming out of thin air, they're coming out of the bank account of the guy who died. Getting a huge bounty is harder than one would think if you are on a fresh account with nothing but a Sidewinder. In fact, it would be more effort to grind out a huge bounty and then die to give it away to someone than it would be to just go mining.

To split a final hair, all credits are generated out of thin air. There is no real economy, so the faction that is paying out the bounty has infinite credits to pay you with, just like they have infinite credits to buy a million and one tonnes of painite.

Edit: I even addressed wing bounty sharing in my own post. Just divide player bounties evenly among the members of the wing that got the kill

Well I have it on the authority of the guy who shot down the original version of my C&P post that it can be done very quickly, and he explained how. But if you split the amount then that short circuits it, yes, if the criminal pays the bounty. I don't really care where the credits come from (it's a game and no credits actually exist) as long as there's a feeling of balance.

 

[Sir*Vivor]

Greetings Commanders!

Game balance has been at the heart of many discussions around Elite Dangerous, for a long time, and rightly so. At its core, Elite Dangerous is about blazing your own trail and we want all Commanders to feel fairly rewarded for whichever path they choose.

To this end, we have taken a close look at the current state of the game and where we would like it to be. Using our data combined with your feedback, we have created a plan of incremental changes we hope will bring the key gameplay mechanics more in line with each other.

What's Changing?

Elite Dangerous has seen a lot of changes since its release in 2014. Among many other aspects of the game, these changes have affected the core gameplay elements and how players earn credits. Over that time, while we have made some balancing adjustments, these elements have inevitably grown out of sync.

In response to your feedback, will bring a series of balancing adjustments to the rate at which credits are earned in each core gameplay mechanic: mining, trade, combat and exploration. Our goal is to have rewards better match the level of skill, effort, and risk each method requires. This means we'll see increased credit rates in some activities and reductions in others.

Crucially, this re-balancing will be an ongoing process where we spend time observing how the changes affect the game and how you, the community, respond both in-game and with your feedback. This may mean several adjustments are needed for each type of gameplay before settling on final values. Giving each method attention in isolation will allow us to more accurately see the results and tweak accordingly, hence the step by step approach, but ultimately they all need to work in the context of each other.

Mining and combat stand out from your feedback as needing the most attention with regards to balancing. As such, we will begin with mining, bring the top range down to a point we see as fair and look at which aspects of mining should offer the greatest rewards based on the skill required.

After this, we intend to look at increasing bounties and solo combat missions in the weeks that follow to meet expected levels. From there we can turn to the still important but less pressing elements such as other mission types and exploration.

These changes will be woven into Elite Dangerous lore and introduced through the narrative. The first can be expected early next week in the form of a GalNet article.

Mining and Trade

Mining has been the most lucrative role within Elite Dangerous for a long time. While this makes perfect sense as pilots find, extract, and transport huge quantities of precious minerals, the gap has become disproportional. This has allowed even brand new Commanders to become wealthy enough to buy the highest performing ships very quickly. For the health and longevity of Elite Dangerous, we're going to considerably reduce the payout of this activity so that it remains lucrative but players won't feel compelled to head out to the latest triple hotspot whenever they need credits.

The following changes will be implemented early next week as a starting point:

These approximate maximum prices offered by markets for the following commodities will be introduced:

• Painite - 600,000
• Low Temperature Diamonds - 700,000
• Void Opals - 1,300,000

To recognise and reward the extra effort and skill needed for core mining, the majority of minerals extracted this way will see an increase in price, barring Void Opals mentioned above. Several mining commodities which can be bought will have the range of their prices increased, resulting in a higher number of goods with strong profit margins (25,000+) when commodity markets are in suitable states.

To benefit trade, we'll also bring the following changes:

• Commodity markets will offer the average price rather than minimum price when selling in bulk. This will affect all commodities.
• The base prices of a number of general salvage items will be increased.

What's Next?

As above, these first changes will happen early next week. We'll spend time observing their effects and listening to your feedback before deciding whether further adjustments are needed.

Next, we intend to adjust combat rewards in the form of bounties and mission payouts. You can expect to hear the planned changes before the date is announced in a post similar to this one.

Thank you in advance for your patience and understanding that this isn't a fast process and it will take time for the effects to become clear.

We would also most importantly like to thank you for your continued constructive feedback on this topic, which will be invaluable during this process!

Thanks for your support,

o7

Allow me to put my two cr's in. Many say that they make 100 mil per hour mining but that is not my case. More like 100 Mil in three hours. After that I still have to sell it. And as things would be the closest selling point is giving 135,000 cr's for Void Opels, not the 1,300,000 cr's. This means that I must spend another two hours getting a good price for my efforts, usually I have more than four items in my holds. Today after mining I had five items in my holds. Finding a good price for them took a lot of time. My opinion is do not touch mining. Hope you find this useful. Later.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

@Bulbulunufus
CMDR, I begin to wonder if we are speaking the same language. You say that bounty payouts should continue to be treated different depending on if an NPC or a player with a bounty was killed. Because the latter generates credits out of nothing.
In fact any activity in the game does exactly this. I would like to know in which way credits generated out of bounty payouts are more toxic to the game than credits out of mining, trading, or exploration.

