Latest CG, the clearest example of P2W in ED to date?

[Stealthie]

People keep asking this.

The answer is time.

Lets say you and another player have both got into the top 75% and you are both fine with that, you just want the extra modules.. Current cut off is 10,000 tons and you are both just over that. A week later, the cut off is now 12,000.

So you both go, damn, need to make more deliveries, i still want those extra modules.

Now, you, in your PC, only need 2 runs to get back into the top 75%, but the person without needs 3 runs to do the same. You have gained a time advantage over the person who hasn't opened their wallet.

Spot on.

When I see people saying "The PC2 isn't P2W because time is the biggest advantage a player can have" it seems a little obtuse to me.
It's the same logic that brings us excuses like "I didn't kill anybody. The gun did it" and "I didn't mean to break the speed limit but I'm driving a Lamborghini".
Sure, time is the biggest advantage a player can have in a CG but, if two players have equal amounts of time, the player with the PC2 is going to come out ahead.

I've also read people saying "The PC2 only carries 40% more cargo than a Cutter so it's not that much of an advantage".
40%?!
Ask Lewis Hamilton if he'd be okay with the idea of Max Verstappen having to do 40% fewer laps than everybody else.
Would you be okay with the idea of having to work shifts 40% longer than some other people where you work?


I will genuinely be interested to see what the results of this CG are.
I know it's all a bit vague and inscrutable but I know how much effort I put into a CG and I know how far up the rankings that amount of effort usually gets me.
It'll be interesting to see if that level of effort still gets me as far as usual or whether it's noticeably harder to get into the top half of the results.

 

[vanFace]

Spot on.

When I see people saying "The PC2 isn't P2W because time is the biggest advantage a player can have" it seems a little obtuse to me.
It's the same logic that brings us excuses like "I didn't kill anybody. The gun did it" and "I didn't mean to break the speed limit but I'm driving a Lamborghini".

IMHO, the people saying that the ARX ships are not P2W were intellectually dishonest from the very beginning. They fully knew that it is in the P2W spectrum, were OK with it, but for some reason felt kind of ashamed for "their" game or their own behavior, so they resorted to those sketchy arguments to hand-wave it away.

Elite Dangerous is using a P2W system with its ARX shop, and it gets higher up in the spectrum all the time. And this is fine. They leverage it in a very sensible way, so there is no danger of exploitation, while there is all the chance of expanded life-time for the game.

I wish people would stop the bun-fighting over the term itself and instead embrace the concept, perhaps adding some constructive criticism instead of shooting down every idea because "OMG, OMG, now it will REALLY be P2W".

For example, recently the fact of old CG modules not being available via broker came up again. What about bringing those modules into the ARX-store? It would give people a chance to buy-in into lost opportunities via ARX. Of course adding it to brokers would be nicer from the consumer PoV, but then this means additional work for the devs for all the interface bells&whistles (for no apparent return of investment for them), whereas an addition to the store should be easier and yielding income as well.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

If one cares about ED and its future then how do you suggest we pay FDev so they can pay the developers and the cost of running the servers? This isn't a charity service. Maybe charge a monthly fee to play Elite? Most wouldn't like that.

I have an idea. They could bring out small paid-for expansion packs that includes a ship... oh wait.

That's really FD's problem. Egosoft and Helo Games have pumped out free expansions for years without resorting to P2W. Not even charging for their DLCs. Plenty of other online multiplayer games exist without subscription fees or the purchase of in-game assets for money.

I feel what they should have done was to not neglect ED for many years by putting out regular content DLCs that people would pay for and that would continue funding. From what we understood back when the game launched, this was the plan, and why quite a lot of us paid for the lifetime expansion, based on the understanding that we would get our money's worth from it. Alas, 2 DLCs doesn't cover the amount we spent.

FD made a number of other mistakes over the years with their other games, and overall put them on shaky ground, so its clear why they need to monetize harder.

Personally I wish they hadn't gone down the road of paid-for ships. They could have leaned harder into cosmetics. There's still no FAS ship kit and a number of other ships still don't have one. Some ships are very limited in their paintjobs. They could have done more with cockpit interior cosmetics as well as suit and weapons. Colonization has shown plenty of people will give money to be able to paint their stations and name them however they want.

