New Bank Initiative will probably result in nerfing wing missions

[Lori Jameson]

Who's to say anyone is grinding this at all? According the the BGS Worriers, there are bots that can fly fast-tracked merit missions at rates far exceeding what any human can do, and they're using 100's of Cutters to do it. How do we know these folks aren't doing the exact same? Or are even the exact same BGS botters they're so worried about?

Aye. If this service OP mentioned is true, bots are probably involved somewhere as to keep up with demand. Honestly, I'm surprised that the 'service' is free. At least it cuts out the 'gold farmers' from turning a profit, yeah?

 

[evanevery]

Just seen Obsidian Ants video, where he mentions again the IBIFI-thing.

Basically it is advertised as a bank where you can request money and it’s paid to you.

Following the link to the Discord group they host and it explains that how they do it is via the use of the Source-Return missions that the “banker” stacks up and then shares with Wing mates who are invited to their wing.

They add some sort of rules about if you already have lots of money you will probably only get a smaller payout and vice versa for if you are poor, probably to try and show some level of control.

I think that if this takes off, then all FDev will do is nerf these type of Wing missions so the payouts become pitiful to try and disssuade players from doing this.

Advertising this get rich scheme and offering payouts from between 20 - 500 million will only result in nerf hammering in game rewards.

Its a a pity that they decided to industrialise the benefits of Wing mission payment method and advertise it, as it will all end in tears.

The payouts on Wing missions were stupid from the start.

If a business has 100 tons of gravel to move, they don't pay 4 times more because the contractor uses 4 trucks instead of 1.

Stupid implementation to begin with. Probably just lazy programming...

 

[evanevery]

I think you are right that FD will just nerf it, but what would have been better, would be a system that actually checks what you did towards the wing mission, and divides the total reward based on that between the wing members.

It's a fairly lazy implementation, but I get why they did it.

No. Its perfectly viable that a player could join a Wing to function as an armed escort while another was in the Wing as a relatively unarmed transport vehicle. How you going to measure THAT participation?

Payouts don't need to be this complicated. Just divide the payout by the number of ships in the wing.

 

[RamirezKurita]

Well, except that the current payouts for wing hauling missions assume that the rewards will be copied to a wing of four (otherwise solo hauling missions are *far* more profitable).

So if they moved to a "shared out" model they'd need to make the base payouts significantly bigger ... which would make absolutely no difference to its usability as a cash transfer scheme.

It also introduces the likelihood that unscrupulous people would invite others to wing missions, let them do 3/4 of the work, then leave the wing - as the mission owner - complete the last little bit of the mission, and keep the full reward for themselves.

Some good points here, that are relatively easy to resolve.

Increasing the rewards is a possibility, although considering how wing missions actually stack up pretty well in solo compared to regular trading, I'd argue that it is the solo missions that are the outlier in terms of goods trading. Either way, it very much comes down to balance and where FD want it to lie; credit income balance overall is very long overdue for some serious balance work.

Cheating people out of their rewards could be easily be solved by saying that anyone who is no longer in the wing doesn't have their progress counted. Sure, griefers could let others do 90% of the mission then kick them out to waste their time and credits, but they would have their progress on the mission practically reset.

 

[Morbad]

Just shows what a crappy implementation Wing Missions was, that this is even a thing.

Agreed.

If free credits make people quit, then it proves the game is a skinner box without worthwhile content once grinding credits is over with.

'Grinding' credits has been over with for my CMDR for a very long time, if it was ever a thing, and I never saw it as content.

I still see free credits as a negative because of how it impacts the overall plausibility of the game and results in an absurd, stunted, economy as well as encouraging what should be very bizarre CMDR behavior.

For some it is. I havent jumped on any gold rushes, i have played bit under 800 hours and still my total assets are under 500 mil.

Doesn't sound like credits are that hard to come by.

Some of us only play for fun.

I'd wager that essentially all of us only play for fun, but that we don't all share the same ideas as to what constitutes fun.

