(opinion) This game's economy problem is the lack of early/mid/end game.

So I have been leaving the same comment on a lot of post and figured I should make a thread about it.

With a lot of people talking about the in-game economy I feel that the same issue pops up a lot. One method of making money is OP, everything else is not worth the time. And I think I know the core reason for that is. The game has no end, middle, or early game. What you do in a type 6 transport to make money, you will probably be doing in a cutter. If a cutter can make make a billion credits in a hour, a type 6 can make a 100 million in a hour probably. This leads to the problem of players making money too quickly, so fdev nerfs it, but than the player in the cutter can't make as much money as they want. See more detailed explanation below

The main issue is that once a player reaches around their first 2-3 million credits they tend to be flying a type 6, a vulture, or maybe a asp. One of those equivalents. At this time their old methods of making money, such as bounty hunting, rare trading, or running various missions no longer earns them enough credits to get to their next milestone. So they join into whatever the credit making meta is. Once they do that they begin making a lot of credits very quickly, suddenly they see no reason to stop. They make skip from a t6 straight to a anaconda, ignoring any ships or activities in-between. There is no middle game, it's just straight to the end game. This makes the game feel very disjointed for a lot of players, they never feel like the game play or mechanics of the game are changing as they unlock new ships and better equipment.

Let me compare this to BEFORE Horizons and Beyond which in my opinion is where the problem started and has gotten worst. I remember starting ED and the first thing I did was a few courier missions and some nav beacon bounty hunting to get a viper. Than I did bounty hunting in res sites with the viper. Than I eventually got a type 6 and did a mixture of rare/bulk trading. Than I a vulture and did combat zones/riskier res sites. Than I got a asp and did Robigo, back in the old slave smuggling days. Than I replaced my vulture with a Fer-De-Lance, and than after doing combat/trade for a while I got my anaconda. Notice how the game play changed as I got better ships, the newer ships allowed me to do activities which might has been out of my reach or too difficult before. I am not saying it was perfect (it wasn't) but I do think it was better than it is now.

However if I started the game now, I would have gotten my t6 and rushed to mining and probably gone straight to a Anaconda. The game gives little incentive not to do that unless your inflicting a self imposed handicap on your self in the name of "fun". What the game really need's is "early game content", "Middle Game Content" and "End Game Content" each with different rewards. This way players in a anaconda can earn the large amounts of credits they need/want but without ruining the experience of early game players. I am not against people rushing for the end game, players like that will always exist and that's fine. I am against how the current game economy basically causes that to happen whether they want it to or not, it feels like the game has no natural progression and that more than half the ships, missions, and activities in the game serve no purpose as a result. Certain activities/mission types are just useless because there is no reason to do them, which makes the game feel like it has less content, it hurts the experience.

I do have some solutions in my head but I wanted to hear what the community thought. Please keep in mind this not me making a statement, all the above should be seen as "This what I think is wrong with the economy" not as "This is what is wrong the economy." Please don't attack me! 🥺

TLDR: The lack of a Early, Middle, and End Game causes the game to feel disjointed and lowers the diversity of game play. It encourages the players to do the same thing over and over again even though different mission types and activities do exist in the game. The game needs to balance out it's content so that it feels like there is a natural progression for players as they unlock better ships and equipment.
 
I need to progress through so many different ships before I get my connie and start winning game? Imagine how many mouse clicks I have to do! Feels like WORK NOT FUN to me!

No, seriously, well thought out post. However, I think we disagree on some specifics, well maybe not disagree, but:
Sure, a better division into early/mid/late game might be desirable, but I think the real kicker is something else: There is no real division between high and low risk activities, and there is no real economy: The moneymaking meta remains the moneymaking meta even when the entire community does it.
And always, always, no matter if you are hauling food cartridges or making 200 MCr/h, it's always the same risk: Anemic hostile NPC's, traffic accidents and killsquad ganks, which you deal with trivially (the first), by being awake when flying (the second) and going silent running (the third). With silent running, I mean going solo of course.

Get a good set of activities for professions at various risk/reward levels, get a functional dynamic economy where bubbles burst, markets get saturated and total accumulated player capital doesn't just soar towards infinity forever. Get some kind of NPC threat that is credible even for experienced players. If the AI can't get better at fighting, at least try to make them better at pursuing through various nav layers (normal flight, supercruise, hyperspace), make sure that they are decently equipped, and... throw more, MORE enemies at players who paint targets on their backs! And for players who have graduated from 'mostly harmless' to a nice bigboy reddit screenshot material ship, loosing that ship should cost.

Ultimately I don't think there is a magic balance formula that will make everything just right. We need a dynamic economy.
 
The origin of the problem all stems back to the price of ships and modules relative to each other.

For modules each upgrade in Rating and size gave ever smaller and smaller increase in performance compared to cost.

Compare the 1E Fuel Scoop performance and cost to the 1A
Compare the 1E Fuel Scoop performance and cost to the 2E 3E etc

Similarly the Power Plant and so forth.

Then consider the Costs of the Starting ships, their modules and capabilities to that of the mid range and high end ships.

Every Credit gives you less and less for what you get an increases exponentially, yet the increase in capability to earn credits was relatively a

So for example a Trading Hauler costs ~400,000 CR and carrying 22 tons
A Trading Type 6 costs ~2,900,000 CR and carries 106 tons

So ~7.25 times the cost for ~4.8 times the Cargo units with a small increase in performance and suitability etc that is hard to justify that extra cost.

The issue is compounded by A rating, or in the larger ships,, where the cost ratio increases far more than the utility.