Probably a number of other ways they could have monetized the game without going down the road of ship sales or if they did, balance the new ships so they aren't automatic upgrades to older ships, thereby mitigating the P2W element... there's still some P2W regardless with buying ships for money (eg: the pre-built ships), in that you win time, but at least they aren't any better than what you can buy yourself for credits.

Automatically assuming FD had no choice but to make P2W ships is a very limited view. I don't think they handled it too badly. 3 months EA is bearable and at least the older ships remain viable, its not like they added new stuff that required the newer ships to participate - that's a line they haven't crossed (so far).

The point in this particular thread is how the new CG is a bit too much on the nose all things considered and clearly an attempt by FD to push more sales of the PC.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

What advantage over what?

I feel like you're being deliberately obtuse with that response. You read my comment, I'm certain you understood it.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I look forward to complaining vociferously, once the CG is over, that I opened my wallet and bought a PC II and didn't win, not even made it into the top 75%!
How unfair it is, there I was spending real money and my effort was unrewarded...

Why would you do that?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

The one who doesn't open their wallet is at no meaningful disadvantage.
The only thing they have to exercise is patience, and then they get the Panther for free.

Depends on what you mean by meaningful.

Let me quote myself:

Latest CG, the clearest example of P2W in ED to date?

I wonder if anyone who paid for PCII will respond here with statement that a main reason for purchase is winning anything, and not those like... I purchased the PCII to make colonization easier. Absolutely. There was no other reason for me to purchase it. My dedicated bulk transport Cutter...

forums.frontier.co.uk

People keep asking this.

The answer is time.

Lets say you and another player have both got into the top 75% and you are both fine with that, you just want the extra modules.. Current cut off is 10,000 tons and you are both just over that. A week later, the cut off is now 12,000.

So you both go, damn, need to make more deliveries, i still want those extra modules.

Now, you, in your PC, only need 2 runs to get back into the top 75%, but the person without needs 3 runs to do the same. You have gained a time advantage over the person who hasn't opened their wallet.

Do you care about that or not? Its fine either way, that's your choice. Do you consider that not to be meaningful? Ok, that's your choice.

Is there an advantage to opening your wallet? That is indisputable.

 

[WillFrog]

The point in this particular thread is how the new CG is a bit too much on the nose all things considered and clearly an attempt by FD to push more sales of the PC.

How exactly is this trade CG any different from the one they just did last week that nobody complained about?

It would be naïve to think FDev weren't hoping to drive sales of the Panther Clipper with this one, of course, but I don't imagine they expected this kind of reaction. I think they expected people would be happy to get their hands on some better cargo racks for other ships and make a lot of money. And yet somehow it's evil and exploitative. I just don't get it.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

IMHO, the people saying that the ARX ships are not P2W were intellectually dishonest from the very beginning. They fully knew that it is in the P2W spectrum, were OK with it, but for some reason felt kind of ashamed for "their" game or their own behavior, so they resorted to those sketchy arguments to hand-wave it away.

Elite Dangerous is using a P2W system with its ARX shop, and it gets higher up in the spectrum all the time. And this is fine. They leverage it in a very sensible way, so there is no danger of exploitation, while there is all the chance of expanded life-time for the game.

I wish people would stop the bun-fighting over the term itself and instead embrace the concept, perhaps adding some constructive criticism instead of shooting down every idea because "OMG, OMG, now it will REALLY be P2W".

For example, recently the fact of old CG modules not being available via broker came up again. What about bringing those modules into the ARX-store? It would give people a chance to buy-in into lost opportunities via ARX. Of course adding it to brokers would be nicer from the consumer PoV, but then this means additional work for the devs for all the interface bells&whistles (for no apparent return of investment for them), whereas an addition to the store should be easier and yielding income as well.

Interesting suggestion there and actually reverses the paradigm in a good way. Instead of ARX first, possibly earn in game later, give the option to earn in game first, and if you miss out (and I have missed out on quite a lot of modules over the years), then offer those for ARX later (say 3 months after the CG is over).

The only concern is it might tempt FD to add some really OP stuff to CGs so they get the chance to sell it later for money.

