Idea to Fix all the C&P, Credit Exploits, etc.

Now first, a little on my problem solving pedigree: AFSO21, LEAN, Six Sigma trained... in my first year at Altus AFB my team and I cut $6M in wasted fuel use while increasing training by 9% and making things easier for everyone. I could go on but what I'm getting at is that the core issue with any list of problems is defining the real problem.

Credit exploits: why do people need credits? Ganking: why do people get upset about getting killed? Why do people care if a newbie is flying a Corvette? I believe the core reason is this: TIME.

This game takes up a TREMENDOUS amount of time, real world time, and so players are doing everything against the clock. Look at the posts: x credts per y unit of time. Most MMO games don't penalize you for dying, for example Call of Duty, you just respawn and you even still make some progress on your character even if you lose every match. CQC was built to sort of acknowledge this problem in Elite. TIME = MONEY and therefore credits need to be farmed ASAP. Why? Because this is a game where death is penalized.

The while "rebuy" insurance mechanic was fun for the original games because they were single player. NPC behave logically, pirates pirate, traders trade, aliens attack... simple. When you throw humans into the mix, results change unpredictably and the penalty of losing your cargo and paying a rebuy (credits = time) is a loss of TIME. A big waste of time, not a small "Rats that was frustrating, oh well, lets try that again" amount of time.

I suggest... and really think about this here don't just auto-reject because you've invested so much time into this already (that's called the "sunk cost" fallacy)... is to eliminate the losses after ship destruction. Players have NO rebuy, NO cargo loss, NO data loss, they just respawn at the last facility, or in prison like you currently have it because that is a fun game mechanic. This would eliminate all the crying over PvP because if an unshielded T-9 gets whacked with a full load of cargo, the player loses the few minutes of time that it too to jump there, but it's out a big amount of time to buy back that cargo and insurance premium. They'll have a "dammit" feeling for a little while, but not enough to quit. Have you seen how many people quit the game because they lost a ship? I know two personally, who not only quit but almost actively push others to support Star Citizen instead of Elite... how is that fun? At the end of the day, you're a business out for profit and console players want to die worry free... hence the need for billions of credits to pad your death.

The counter argument is "you need to feel a sense of loss" but really, do you? It's not reality, it's entertainment, and I'd put numbers of sales against titles like Witcher, Elder Scrolls, Halo, etc etc etc.... none of them have you go back in time 3 or 4 hours when you get killed. You still have a feeling of danger, still don't want to lose, but if you die you don't lose that much time. Have I said TIME enough yet?

Anyway, for your consideration.
 
CoD isn't an MMO.

Most real MMOs punish you for death, be it loss of gear, XP, money, or even just forcing you to walk back to your corpse.
All equal time.

In Eve Online, if unprepared, you can lose years of training (last I checked). Clone requires money to buy, money took time to earn. Plus your insurance on top.

Everything is how it should be. Simple.

5% of your ships value for death is about as easy going as it comes.
 
Last edited:
Ah, okay then, I guess there isn't any problem then. :) So there isn't any need for multi-mode because there are no ganking complaints, no need for C&P changes, no need to patch credit exploits... I must have been playing something else for the last 5 years.
 
I'm not sure I want to play CoD in space where death is meaningless.
Your avatar is wearing a uniform, so I'll assume you have a military background - is the rapid movement, crazy running around, and constant jumping typical of successful players in CoD in any way typical of a real combat scenario?

I want my ship to have value, I want to think that escaping more worthwhile than getting blown up and respawning.
Unfortunately, the credit exploits have allowed many players to treat their ships as disposable and act towards others in that way.
 
Ah, okay then, I guess there isn't any problem then. :) So there isn't any need for multi-mode because there are no ganking complaints, no need for C&P changes, no need to patch credit exploits... I must have been playing something else for the last 5 years.
Technically, there are no problems, except the exploitable missions.
C&P needs some bugs ironing out, but its helping protect players from ganking already. Ganking itself is actually fairly easy to survive, unless ridiculously outmatched, or totally unprepared. But those CMDRs now have to deal with the consequences.
Modes aren't just about avoiding ganking. I use solo for stability. If open didn't crap out constantly, I'd use that more. Others just don't like interaction with humans.