I guess not! Or something wasn't clear enough. As I said I'd love to reduce everything to the same level, which would require a massive nerf of mining (and wing missions), except that this would unfairly pull the ladder up behind those who have already made their money, so it's not a goer. I don't care where the credits come from in as far as none of them are real, but it should feel as plausible and balanced as possible. Bounties are not toxic, but loophole-farming cash off player bounties through an exploit faster than you could mine, does not a valid game mechanic make. The loophole is not available for NPC bounties. So close that loop, and then you can buff the player bounty cap. Hopefully that's unambiguous?

 

[Sysmon]

The "how does it bother you for me to accrue insane wealth" argument always comes out when anyone talks about balancing the game so that reward has some tie to risk/investment and cost.

These are people who still have wet fever dreams of elite having a single player mode and dont acknowledge that the only thing that makes this a game, the BGS, does get impacted by infinite player funds ... as does any other mechanic that tries to leverage credits as a balance - and since it's not something that matters for the uber rich, and all mechanics eventually lead back to the bgs unless you're off in the black and never returning, all player actions impact the shared game of everyone. The decisions you make as a player where money is no object are undeniably different from those you would make if money mattered.

If the argument is that the way you play is more fun and objectively better where money doesn't matter ...vs what it would be like if it did...then argue for the elimination of credits altogether. Because in that reality, credits' only purpose is to be annoying to new players and force people to temporarily grind something they probably find boring until credits dont matter. What kind of purpose is that? Just get rid of it.

“In the future, money have no meaning. We seek only to better ourselves.”

S

 

[Vetinari]

“In the future, money have no meaning. We seek only to better ourselves.”

S

Yet we still have wars when you think 'Just go over there a bit theres loads of untapped systems, and over there, or there....why you fighting over this bit, its not really so finite anymore?'

 

[DemiserofD]

The biggest problem with mining is that you simply can't mine common materials fast enough.

Lets take an extreme example; say you want to make money mining WATER. Yes, silly, but it's possible, isn't it? Shouldn't it be reasonable to make a reasonable amount of money doing it? If you can't, why does it exist?

Now, lets assume that you've created such an unbelievably perfect map that you can mine 1000 tons per hour, far faster than anyone has achieved to date!

And lastly, we're assuming you're selling water to a system in Drought, to acquire the maximum possible price, more than 10x the galactic average.

Even with all these absolutely ridiculous, absolutely absurd conditions, you're going to make a glorious...

4.5 million credits per hour.

In fact, you could literally mine water from rings INSTANTLY, getting a ridiculous 12000 water per hour, and you'd still only make about 50m/hour! Assuming the sell point is about one light second away!

 

[Sysmon]

Yet we still have wars when you think 'Just go over there a bit theres loads of untapped systems, and over there, or there....why you fighting over this bit, its not really so finite anymore?'

Half of us must be the Borg.

S

 

[Jmanis]

The biggest problem with mining is that you simply can't mine common materials fast enough.

Lets take an extreme example; say you want to make money mining WATER. Yes, silly, but it's possible, isn't it? Shouldn't it be reasonable to make a reasonable amount of money doing it? If you can't, why does it exist?

Now, lets assume that you've created such an unbelievably perfect map that you can mine 1000 tons per hour, far faster than anyone has achieved to date!

And lastly, we're assuming you're selling water to a system in Drought, to acquire the maximum possible price, more than 10x the galactic average.

Even with all these absolutely ridiculous, absolutely absurd conditions, you're going to make a glorious...

4.5 million credits per hour.

In fact, you could literally mine water from rings INSTANTLY, getting a ridiculous 12000 water per hour, and you'd still only make about 50m/hour! Assuming the sell point is about one light second away!

Yep. The problem remains that if the mechanic for low tier mining was "Arrive at belt, instantly fill your cargohold with your choice of sub-10k/t mineral" you still couldn't come close to outperforming laser-mining things like Painite and LTD. That's how you know the solution here is not tweaking prices, but rather, increasing the rarity of the higher-priced items and decreasing the rarity of the lower ones.

 

[Sanctusice]

Fantastic. I came back to the game this year, (bought it at launch) been on and off since. I was a little sad to see that basically everyone had trade Elite because it was acquirable within a few hardcore days. It lost all meaning really, and I made it a specific point to avoid getting trade Elite first because it just felt like cheating.

Credits have felt like they mean nothing, and getting your ship blown up, well who cares, it just takes a few minutes off your day there's no other impact. I wasn't to be afraid of dying, not 'meh' about it.

One suggestion I would make is reducing the amount of impact prices have on mining rank, maybe more about tonnage. Someone that mines for a few days should never be considered 'Elite'. Not to mention the guy that bought the game a week ago and now has an A rated conda at the founders world.

Anyways, super glad to hear this is being addressed. Thanks for all the work you guys do, this is a wonderful game and I will continue to buy Arx because of how awesome it is!

 

[alexzk]

decreasing the rarity of the lower ones.

I think problem with realism will come. In fact it should be like 2000t+ of water out of 1 rock. However, when it's applied to current mechanic (laser/pieces/refine) you can't do 120% chunk.
P.S. actually it's pretty dumb right now "rock has 20% of water", okey ...but what contains water then ? After mining such basic things like water/oxygen it must remain nothing.
I can understand 20% and 80% of water in rock. But not 20% of water and 80% "trash", because we mine all sorts of "trash" elsewhere.
...so to proper balance, they should start from very deep change, i.e. when rock 100% mined it's gone. If you mine water - rock of ship size, you get at least ship weight amount of water.