ANNOUNCEMENT Game Balancing

[M_Biscotti]

Hello,

I put my, I think very rare, own opinion here, just to have it somewhere. I don't expect anyone here to follow or think the same way ^_^.

What I would have loved is a massive nerf and balance of everything down to combat earning rates as the progression seems balanced for this gameplay.

Because I never felt Elite Dangerous as an "Emir simulator" who can crash and destroy his 875 luxury cars just for pleasure.
Because when progression is not learning but just one tedious and repetitive task then where is the sense of achievement ?
Whatever the grind. If I just have to "work" for 3 weeks to get billions of credits then where is the sense of achievement ?

What I would have loved is a complete rework on how to find and drop rate of all random components for engineers, with a big rework of the useless ship radar (useless painful blue circles) making this gameplay useful. Make the collection of component "Nice and clean".

regards.

Note : what is funny about risk and reward is that it makes killing people far better than helping them...

 

[Elpin]

My way of playing is simple: best ship (FOR ME), with best modules with best engineering. I want it all because FOR ME it is a measure of progress. If you don't like it go and play your game. Why are my choices so important to you?? Why is me owning best ship in the game a problem?

That's what you were supposed to say in the first place, instead of making nonsensical arguments.

If you like to have the best ship early in the game, no prob. It's just that in a general sense of things, the current status breaks the game. In the same way as if you would play an RPG game and you could become level 50 in a few minutes. There's actually a word for it. Exploit. Not a cheat, but not a proper playing either. But I'm sure there are people that like having the best equipment early in the game and there's nothing wrong with that. After all, it's only a game that everyone should enjoy.

However, my problem is that I like mining, but I can't do it, can't enjoy it, because it would break my game. That's the whole point.

If there are people like you, who like to use exploits to get to stuff sooner than intended then the game should allow them to do it, but in a different way, some more complicated and hidden way, that wouldn't affect the gameplay of others.

 

[Maymo]

What I would have loved is a massive nerf and balance of everything down to combat earning rates as the progression seems balanced for this gameplay.

I like this idea!

It’s settled. Nerf EVERYTHING!

 

[Rubbernuke]

I like this idea!

It’s settled. Nerf EVERYTHING!

Just as with orbital bombardment-

 

[Elpin]

I like this idea!

It’s settled. Nerf EVERYTHING!

Agree! Although I also agree with his other point, that when you nerf all the payouts, you will need to do the same over and over again for much longer. So together with the nerf there also needs to come a lot more varied mission content. And I don't mean scripted quests which can be only limited amounts, but some more complex mission generator that would be able to generate a mission that you don't already know in advance how it's going to play out...

This is a topic for a whole new conversation I'm afraid

 

[F4fred]

No, you just keep heavily implying it. "Oh nobody needs them to have fun, everyone quit Star Citizen because the ships were too easy to get" etc etc - if I'm supposed to draw some other conclusion than "people owning the big ships is bad", you're not communicating it very well.

Everything is just smoke and mirrors. NPCs just magically spawn on top of you if you have cargo or meet some other specific criteria and all spout the same six lines of atrocious dialogue. It is patently obvious that everything in the game world stops existing the moment a player isn't around to see it. We have a relatively tiny set of possible encounters that just repeat forever. For all the constant talk of how we can't have feature X because it would "hurt immersion", the game world has absolutely no verisimilitude because everything is so obviously designed around keeping players busy: we have fusion but our SRVs run on gunpowder, humanity has multiple interstellar empires built on trade but we can't buy iron, space stations are enormous structures that can hold many individual ships for us but we can't store cargo, you can't pay another pilot for goods or services, NPC crew earn more money than players do in multicrew, hostile aliens are invading human space and posing an existential threat to mankind but the reward you earn for killing them is tiny - the list just goes on and on.

Answer me this: you posted that screenshot of the guy who bought a type 9 too soon and lost it but why do you care? Why does it bother you if someone buys a ship before they really know what they're doing and then loses the ship? They don't have the ship anymore so surely from your point of view, the problem solved itself? I'm really struggling to understand what your actual position is on the matter.