People use credit exploits because they can, and because they want what they want as soon as possible.
 
And I'll be in opposition to the two esteemed spokespeople before me and agree with OP.

As evidenced by latest skimmer mission exploit, people don't mind losing ships as long as rebuy cost is negligible, which proves OP right - because the time invested in rebuying the ship is minimal, the sense of loss is also minimal.
This directly leads to conclusion that should rebuy cost be completely removed, the reason for grinding credits described as "I want to buffer cash for rebuys" is eliminated as well.

There is one question, however. If there is no major setback associated with getting killed, what is such solution's impact of longevity of the game?
Surely being spawned at the previous station, with cargo intact and ship ready to go, has influence on general "progress" towards player-set goal in the game.
Food for thoughts :)

Oh, and $0.02 for OP - my dear friend, I commend your efforts in an attempt to find simple solution to complex problems, but don't bother.
This game is far beyond the point of no return. Should your ideas arrived some time before introduction of engineers, there would be a good chance of balancing some stuff out.
Currently, however, this game is so far into woods fixing one problem instantly creates ten more elsewhere. It's just impossible, IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Now first, a little on my problem solving pedigree: AFSO21, LEAN, Six Sigma trained... in my first year at Altus AFB my team and I cut $6M in wasted fuel use while increasing training by 9% and making things easier for everyone. I could go on but what I'm getting at is that the core issue with any list of problems is defining the real problem.

I was ready to read the post and give it serious consideration and this paragraph is where you lost me.
 
Last edited:
And I'll be in opposition to the two esteemed spokespeople before me and agree with OP.

As evidenced by latest skimmer mission exploit, people don't mind losing ships as long as rebuy cost is negligible, which proves OP right - because the time invested in rebuying the ship is minimal, so the sense of loss is also minimal.
This directly leads to conclusion that should rebuy cost be completely removed, the reason for grinding credits described as "I want to buffer cash for rebuys" is eliminated as well.

There is one question, however. If there is no major set back associated with getting killed, what is such solution's impact of longevity of the game?
Surely being spawned at the previous station, with cargo intact and ship ready to go, has influence on general "progress" towards player-set goal in the game.
Food for thoughts :)

The problem with credits comes from the lack of scaling in nearly every aspect of the game, except trading and mining.
I can't earn any more per hour when bounty hunting in my battle ready Anaconda (22mil rebuy) than I can in my FDL, or Python (8mil rebuys). Exploration can earn the exact same per hour regardless of ship, providing you have the tools.
So, people with 1bn credit cutters, are sitting with a 50~mil rebuy waiting to happen. But with the exception of trading, they're not really earning more than anyone else.

Scaling is the issue, not exploits.

Getting rid of the rebuy just goes around the problem, instead of addressing it.
 
The problem with credits comes from the lack of scaling in nearly every aspect of the game, except trading and mining.
I can't earn any more per hour when bounty hunting in my battle ready Anaconda (22mil rebuy) than I can in my FDL, or Python (8mil rebuys). Exploration can earn the exact same per hour regardless of ship, providing you have the tools.
So, people with 1bn credit cutters, are sitting with a 50~mil rebuy waiting to happen. But with the exception of trading, they're not really earning more than anyone else.

Scaling is the issue, not exploits.

Getting rid of the rebuy just goes around the problem, instead of addressing it.

Is that strictly true?
Shouldn't the acquisition of a more capable weapons platform make you more efficient at combat?

I know it won't increase the number of targets, but you should be able to get through those targets faster.
 
CoD isn't an MMO.

Most real MMOs punish you for death, be it loss of gear, XP, money, or even just forcing you to walk back to your corpse.
All equal time.