And yeah, I wish more people who are fine with FD's monetization would simply agree that its on the P2W scale and own it. Every person has their own level of tolerance to P2W and where their breaking point is on the scale. The concern from my point of view is the more people accept it, the more the devs will slide towards even worse practices. They are a corporation, they have shareholders, they have an obligation to their shareholders to maximize profits, so if the community is tolerant to these things, they will take it as a green light to do even more.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

How exactly is this trade CG any different from the one they just did last week that nobody complained about?

Did you even read the OP?

but I don't imagine they expected this kind of reaction

Unless they are very naive I'm pretty sure they discussed the community's reaction to this during meetings and decided they were ok with it. I'm sure with every new feature and goal they consider the community's possible reaction to it. They'd be foolish not to. I'm sure there would have been even some tactic acknowledgement internally that it is a bit too on the nose, not that they could ever acknowledge it publicly.

 

[WillFrog]

Did you even read the OP?

Yes, and as I have repeatedly said, nobody is gaining any advantage here. Whether you bought the new ship or not simply does not matter in any way, shape, or form. The only thing it will help you do is earn more credits, which is utterly irrelevant.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Yes, and as I have repeatedly said, nobody is gaining any advantage here. Whether you bought the new ship or not simply does not matter in any way, shape, or form. The only thing it will help you do is earn more credits, which is utterly irrelevant.

I replied to your question:

How exactly is this trade CG any different from the one they just did last week that nobody complained about?

That is answered in the OP (as well as in my other replies to you).

You are free to disagree, but you had your answer if you read the OP, I already laid out my case, so asking that question was rather redundant.

Whether you bought the new ship or not simply does not matter in any way, shape, or form

And as I've repeatedly stated in this thread, and even demontrated with numbers, it does provide a functional advantage to someone who has opened their wallet in terms of time.

If that doesn't matter to you personally, fine, you can say that. But to try and claim there is no gain from it, when it can haul more, is crazy. I'm looking forward to getting a PC myself in approx 3 months to increase my hauling capability, it will be a good time saving ship and enable me to earn more credits quicker and complete hauling tasks quicker.

 

[Weps]

Yes, and as I have repeatedly said, nobody is gaining any advantage here. Whether you bought the new ship or not simply does not matter in any way, shape, or form.

"Come on, i’ God’s name, once more toward our father’s.
Good Lord, how bright and goodly shines the moon!"

"The moon? The sun! It is not moonlight now."

"I say it is the moon that shines so bright."

"I know it is the sun that shines so bright."

"Now, by my mother’s son, and that’s myself,
It shall be moon, or star, or what I list,
Or e’er I journey to your father’s house."

 

[Rat Catcher]

Why would you do that?

Why wouldn't I?
If it is so blatantly obvious that having a Kitty and taking part in the CG is a guaranteed win, according to your logic...

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Why wouldn't I?
If it is so blatantly obvious that having a Kitty and taking part in the CG is a guaranteed win, according to your logic...

That is not my logic at all.

PS: We are calling it a Kitty now?

 

[Rat Catcher]

That is not my logic at all.

Effectively, it is though...

This means that those that paid cash for the PC have a huge, almost 2x advantage over anyone who hasn't paid for the ship. Those who don't have the PC will be able to haul less (and the Type 9, the next biggest cargo ship has a worse jump range, meaning deliveries take longer), earning less credits, and less chance of getting into the top 75%.

As it is around 1.5x times advantage (which you have been corrected on several times, but resisted the urge to correct it, as it isn't quite so sensational...)

The argument that a Kitty flyer can haul more in the same given time as a Cutter / T9 player is equally as valid as a cutter Vs T8 player, in the same time the Cutter will haul more... You just appear to desire to highlight that a new ship gives an advantage, when said advantage is only 'huge' if 2 players are directly competing and 'grinding' the CG for many hours.

PS: We are calling it a Kitty now?

I've been calling it a kitty since the cargo capacity was announced, it sure ain't what I had hoped for, but balance is everything, so it was a giant ship with a hold the size of a kitten... (But, having seen it in game, it is only a little larger than the T9, so not the massive ship the initial impressions gave)

As for your desire for folk to recognise P2W, first they have to recognise the 'experts' who coined the concept (which, you may have already gathered, I think hilarious) to be quite so vague that even buying a game before another player must be P2W, but, you know, 'experts' have to make a living too...

 

[WillFrog]

That is answered in the OP (as well as in my other replies to you).

