Impose A Limit To Tier 1 Outposts In Systems (Outpost Griefing)

[Ned Flandalorian]

But I suppose a transfer fee to the CMDR wouldn't be the worst idea either.
Even 1mil creds would still be more than the system would make in a year on each server round.

Any sort of proposed transfer system would be exploited by people selling them for real money.

 

[Feuerklaue]

Any sort of proposed transfer system would be exploited by people selling them for real money.

I don't see how that'd be any different than people doing so for easy credit or reputation gains in other areas of the game for progression.
Besides, they wouldn't be able to guarantee it would go to the person sold if it only free'd up on server maintenance and not immediately.

 

[ZULU OSCAR OSCAR LIMA]

For some construction jobs; you pretty much get a return on investment anyways and then some. It's more of an upfront cost.

Some people would prefer to focus on building up rich systems, so smaller systems wouldn't really be a forethought.
But I suppose a transfer fee to the CMDR wouldn't be the worst idea either.
Even 1mil creds would still be more than the system would make in a year on each server round.

My Tier 2 Coriolis System, not very well Built up yet, is still pulling 160K Credits last Server Tick.
It 79K Credits last week, 160K Credits this week.
The point is, if Players actually took the time to Build them up, the Returns would start to climb a lot.

Personally, if someone can't be bothered to Build the Systems out themselves, they should at least leave some Construction Sites in their wake.
Those Sites will eventually get filled out by Players, but the Beacons need to be there for that to happen.

Side Note:
Does anyone know how to Increase the 'Happiness' Rating?
My Tier 2 Coriolis System is pulling in 160K Credits, but they are miserable, and I don't know why, LOL.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

I don't see how that'd be any different than people doing so for easy credit or reputation gains in other areas of the game for progression.
Besides, they wouldn't be able to guarantee it would go to the person sold if it only free'd up on server maintenance and not immediately.

Really? Do you want your chat channels absolutely swamped by Chinese gold sellers spamming? Because this is how you get Chinese gold sellers spamming. No thank you.

 

[ZULU OSCAR OSCAR LIMA]

So hey man check this baby out!

Synuefe PY-Q c21-4 - star system bodies | Elite:Dangerous | INARA

The companion site for Elite:Dangerous with the game database, market data, trade routes, outfitting, engineers, blueprints, crafting, Thargoid war, squadrons, logbooks, galleries, galaxy information and much more...

inara.cz

I got two Water World's that orbit each other. I got your Pristine metallic rings. I got your Pristine metal-rich rings. I got your Pristine Icy rings. I got HMC's that are landable. I got what you need!

Just a big fat juicy system and - oh yeah - I've decided to leave it like this I think, sorry. It's just TOO nice of a system to junk it up with man-made crap.

View attachment 428977

This is exactly the sort of Situation that serves as an example of exactly what can happen when someone just doesn't bother.
They 'Take' the System, and then, leave it to waste.

I can hope that you will at least put something more than just an Outpost in there, good job I'm not trying to expand in that direction I guess.
You do know that you could likely make so much out of this ONE System, it would pay for a Fleet Carrier's Operations forever, LOL.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

You do know that you could likely make so much out of this ONE System, it would pay for a Fleet Carrier's Operations forever, LOL.

.......

Yeah I could spend months, literally months and months, of REAL LIFE time building up this one system to pay for fleet carrier ops. My eyes bleeding. My hands calloused. My brain dissolving from the mindless and monotonous A>B>A hauling. My ass literally protein-bonding with my chair cushion.

OOOORRRR I can use my one outpost in that system to pick up wing mining missions from my faction and in literally a fraction of the time make a fortune.

This is exactly the sort of Situation that serves as an example of exactly what can happen when someone just doesn't bother.

Oh I'll have more. I'm going to start gobbling up Earth-Like world systems exclusively so I can show them to you

 

[Doctor Dread]

Oh I'll have more. I'm going to start gobbling up Earth-Like world systems exclusively so I can show them to you

And call them all Black something...

 

[ZULU OSCAR OSCAR LIMA]

And call them all Black something...

Blackacaroni Cheese (Thanks Chris Rock, for the idea).