If a system can be exploited, it will be. It's basic human nature. The real issue here isn't how players are seeking to exploit these problems at an industrial scale, but instead that the problems regarding the sharing of rewards and magical money multiplication exist in the first place. Charity is one thing, but for a player to progress at full pace while giving three additional players a free ride is completely broken.

If this encourages FD to fix wing missions, such as by making the rewards shared rather than multiplied, then it's all good. In fact, it's quite possible that these players are deliberately doing this to draw attention to these issues so that they get resolved; many games have dedicated fans who try to exploit and break them to support the developers in fixing the issues.

The game needs an actual economy where money supply doesn't just increase logarithmically without consequence.

There are mission types where that would be extremely difficult to quantify.

For example, the bulk haulage missions - if two T-9s and a FDL take a bulk haulage mission, and the FDL blows up 6 NPC pirates attacking the freighters, and the freighters haul 2200t each, what's the % contribution from the FDL?

Or on the wing assassination missions? If one player keeps the NPC's escorts busy while the other player goes for the main target, what's the contribution rate?

The mission should pay a flat sum for successful completion, based on how desperate the mission giver is to have it done in a certain amount of time.

If you can do it alone (and for some missions this should be a highly uncertain to virtually impossible task) then you get to keep all the money. If you require or desire support, it should be worthwhile for you to take a hit to your share for the assistance provided.

Well, except that the current payouts for wing hauling missions assume that the rewards will be copied to a wing of four (otherwise solo hauling missions are *far* more profitable).

So if they moved to a "shared out" model they'd need to make the base payouts significantly bigger ... which would make absolutely no difference to its usability as a cash transfer scheme.

It also introduces the likelihood that unscrupulous people would invite others to wing missions, let them do 3/4 of the work, then leave the wing - as the mission owner - complete the last little bit of the mission, and keep the full reward for themselves.

Some reworking of missions would be needed, but this is a given.

Once someone shares in a mission contract, no one should be able to unilaterally exclude the others. Even if the original mission taker leaves the wing, the contract should remain, and completion should result in the agreed upon share for all participants, without any multiplication.

From my point of view an escort would be irrelevant.

Something that should change if wing missions are to have purpose other than credit duplicating handouts.

 

[Drelthar]

No. Its perfectly viable that a player could join a Wing to function as an armed escort while another was in the Wing as a relatively unarmed transport vehicle. How you going to measure THAT participation?

Payouts don't need to be this complicated. Just divide the payout by the number of ships in the wing.

You make an excellent point. I know it's excellent because it's the point I now remember making back when these got introduced... Thanks for reminding me.

Obviously, I agree with you, also, there should be no such thing as a wing mission, there should just be missions. All of which should be sharable with wings/crew.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

The game needs an actual economy where money supply doesn't just increase logarithmically without consequence.

I'm not sure there's really an alternative.

Basic activities have to be on average net profitable without too much trouble, or beginners can't get started. Once you have the ability to convert time into an increase in assets and the ability to buy assets which increase profitability and the ability to make a better profit with the same assets once you know what you're doing, everyone ending up rich is to be expected.

Realistic economies aren't fun for the majority of their participants, which is a problem in a game context where the people not having fun can just opt out entirely by playing something else.

 

[Hacker#451563]

Even if it's possible: Who'd grind day in day out just to provide transaction services? 10 guys? 20 guys? How many transactions could they provide? How long until they drop out after realizing they better spend their time earning real money instead of slaving for free in a vid game?

I find it positively terrible to hear you say that with your Sig.

 

[GunnerBill]

I find it positively terrible to hear you say that with your Sig.

Well spotted. I'd have expected our Comrade to have at the very least contributed with some version of a 5 Year plan to boost the wealth of everyone!

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

You make an excellent point. I know it's excellent because it's the point I now remember making back when these got introduced... Thanks for reminding me.