Jumpgate (now gone, RIP) - when you died you lost your cargo if you were hauling. shucky darn. toward the end of the game they instituted insurance much like what goes on here. the response in game went from 'well damn I gotta buy/fly that again' to 'I'm going to strap nukes on my ship to protect my haul' and on the pirate side from 'oops they had a trap that blew me up while stealing cargo' to ' I'm just going to POD (pay or die). This led to squads of folks who would 'guard' you for creds while you mined or spacetrucked, or you could pay them to go hunt said pirate until they logged. It literally broke the game mechanic for pirates/hunters.

Lineage II - you had to go get your gear. If you were wanted (i.e. ganking/killing innocents/etc) you had the probability to 'lose' a piece of gear. the person who killed you got said piece/cash equivalent. this only ran afoul when people would strip off their good gear and go on a gank spree to get people chasing them, then when folk went 'red' (i.e. pvp mode) they'd get wiped by the ganker's guild for coin/drops. it was called 'noob farming'. It was a problem.

WoW - you die, you go get your body. nothing lost, nothing gained. if some chump/NPC is camping your body, you can res at a graveyard for 1 hour 25% debuff to all your stats (rez sickness).

I was a mod for Jumpgate. I ran my own private server for L2. I'm just a gamer in WoW, and here in E : D.

broken mechanics killed Jumpgate.

I disabled the PC drops system in L2 to watch that problem evaporate.

I still play WoW regularly and have a couple maxed out toons there. it's enjoyable and relaxing despite the grind.

I'm becoming disenchanted with E : D because of the constant gold rush-removal-nerfhammer whine, which is truly sad considering it is what Jumpgate could have grown up to be.
 
Last edited:
The problem with credits comes from the lack of scaling in nearly every aspect of the game, except trading and mining.
I can't earn any more per hour when bounty hunting in my battle ready Anaconda (22mil rebuy) than I can in my FDL, or Python (8mil rebuys). Exploration can earn the exact same per hour regardless of ship, providing you have the tools.
So, people with 1bn credit cutters, are sitting with a 50~mil rebuy waiting to happen. But with the exception of trading, they're not really earning more than anyone else.

Scaling is the issue, not exploits.

Getting rid of the rebuy just goes around the problem, instead of addressing it.

Yup, like I said - attempt to fix one thing and 10 other issues pop up.
ED is beyond saving at this stage - unless it's scratched and completely re-written from ground up.
 
Is that strictly true?
Shouldn't the acquisition of a more capable weapons platform make you more efficient at combat?

I know it won't increase the number of targets, but you should be able to get through those targets faster.

That's the problem. You hit a hard limit based on the current spawns.
All the fire power in the universe, and nothing to use it on. Lol
The late game ships need a better pool of targets to increase the earning potential.
Larger wings, more valuable (and difficult) targets, etc.

Scaling. Lol
 
Now first, a little on my problem solving pedigree: AFSO21, LEAN, Six Sigma trained... in my first year at Altus AFB my team and I cut $6M in wasted fuel use while increasing training by 9% and making things easier for everyone. I could go on but what I'm getting at is that the core issue with any list of problems is defining the real problem.

Credit exploits: why do people need credits? Ganking: why do people get upset about getting killed? Why do people care if a newbie is flying a Corvette? I believe the core reason is this: TIME.

Unfortunately this does not define the 'real' problem.

People don't need credits.... People 'want' credits because in our increasingly materialistic world what you have defines you. Most of these people who are complaining about lack of creds etc are the first to complain, when they have billions from whatever cash exploit pop up, that there is nothing else to do because for these people the act of getting credits IS the reason to play.

People get upset when they get killed (not just from players but even NPC's) because the simply don't like to lose. The whole argument around time/credits invested etc is just a smoke screen to take away from the real reason which is they are upset something beat them. This is more and more indicative pf modern society thinking that they are entitled to everything without effort or sacrifice.