 

[Ned Flandalorian]

My Tier 2 Coriolis System, not very well Built up yet, is still pulling 160K Credits last Server Tick.
It 79K Credits last week, 160K Credits this week.
The point is, if Players actually took the time to Build them up, the Returns would start to climb a lot.

They won't. The payout is (roughly) calculated by multiplying the system's score by 10,000, therefore a score of 100 (which would be an extremely well built-up system) would only reach one million. Then it would take 25 weeks just to make back the initial cost of the claim, before you started seeing any profit at all.

Does anyone know how to Increase the 'Happiness' Rating?
My Tier 2 Coriolis System is pulling in 160K Credits, but they are miserable, and I don't know why, LOL.

Happiness is based on whether the system spent any portion of the past week in a positive state, e.g. boom, public holiday, etc. It can also go down if there was a negative state, e.g. bust, lockdown, famine. A happiness level of 0% means nothing at all happened, they're just content.

 

[Freyar]

The original premise of what is "Outpost Griefing" is not one I can agree as a proper definition of griefing. Want a port for yourself? Claim one and put the effort in to build the Teir 2 or Tier 3 port. Otherwise, treat it like any other uninhabited system and fuel scoop as normal.

The general community doesn't owe you a docking pad.

 

[aRJay]

Unless you're refunded your 25million and get all the materials back that you put into a system, why would someone abandon a colonized system? There's no drawbacks to owning them.

Why should you get the materials back, they were bought from whoever hauled them at a price that would have given them a profit as long as they weren’t bought from another player.

 

[aRJay]

…
You do know that you could likely make so much out of this ONE System, it would pay for a Fleet Carrier's Operations forever, LOL.

Just do a little bio sampling or a CG or two and an FC will be funded for more than long enough without needing to worry about how the 5 million earnings cap for systems works.

 

[Greasetrap42]

The in-game explanation for price increase with distance when doing claims (and remove the claim distance limit) is that the further away, the more resources must be spent to colonize a system.

No it doesn't. And that doesn't make any sense.

Currently there is no reasonable explanation for applying a significantly large cost increase when building a colony with distance.

a) The initial cost of a claim doesn't have any relevance to what gets built within the claim. Unless you mean an additional cost added to each facility within a claim.

b) It doesn't make any logical sense to increase the building cost (resources) for each facility. The building materials for a coriolis isn't going to increase with distance.

c) The additional travel distance costs are negligible especially if under 500 Ly from the nearest civilization. But even 2000Ly... is only 4 fleet carrier jumps away. And the cost is just some Tritium.


Maybe some concept could be added to the game that would explain prohibitively large and significant cost increases with distance. But currently there isn't.

 

[CMDR Melloca]

Increase in materials required the further out you go is the worst idea I think I've heard in connection to Colonisation. It's hard enough getting the materials from buy ports out to distant systems as it is, especially if you're building anything higher than a T1. Please forget about this one and never bring it up again!

For goodness sakes it's not griefing to build an outpost in one or more systems on your way to a goal, opening up the door along the way for others to branch off that. That benefit alone justifies "one outpost stopover systems". Sure, it may happen in a system you would do something more with, but you didn't claim it. Don't be the nosey HOA lady worrying about what everyone else is doing -- branch out from one of those outposts and find a nice system for yourself that they paved the way to.

 

[Darrack]

So, Outpost Grieing...

What is it?
When a Player or Group setup Outposts in a Line, or Chain, just to get to a System that they actually want.

When does this occur?
Usually, when a Player decides that they want a specific System, due to its characteristics.
This can be due to the presence of an Earth-Like World, or due to the number of Building Sites in a System.

Why is this a Problem?
For me personally, this is an issue because it means that my Large Ships don't have anywhere to Land.
I, like many other Players, just want to Refuel at a Station, maybe sell some Cartographic Data, and keep moving.

.

OK, so how do we fix this Issue?

Suggestion 1:
Impose a Limit to the Number of Systems a Player can have, that ONLY have an Outpost.
A Reasonable Number would be somewhere between 5-10 Systems.
At least by doing this, in this way, it means any one specific Player can only do it once, unless they go back, and Develop their Systems later.
Exemptions: A System that at least has a Large Landing Pad Location in it, either as a Land Based Location, OR Space Station would be exempt.
Since a Tier 2, and especially, a Tier 3, can both provide a Place for Large Ships to Land, these are not a problem, these don't cause any Grief to anyone.