We're discussing player incomes as a matter of "balance" but how is the game currently unbalanced by the fact that everyone owns tons of stuff and there are 40+ carriers in every system? Surely if that was an issue, something would have to be done about the existing stuff people owned?

No I think the problem is you are just not getting it. There is nothing wrong with owning the big ships and if you do and you enjoy it, more power to your elbow. The problem is people expecting owning one to transform their experience of the game and when they get one finding it doesn’t and getting disillusioned. They then blame the game for being a grind fest or too penal. And that is the problem for our friend, 10 days in with a Type 9, it was ruining the game experience for him or her. That is a problem for the longevity of the game and the retention of new players, which FDev will need if they are continue developing the game. It has nothing to do with what people have already. If you have stacks of cash, a FC and all the ships and you are still enjoying the game great. If you got everything, got bored and gave up, rebalancing isn’t going to change that. Only some new content that grabs their attention will get them back.
As for the stuff about the smoke and mirrors, couldn’t agree more. We know it is all procedurally generated as required, that is David Braben’s thing after all. However if you know of another space based MMO where you can fly spaceships and explore the Milky Way and that, mentioning no names, isn’t toxic for new players, doesn’t have cartoon graphics and is a finished game, having made it through alpha and beta stages then let me know cos I would like to play it.

 

[Florenus]

I did, I still disagree. If you don't want best ships in the game just don't buy them, make life harder for yourself but please do not deny access to those ships for new players. Everyone here is saying: "play the game the way you like". My way of playing is simple: best ship (FOR ME), with best modules with best engineering. I want it all because FOR ME it is a measure of progress. If you don't like it go and play your game. Why are my choices so important to you?? Why is me owning best ship in the game a problem?

Play the game as you like, but PLAY the game.
Your choices are not important to me, as long as you do not require game to be changed (or remain broken) to accommodate your whim.
Some ships in game were designed as assets that require substantial effort to get. It has been cut extremely short already. Just as 99th level in RPG requires work to achive, Cutter newer was intended for new players.
When I play, I want to have long term goals - not get everything in first hour and then have no reason at all to earn credits.

 

[F4fred]

I think along the same lines. And the reason why they don't 'fix' the PWA nor ever will or even talk about it is that they have not done anything with the PWA itself. Those who do not (want to) understand this and are still mining by their old habits are therefore getting extremely meagre results now. It's frightening to see how many people this seems to apply to. But that's ok. Reserve core mining as a niche option for a few specialists. I have no issues with that.

Not quite true. They have acknowledged it is broken and they are working on a fix, but no word yet as to when that might come out.

 

[Maymo]

When I play, I want to have long term goals - not get everything in first hour and then have no reason at all to earn credits.

This.

I think you need to have something to look forward to as this creates a lot of the motivation to continue playing...

Credits are unfortunately the only gate here (excluding the Cutter and Corvette) as its been pointed out countless times that you can do almost everything the game has to offer in a very cheap ship.

FC’s.... -spits- ....really haven’t made creating balance any easier.

 

[Zieman]

FC’s.... -spits- ....really haven’t made creating balance any easier.

They're supposed to be the 'endgame', but we have countless whiners here crying they take too long to get and/or are too expensive to maintain. And most of them don't even have any idea what to do with the blasted thing.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The other is that a ship should be a modifier for the underlying game, and not be the game itself. Ship free gameplay in Odyssey is a move towards this, but Elite should be about more than just acquiring ships.

FCs would not be required if the underlying game was more than hoarding cash to buy things.

 

[Sunny_weather]

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

Any chances you would also fix the pulse wave analyzer as well while you’re at it ? As well as the numerous bugs ? I hate my conda changing for that orange sidewinder....

 

[skananote]

What I would have loved is a massive nerf and balance of everything down to combat earning rates as the progression seems balanced for this gameplay.

Wouldn't that be counterproductive to bringing new players to the game?? Making ED more grindy that it is currently is not the right thing to do...

Because I never felt Elite Dangerous as an "Emir simulator" who can crash and destroy his 875 luxury cars just for pleasure.
Because when progression is not learning but just one tedious and repetitive task then where is the sense of achievement ?
Whatever the grind. If I just have to "work" for 3 weeks to get billions of credits then where is the sense of achievement ?