People get upset if a newbie is flying a bil cred ship for similar reason as above. They feel they should be entitled to have the same ship. Regardless of how said 'newb' acquired it. They may have worked their butt off for it but because someone sees that a 'newb' is flying a bigger/better/more exy ship than they think they should be they get bent out of shape.

This is the simple heart of the matter that plagues modern games. It not the games, as they are based on a strong history or online games of this type, but the playerbase is changing to a more materialistic, less focussed crowd. There is a reason why mobile games totally trump the big online games in terms or turnover and time played etc. 'Traditional' gaming is more niche than it ever was even though most people would fall into the 'gamer' definition nowadays.

MMO's traditionally would smack you hard for dieing.... EQ you lost everything unless you could get back to your body and pick your gear up (pretty bloody hard if you died in the middle of a enemy camp etc) Eve online well you literally lose everything from your ship upon destruction (insurance is paltry). And until relatively recently if you died and didn't have a clone that could support the amount of skills you had you lost a lot of time retraining those skills. The grandfather of MMO's Ultima Online was one of the most hardcore (by today's standards) yet it thrived. But when the newer generation of gamers came along they whined and complained and the game got a PVE only 'safe mode' and not long after it lost most of it's player base. Most of these games would be described as hardcore nowadays yet these were the norms....

Ultimately it means MMO's are doomed unless gamers start hardening the F up but given todays participation mentality I don't seeing it happening. Unfortunately what it means is that true MMO's will become more and more like the mobile games, quick flits with cash shops all over etc and proper games where you can get into it will slowly die out. It's already happening.
 
Yup, like I said - attempt to fix one thing and 10 other issues pop up.
ED is beyond saving at this stage - unless it's scratched and completely re-written from ground up.

ED has issues but beyond saving... nah. The fix 1 another ten will always pop up it's called software development and is the bane of coders and devs the world over.....
 
Credit exploits: why do people need credits? Ganking: why do people get upset about getting killed? Why do people care if a newbie is flying a Corvette? I believe the core reason is this: TIME.
Except, most players *don't* play the game to maximise their credits per hour. People explore for months (which does pay, but less than doing pretty much anything else for those months would) ... people race SRVs, SLFs, ships ... people fly for hours as Fuel Rats just to rescue someone ... people fight PvP duels to the death in San Tu or fast track supplies for Powerplay because the fun they get from doing so is worth more than the imaginary credits it costs them ... people drift around systems sightseeing ...

The while "rebuy" insurance mechanic was fun for the original games
The original games didn't have a "rebuy" mechanic. If your ship exploded in those, you were dead, and had to reload your previous save game (might have been a minute ago, might have been hours ago)

When you throw humans into the mix, results change unpredictably and the penalty of losing your cargo and paying a rebuy (credits = time) is a loss of TIME. A big waste of time, not a small "Rats that was frustrating, oh well, lets try that again" amount of time.
...except that people grind for credits who only ever play Solo and/or a PvE private group and/or a bit of Open where the hostile players aren't, where the direct human impact on time efficiency is minimal or positive.

It's not reality, it's entertainment
Yes, which means that the cost-benefit analysis of your day job (or mine) doesn't really apply.

The time value of entertainment is how much fun you get out of what you're doing, not whether a particular fictional value is higher or lower at the end of the day. Frontier could just put a "your balance at the end of the day cannot be lower than at the start of the day" rule in - and credit your account accordingly - and everyone's time would be guaranteed to be at least minimally "productive". Would this make the game more fun?

When I'm not playing Elite Dangerous, I like the mini-puzzle games in Simon Tatham's puzzle collection (they're free, if you want to look them up). I'll quite happily spend an hour playing them. If I win a game ... I get to have won a game. And then I close the program and in terms of what I've tangibly got I've got exactly what I'd have if I hadn't opened it at all, or if I'd played it for a bit, got stuck, and given up. If I wanted to be time-efficient, I'd just hit the "Solve" button immediately, and get the solution in seconds rather than minutes.