Suggestion 2:
Place the ability to Build / Upgrade Outposts to have Large Pads on them.
An Outpost could have 2, 3, or 4 Large Pads, the point is, they would at least have Large Pads, even if they are Few in Number.
IF ALL Outposts were just Upgraded over a Maintenance Update Period, the Issue of Griefer Outposts would be Eliminated over night.
IF Outpost Options were made available, something to Provide a Large Pad, something that wasn't as costly as a Dedicated Coriolis, that would be something.
A Large Outpost, with appropriate Landing Pads, but for around half of the Cost of a Coriolis, that would be great.
It wouldn't fix the issue entirely like this, but it would make things better, as some Players would be responsible enough to at least Build them if they had the Option.

Suggestion 3:
Make Tier 2 and Tier 3 Space Stations less Troublesome to Build, or add some sort of additional Reward for Building them.
The main reason that Players build Outposts is because they are Quick to Build, really Quick.
I know that I can build a Tier 2 Coriolis in around a Week, on my own.
Just recently, I built a Tier 2 Coriolis, with a bit of assistance, in only 4 Days.
However, most Players are not me, and don't want to spend this sort of time on a Coriolis, especially if they are not going to Benefit massively from it.
Currently, Players are rewarded for Building a bunch of Outposts, and then 'Base Crawling' to the Systems they actually want.
If Players had more incentive to Building the Higher Tier Space Stations, then more Players would.
Again, this isn't the most effective way to address the Problem, but it would help.
Making the Tier 2 and Tier 3 Space Stations easier to Build, would also help.

Suggestion 4:
NPC Hiring, being able to Hire NPC's from Systems that you already have Architect Status with.
The idea is that you still impose a Limit on this, maybe the NPC's can only Progress 50% to a System that you're trying to Colonise.
In return, they take a Massive Chunk of Credits out of you.
This might not be a Great idea, as it may introduce a different problem.
However, if a Player has a Well Built Out System, and they could then use that System to help Build a new System, that would add incentive.
Instead of Thousands of Outpost ONLY Systems, we'd get better Quality Systems, and fewer Outpost Only Systems.
You'd add a Limitation, a Player would only be able to 'Hire' NPC's once per 90-180 Days or something.
Additional Limitations could include Limiting the NPC's to only a set few Resources, selected by the Player.
Also, any NPC's that were Hired would only be able to Carry what was actually Available in the Market of the System they came from.
None of this, NPC picking up 700 CMM Composite, if the System they came from doesn't even produce CMM Composite, or there is a Shortage.

Suggestion 5:
Prompt Players to place Construction Sites in a System they have Successfully Colonised.
I don't think many Players know this, but, once you have Completed the initial System Colonisation Stage, there are no more Timers.
You can then deploy Construction Beacons in a System, and there will be no Timers on those.
This means that if you are Outpost Jumping (Base Crawling) and just don't have time for the Systems in your Wake, other Players can Build them out for you.
I actually intend to do this as I Base Crawl to a System that I have my eye on, placing enough Construction Projects in my wake to then build out some Space Stations in each System.
Effectively, this would add a more Community Focussed Element to the Game.

Suggestion 6:
Add a Penalty to Outpost Jumpers (Base Crawlers).
The more Systems that a Player owns that ONLY have Outposts in them, the more Credits and other Resources it will cost for those Players to Build more Systems.
Unfortunately, the worst people for doing this have Billions of Credits, and may even own Fleet Carriers.
That said, it would make Players think about what they are Building.
These Outpost Only Systems still require things in order to run, but they can't run effectively if there is nothing backing them up.
This in turn would become more of an issue, the more times it happens.
As such, this should be reflected in Players who do it.