My sense of achievement is different to your sense of achievement. Others may have another idea...

If there are people like you, who like to use exploits to get to stuff sooner than intended then the game should allow them to do it, but in a different way, some more complicated and hidden way, that wouldn't affect the gameplay of others.

Eeee...?? What exploits you referring to??

Play the game as you like, but PLAY the game.

I do play the game. Not sure what you're on about. What I said to all "seasoned players" is this: don't be hypocritical, you have you wealth already, you have your best engineered toys, let new comers ENJOY the game. Nerfing crap out of the game is not the right way to achieve anything...

When I play, I want to have long term goals - not get everything in first hour and then have no reason at all to earn credits.

Have a long time goals. All power to you. BUT WHY would you like everyone to go through the same play style?? Wouldn't that be enforcing your vision of the game on others?? Something I am being accused of in this discussion...

 

[Florenus]

I do play the game. Not sure what you're on about. What I said to all "seasoned players" is this: don't be hypocritical, you have you wealth already, you have your best engineered toys, let new comers ENJOY the game. Nerfing crap out of the game is not the right way to achieve anything...
Have a long time goals. All power to you. BUT WHY would you like everyone to go through the same play style?? Wouldn't that be enforcing your vision of the game on others?? Something I am being accused of in this discussion...

I just started new account I got on Epic. I'm enjoying it very much, because at the beginning the game is much more balanced. I need to work to get new ship, more work to outfit it. I have reasons to do missions, earn cash. I'm enjoying it much more than my old account where I struggle to find goals.
What I said about my new commander is excluding mining, because it has potential to shoot me all across progress ladder in very short time. For someone who enjoys mining (I can live without it) and wants to make it his main activity, this breaks the progression in game.
There's a design behind this game - your way of playing is skipping through designed progression - that's what I call "not playing the game". You want to avoid playing the game and get the rewards.
As I said, you can do whatever you like, as long as it doesn't require to have broken game for others.

 

[F4fred]

I did, I still disagree. If you don't want best ships in the game just don't buy them, make life harder for yourself but please do not deny access to those ships for new players. Everyone here is saying: "play the game the way you like". My way of playing is simple: best ship (FOR ME), with best modules with best engineering. I want it all because FOR ME it is a measure of progress. If you don't like it go and play your game. Why are my choices so important to you?? Why is me owning best ship in the game a problem?

It is not a problem for you personally, or the game, as long as you are enjoying it and keep playing. Cos the more players that are active the more incentive there is for FDev to keep developing the game and delivering new content. The problem comes if 2 months into the game you now have your Cutter and Corvette and you are bored cos you have the best ships with the best modules and you don’t know what to do with them as you haven’t explored any other aspects of the game that might be fun. Your only measure of progress is getting the next ship or module so you look at the next big thing which is a fleet carrier and is going to set you back 6-7 billion credits. You realise it is going to take some time to make that much and give up complaining ED is a grind fest and how unfair it is players can’t earn half a billion credits an hour so you get a FC after a weeks casual play.
But you paid for it play how you like, just keep playing and explore all the ways of having fun in the game.

 

[Maymo]

Wouldn't that be counterproductive to bringing new players to the game?? Making ED more grindy that it is currently is not the right thing to do...


My sense of achievement is different to your sense of achievement. Others may have another idea...


Eeee...?? What exploits you referring to??


I do play the game. Not sure what you're on about. What I said to all "seasoned players" is this: don't be hypocritical, you have you wealth already, you have your best engineered toys, let new comers ENJOY the game. Nerfing crap out of the game is not the right way to achieve anything...


Have a long time goals. All power to you. BUT WHY would you like everyone to go through the same play style?? Wouldn't that be enforcing your vision of the game on others?? Something I am being accused of in this discussion...

The devs will hopefully be paying a fair bit of attention to this thread...

If you’re happy with balance in the current game as it is you should just say so and make your argument to them.

Other players are equally as entitled to their own opinions, it’s not “enforcing your vision of the game on others” because FD are the gatekeepers, not us.