Obviously, I agree with you, also, there should be no such thing as a wing mission, there should just be missions. All of which should be sharable with wings/crew.

absolutely.... and if this means cutting the pay on the missions with a small cargo amount and increasing the pay of the large cargo amount, then so be it.

btw i am currently waiting on a pinball table delivery. it is an expensive item however as i am not in a crazy rush i am paying the courier £100. this is to carry it half way accross the country, and i worked out the fuel alone would be £50 to go get it myself combined with 7hrs+ driving and how ever long it took to load into my car (even if it would fit, it is tight!)


when pricing up, i could of course have paid next day pickup and delivery..... at a cost of about £250.

My point here is, it does NOT cost millions to get a courier to deliver even large expensive items if you are not in a crazy rush. if you are you can pay more and get it quickly.

but even then....... the cost of the courier is NEVER even close to the cost of buying the item and delivering it yourself. And this last part is where Elite gets it horribly wrong.

i can get paid 1million creds to deliver 70 tons of clothes which costs way more than the cost of the clothes and any potential profit the actual trader would make.... and yet that trader is risking a hell of a lot more than the courier.

going back to my pinball example, it would be like the courier charging me £20,000 to deliver my pinball table, despite my table only being worth a fraction of that, and at the same time being able to buy it brand new direct from the authorised retailer for £8,500 including delivery!!!!

 

[Hellakitty]

My idea finally caught on.

Handing out tens of millions of credits to people who've done little to nothing to warrant such a payout is good fun.

Edit - I doubt anything will be done about this thing, when it first cropped up I gave away upwards of half a billion credits to random people using source and return wing missions. Indignant threads were made, many huffings and puffings were done and even many toys thrown out of the pram. I was even reported by *redacted* (that person STILL reports me when I give them the proverbial sly side-eye over that report, so now I don't use their name but... hey there, yes you - I'm talking about you. Can't report me for 'harassment' now can you, marmaladeface) because I'm the devil incarnate. Or something.

Anyway, after all that, FD just shrugged their shoulders and did nothing. Long may it continue. Diamond encrusted golden Cutters with 8A fuel scoops for everyone!!

 

[sollisb]

Always amazes me... This has been a thing for months and months and has not been an issue.

Now that someone has it posted on YouTube, it's of vital import to nerf it.

It's like, 'woah, I've made my credits now that's it public knowledge I gotta stop it'

Old news, fake news.

 

[RamirezKurita]

I think OA is doing a disservice advertising this scheme on his channel.

I'd argue the opposite, the more this scheme gets used the greater the likelihood that FD actually get around to fixing and balancing the mission boards. It's the standard process for dealing with issues like this, you raise it in private first in the hope of them fixing it quietly without any fuss, then move onto public reporting so that everyone knows of the issue so they lose face, before finally moving onto abusing the hell out of it to completely force their hand before the whole ecosystem gets broken. By advertising this, OA is helping with the development of the game and doing us all a far greater service than his usual informational videos.

 

[sollisb]

I'd argue the opposite, the more this scheme gets used the greater the likelihood that FD actually get around to fixing and balancing the mission boards. It's the standard process for dealing with issues like this, you raise it in private first in the hope of them fixing it quietly without any fuss, then move onto public reporting so that everyone knows of the issue so they lose face, before finally moving onto abusing the hell out of it to completely force their hand before the whole ecosystem gets broken. By advertising this, OA is helping with the development of the game and doing us all a far greater service than his usual informational videos.

News alert; The 'eco' system has been broken from day 1. The 'blaze your own trail' without any balancing has meant that A, it [get rich] was justified, 2, supported, 3, is a valid play option.

The question is; why does it matter to anyone else if; 1. I have 7bn and 2, how I got it?

I would support the school of thought that states, gold rushes are needed and indeed very helpful to keep players online playing, where in other cases they may just get bored and leave. Remember this; For every player that buys a cutter, there's a potential sale of multiple paint packs.... You buy your pride and joy you'll definitely want to put makeup on it.