Suggestion 7:
System Satisfaction Rating.
Now, I'm not entirely sure how this is working as of yet, but this could be used to Impose a Limit.
Making it so that Outpost ONLY Systems generated Negative Points, would allow a means of Tracking them.
IF a Player owns too many Systems who's Satisfaction Ratings fall into the Negatives, they are Prevented from Developing New Systems.
IF that Player then goes back, fixes the Systems that they've neglected, and resolves the Satisfaction Ratings in those Systems, then System Development is restored.
I currently have ONE System with 0 Satisfaction Rating on the Last Report.
I've added something to it that should help (I hope), so upon the Next Report, that should be resolved.
That System has a Tier 2 Coriolis in it, so that could be the Baseline.
Let's assume that it Generates 0 Satisfaction, and as such, would not be able to Generate Negative Values.
This would then mean, I would still be able to Build Systems as I see fit.
How this would look:

• Tier 1 Outpost ONLY Systems, Generate -5 Satisfaction
• Tier 2 Coriolis ONLY Systems Generate 0 Satisfaction
• Tier 3 Ocellus/Orbis ONLY Systems Generate +5 Satisfaction

This is obviously just an Example.

.

I would prefer Suggestion 1 out of that list, personally.
However, I thought that I would present multiple Ideas that I had on how to address the issue.
I know this Thread is a bit Long, sorry about that.
If you did read everything, then, thank you for your patience.

er no

O7

 

[MPL3D]

No it doesn't. And that doesn't make any sense.

Currently there is no reasonable explanation for applying a significantly large cost increase when building a colony with distance.

a) The initial cost of a claim doesn't have any relevance to what gets built within the claim. Unless you mean an additional cost added to each facility within a claim.

b) It doesn't make any logical sense to increase the building cost (resources) for each facility. The building materials for a coriolis isn't going to increase with distance.

c) The additional travel distance costs are negligible especially if under 500 Ly from the nearest civilization. But even 2000Ly... is only 4 fleet carrier jumps away. And the cost is just some Tritium.


Maybe some concept could be added to the game that would explain prohibitively large and significant cost increases with distance. But currently there isn't.

Sorry thinking about >20k light years here, and still no distance limit can mean 75k light years away from Sol.
Now buy one item at your local store for 1 buck and now tell me that if you transport that particular item to the other side of the world you will still sell it for the same price. Dont troll me please.

 

[Blaggerdy]

Why should a system architect cater for large ships. Pre-colonisation there were plenty of systems that only contained outposts

Also, who knows what will happen in the future, e.g. with Vanguards

 

[Greasetrap42]

Sorry thinking about >20k light years here, and still no distance limit can mean 75k light years away from Sol.
Now buy one item at your local store for 1 buck and now tell me that if you transport that particular item to the other side of the world you will still sell it for the same price. Dont troll me please.

Why would claiming a system >20 Ly from bubble cost more? Shouldn't it cost less? Usually claims far far away from civilization become progressively cheaper. Historically sometimes even free. Not more expensive. Claims inside the bubble, systems with premium locations, they should be way more expensive. Not the ones far far away.

Edit: An additional cost for the travel of the System Colonization Ship is reasonable. And obviously it should take more than 3 minutes to appear after launching a colonization beacon if it is >20Ly away. Typical ship transfer time should apply, which could be a couple days, maybe quicker because its FC style FSD.

Are you are confusing the cost of a claim with the cost of transporting building materials?

Please try to respond staying on topic without personal attack.
(Off topic, Walmart is packed full of commodities from the other side of the planet)

 

[Screemonster]

Good god... "outpost griefing?

We've really done it hey?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark
View attachment 428967

Didn't you know? Griefing is when anyone is mildly inconvenienced in any way whatsoever.

Pad hogging? Griefing.
Supporting a different faction to me in BGS or powerplay? Griefing.
Claiming a system I was looking at? Griefing.
Buying insulating membrane to build your station from the same place that I was looking to buy some? You better believe that's griefing.

 

[Jmanis]

Didn't you know? Griefing is when anyone is mildly inconvenienced in any way whatsoever.

Pad hogging? Griefing.
Supporting a different faction to me in BGS or powerplay? Griefing.
Claiming a system I was looking at? Griefing.
Buying insulating membrane to build your station from the same place that I was looking to buy some? You better believe that's griefing.

You criticised people who are "against griefing"... griefing!

People making these toxic categorisations are the real griefers here.