 

[Elpin]

Eeee...?? What exploits you referring to??

Mining as it's set right now is basically an exploit.

 

[Dreaders]

NOTE : I love this new FDev and do not mean to be critical, it's all just learning together

On the one hand FDev are saying 'dont rush, no need, rebalance the money makers' and I see people saying 'Yeah no-one needs a fast Cutter'. But then we have a CG that accelerate grinds Imperial rank and gives a huge discount on purchases of ... Cutters. Cue race for money and gear.

On the one hand people say 'go explore, do more with the game, enjoy', on the other we get a CG with a nifty FSD available pretty much too FC owners and their mates, and AXI endgame specialist. Cue race for money and gear.

It's existing mechanics and competitive reward actions in CG's etc that define the race for money and gear, because they are exclusive to people who already used these meta techniques and exploits, and often only now want them clamped down. How do I know? Because when the 25% became 75%, WAY too many of the complaints were for other people to just not get the same as those of us in over 25 got with no other reasoning - pushing down others that would follow. That's what competitive rewards gets you. And I see this in this thread with posters saying 'Dont meta, go explore!' followed by 'Exploring earns too much if you use spansh nerf it'. You know who clearly used spansh to get rich quick playing meta? The poster did and they are putting their characteristics on to others.

The positive impact of cool rewards to the haves, WILL be outweighed by the negative impact of denying those rewards to the have nots in competition, it's sociological. It will also cause a FOMO surge to find metas to plug the gap as nobody wants to be a have-not when it makes a material difference. Rebalance, yes! But re-think what behaviours the rewards systems are driving.

 

[skananote]

There's a design behind this game - your way of playing is skipping through designed progression - that's what I call "not playing the game". You want to avoid playing the game and get the rewards.

Why do you assume that I skip anything in the game?? I don't do mining. I have a ship capable of mining but it is nicely parked in the station near the mining hotspot. I do missions, actually I do those cheap currier runs between three stations currently - mainly because it allows me to play during the short sessions I have with the game. I also get the engineering materials from some mission as a top up to surface prospecting... Again I play the game. What I said, and will say it again, ED is a sandbox, ED that I play is my personal narrative, I play the game that is convenient for me HOWEVER I do not expect my play style to be enforced on others. All of you here following pro-nerf agenda is an example that you have no imagination and the only way to "fix" the game it to break it for all. This is not the way to bring more players on-board...

 

[limpetdwarf]

1. The players and NPCs they interact with. Why do something for no reward, for the satisfaction of doing it and getting involved, if that isn’t enough for you do something else.
2. From my perspective there are lots of enjoyable things to do in Elite and I do some of them and switch to doing different ones as the mood takes me. Currently I am doing the only sort of passenger mission I will touch rescuing people from a burning station and generally selecting ones that let me pick up stuff for engineering instead of credits. I am sure I miss a lot of stuff due to lack of information but as most of the time I don’t know what I have missed I don’t fret about it too much.
3. I don’t get those things out of Elite maybe because I accept it for what it is now not for what I wish it could be.

The problem is that the fun things are massively outweighed by the things that make players frustrated and angry. You can lower or raise the prices of minerals or other things all you want, doing that won't change this.

Do you have more fun when the same old passenger mission pays ten times as much as it used to, and will you do it because it's more fun or because it pays more? Do you have more fun when you have to sell the minerals you mined for less money than before, and will you go mining more because it's more fun or because it pays less? Do you have more fun when trade yields 10 times more money per ton of cargo, and would you do it more because of that --- or would you do it more when you don't have to keep your computer running along with your xbox, switching the monitor back and forth between them so that you can use external web sites to be presented with suggestions for trade routes?

I would be inclined to do more passenger missions --- or bettter make my own cruises --- if I could fill more than a single cabin and if they payed more, and I would like to go mining if it wasn't so totally broken (and its brokenness doesn't have anything to do with mineral prices). I would do more trade if the jump ranges weren't so painfully limited and if I didn't need to keep my computer running for it --- or if I could at least get the data and do my own programming to find out routes --- and if I could trade significant amounts of cargo and if there were a good simulation of economy so it would make sense and wasn't totally random.