You are free to disagree, but you had your answer if you read the OP, I already laid out my case, so asking that question was rather redundant.

You said that someone who doesn't own a PC will earn less credits and have less chance of getting in the top 75%. The second half of that is simply incorrect. You even agreed with me earlier that it was, so we can dispense with that. As to the first part, I have still not seen any explanation as to why the state of someone else's credit balance should matter to me in the slightest or what advantage they are supposedly gaining.

And as I've repeatedly stated in this thread, and even demontrated with numbers, it does provide a functional advantage to someone who has opened their wallet in terms of time

Okay then. Let's look at some numbers.

The best price I can currently find for Titanium on Inara is 3,944cr. The price at the CG station is 44,460 for a profit of 40,516 per ton.

Let's say I did 40 runs. The cargo capacity of my Cutter is 728, meaning I could deliver 29,120t.
The capacity of my PC is 1,232 for a 40-run total of 49,280.
The difference between them is 20,160t, meaning the Panther would make 816,802,560 more credits than the Cutter.

800 million. That's the price of 9 undiscovered Stratum Tectonicus. Hell, I made more money than that a few days ago selling stuff to fleet carriers IN A CUTTER!

It. Does. Not. Matter.

...

At all.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Effectively, it is though...

As it is around 1.5x times advantage (which you have been corrected on several times, but resisted the urge to correct it, as it isn't quite so sensational...)

The argument that a Kitty flyer can haul more in the same given time as a Cutter / T9 player is equally as valid as a cutter Vs T8 player, in the same time the Cutter will haul more... You just appear to desire to highlight that a new ship gives an advantage, when said advantage is only 'huge' if 2 players are directly competing and 'grinding' the CG for many hours.

I've been calling it a kitty since the cargo capacity was announced, it sure ain't what I had hoped for, but balance is everything, so it was a giant ship with a hold the size of a kitten... (But, having seen it in game, it is only a little larger than the T9, so not the massive ship the initial impressions gave)

As for your desire for folk to recognise P2W, first they have to recognise the 'experts' who coined the concept (which, you may have already gathered, I think hilarious) to be quite so vague that even buying a game before another player must be P2W, but, you know, 'experts' have to make a living too...

sigh I'm going to go back and edit the OP because people keep quibbling about it. Sure, ok, 1.4 times, it doesn't alter the argument.

Look, maybe i've badly explained it, maybe you're misunderstanding what i'm saying, so I won't bother trying to explain again for the umpteenth time, but will just say, if your takeaway is:

I look forward to complaining vociferously, once the CG is over, that I opened my wallet and bought a PC II and didn't win, not even made it into the top 75%!
How unfair it is, there I was spending real money and my effort was unrewarded...

...then there is a serious breakdown in understanding.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

that even buying a game before another player must be P2W, but, you know, 'experts' have to make a living too...

That isn't my argument either nor have i even suggested as such.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I'd say not quite pay2win, but definitely pay2advantage.

P2w means paying real money to get an in-game advantage.

"But its mot p2w if you dont win" is literally Star Citizen-style wordplay. This is p2w.

Fwiw: I got the pc2 and didnt join the cg, but its still p2w.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

You said that someone who doesn't own a PC will earn less credits and have less chance of getting in the top 75%. The second half of that is simply incorrect. You even agreed with me earlier that it was, so we can dispense with that. As to the first part, I have still not seen any explanation as to why the state of someone else's credit balance should matter to me in the slightest or what advantage they are supposedly gaining.


Okay then. Let's look at some numbers.

The best price I can currently find for Titanium on Inara is 3,944cr. The price at the CG station is 44,460 for a profit of 40,516 per ton.

Let's say I did 40 runs. The cargo capacity of my Cutter is 728, meaning I could deliver 29,120t.
The capacity of my PC is 1232 for a 40-run total of 49,280.
The difference between them is 20,160t, meaning the Panther would make 816,802,560 more credits than the Cutter.

800 million. That's the price of 9 undiscovered Stratum Tectonicus. Hell, I made more money than that a few days ago selling stuff to fleet carriers IN A CUTTER!

It. Does. Not. Matter.

...

At all.

Ok, you're welcome to your opinion. I think it does matter, you don't. We've got nothing further to discuss.