In a different field of entertainment entirely, I listen to music (as many do!) and the singers *repeat the chorus*. Well, what a waste of time, I've already heard that bit. If they just sang it once my songs/hour would go way up, and I'd be much more entertained. (Right? Entertainment's all about the time isn't it?)

I mentioned the Fuel Rats above. If running out of fuel just meant "oh well, carry on" ... then they wouldn't exist. How many people have stayed in the game because they find being a Fuel Rat fun? Is that more or less than the number who quit because they took a significant setback and decided to do something else? There's famous stories - that got positive out-of-game press coverage - where a player managed to get themselves stuck somewhere and had to have a major multiplayer rescue attempt put together - if they could just self-destruct and keep all their exploration data, those wouldn't have happened.

The player group I'm in escorts explorers home to protect their data from players, NPCs, forgetting how to dock after six months in deep space, and other such hazards. I wouldn't still be playing the game if I hadn't been rescued from a hostile player by them and then joined them to pay it forward ... and I'm very happy that hostile player was there and set me on that path. If death was consequence free, none of that would have happened, the group wouldn't exist, I'd have stopped playing over a year ago.

You can't reduce entertainment to a profit/time efficiency exercise. People play the game for a wide variety of reasons. Despite the mega-threads on the forums every time a big earner ends, people mostly don't do them in the first place.



There are, yes, some issues with how the economy and professions are balanced, how the ship prices are balanced, and how this affects the rebuy of ships at the high end compared with the earning potential of those ships. And there is a time component to those issues in that the pay-for-itself rate of small ships is considerably better than that of large ships. But taking away almost all consequences for ship loss is not the solution.
 
Why not just lock ships behind Pilot Federation Ranks?

The combat-based ships would be unlocked along the Combat tree.
The trade vessels will unlock via the Trade ranks.
Exploration ships, along the Explorer tree.
Multi-role ships could be unlocked with any progress in any tree. The multi-role ships would be used as a gateway to gaining rank with any tree.

This way it doesn’t matter how much money you have. If you don’t have the rank, then you don’t have access to the new ship.

I’m sure that could provide a baseline for mission payouts as well, knowing which missions can be accomplished (in a general) with a range of ships. If you wanted to that the risk and “punch above your weight class”, then that’s the risk/reward aspect of the game that many people are seeking—taken care of!

-This idea was not all my own. CMDR Threxor, thanks for the insights!
 
Why not just lock ships behind Pilot Federation Ranks?

The combat-based ships would be unlocked along the Combat tree.
The trade vessels will unlock via the Trade ranks.
Exploration ships, along the Explorer tree.
Multi-role ships could be unlocked with any progress in any tree. The multi-role ships would be used as a gateway to gaining rank with any tree.

This way it doesn’t matter how much money you have. If you don’t have the rank, then you don’t have access to the new ship.

I’m sure that could provide a baseline for mission payouts as well, knowing which missions can be accomplished (in a general) with a range of ships. If you wanted to that the risk and “punch above your weight class”, then that’s the risk/reward aspect of the game that many people are seeking—taken care of!

-This idea was not all my own. CMDR Threxor, thanks for the insights!

I had this idea a while back.

I didn't go down well. Lol
 
Rather than making death meaningless, I would like to see C&P actually PUNISH the criminals... with (among other things) time.
The never-expiring bounties, notoriety and "anonymous" docking changes are welcome, but after respawning at a detention centre, a psychopath merely pays his/her piddling little fine and flies away clean in the same ship.
How about making them wait - say 10 mins per CMDR murder - before they can fly away? They need to be "Processed" through the legal system. Blah blah red tape.
Above a certain threshold of CMDR murders, their "hot" ship is confiscated.
On each visit to a detention centre, a CMDR's notoriety is reduced by 1 (one. Count'em. ONE) point. Notoriety decays naturally: after, say 7 days of no CMDR murders, they start to lose notoriety points - say 1 per day as long as they stay clean?
 
Back
Top Bottom