This extreme increase in CR costs per utility made the call for more profit for the larger ships as the Ship progression experience became a longer and longer slog to reach the next ship and as the game scaled to that the small ships and even medium ships became priced below the rewards for Normal Missions or the current gold rush activities.

Where as if the original Cost of Ships and Modules reflected their increased capability more rationally then Ship progression would have been a more even experience as to the time required became more reasonable.


Compare with the prices of ships and modules in FE2/FFE and you sill see a far more compacted price of ships and you will see

A Sidewinder is of similar price to that of ED where as the Anaconda is 146 times more expensive in ED.

Yes the two games ships are not 1:1 for each other but gives an idea on how much more each ship was over the previous "Tier'

This is also the cause of the lack maintenance costs fuel costs and interesting differences between ships as the service and repair costs were % of the ships and modules and so ballooned out unreasonably making larger ships uneconomic to repair.

This is a shame as there was originally a differential with ships by the manufacture etc which was the answer of the Imperial Clipper vs Type 7 debate as the Lakon was a ship that was designed to have fewer crew, lower maintenance and repair costs and lower over all running costs vs the Gutamaya with higher performance at the cost of higher running costs, thus creating a niche for each ship.

The Lakon being a bulk trader that with its low running costs, being able to turn a reasonable profit running low profit but large supply goods that would hold their price for a long time
Where as the Gutamaya ship needs to look for higher profit per unit goods, that would be more supply and demand sensitive so would need more about more finding those short term market gems before moving on
 
No, problem with economy isn't the absense of some gameplay phases, but absolutely dead, set in stone artificial pricing put up right from someones backside. It absolutely makes no sense having BGS and having SO FREAKING STATIC "economy" if you even can call it that.

BGS is perfect tool to keep it dynamic, but it isn't. Galnet could be used to direct trade in different sectors of the bubble. Prices must change daily or hourly and have a LOT harder impact based on demand, system/station state, various other factors. I could really go on forever here...

It's so dishearteining how brutally trade is killed in this game, and how BGS stands for nothing. I've seen several singleplayer space themed games, where economies are FAR more dynamic, and these games aren't even built around trade. It's so sad...
 
I think the problems are quite a few. First being in player mentality, that a game should have early, mid, end game. It's a sandbox you can do everything in each of those phases. The reason people don't right now is because there is no balance between ship sizes. Whatever you can do, a bigger ship will almost always do it better (at least in PvE, what people play most, but also PvP, outside of events and personal challanges small ships are not viable). That creates this feeling to push you into what in normal non-sandbox games would be called end game.
If it would be balanced so that each ship would be vialble and serve a certain role, you could get thousands of hours of fun flying just one ship, not worrying about getting another. But since a ship size is directly bound to payouts (and whatever semblance of progress we have), this can't happen.
To a certain degree this would be fixed if the progress would be throttled by something, for example players rank. Let's say a rough example at first rank, you could only get payouts of 10% what for the same activity an Elite rank would give. Making a smart progress curve to throttle progress to a certain "rank / hour", equalizing payouts accross all activities (just the first idea, there are many ways to do this). That way you would kind of force players to pick up some skills, have clearer goals, even give purpose to many ships, and in time people would stop caring so much to have endgame stuff immediately. Hell, maybe that would even force players to work together, you might even realize playing with others is fun.
Since there is no such progress, big ships (and FCs) don't feel as exclusive, they are too much in everyones reach that it doesn't matter what the game offers, you want that immediately. Sadly such artificial throttling would to a certain degree make the game a bit less sandboxy. Add to this ship and activities balance, so you can eventually earn payouts in small ship similar to activities in big ships, which is not the case now, and you have a winner. Fun game, where you stop worrying how you'll get to the next gold rush and the biggest ship, but rather enjoy the game at any stage. It would also keep players interested for a longer period of time and would cause less grind fatigue, people would start to utilize things like engineering, planetary gameplay, etc.. much earlier.

My 2B cr (which is equivalent to 2cr back in the time :) )
 
The issue for me is mining. It's too easy to find a hot spot and make credits. Credits allow you to bypass the ship progression.

Imagine playing the game without mining.

Interesting thought - with credits being so easy to come by look at the uptake on Steam recently, so almost the opposite is true and people want to max out asap.
 
The issue for me is mining. It's too easy to find a hot spot and make credits. Credits allow you to bypass the ship progression.

Imagine playing the game without mining.

Interesting thought - with credits being so easy to come by look at the uptake on Steam recently, so almost the opposite is true and people want to max out asap.

Players would just go for another Gold Rush. Even before mining was a thing, there were other Gold Rushes like stacking Skimmer missions, passenger missions and what not that made similar credits per hour. However, most originated in some form of "soft exploit" (or "unintended game mechanic") and were eventually fixed by FDev.
 
It's true that optimized mining and selling (let's not ignore that) generate a very high combined return. But this is partly because it is the multiplicative effect of combining 2 professions: mining(optimally) and trading the proceeds(optimally).

Let's consider a miner that hunts only in a single hotspot, and then just gets Galactic Average price on the proceeds. That's "Just Mining" alone, and it is much more inline with other avenues of revenue. Third Party informatics drives hunting for ores in double/triple hotspots, and then provides market information for optimized trading too.

To achieve maximal returns, we have to combine fast safe travel, with all the above.

There isn't a way to get variable market values on missions, exploration or salvage turn-ins, or Bounties. All of those are fixed income per task, because nobody trades the effects on a secondary derivative market. The only way to get more per unit time is to stack them.

Mining by itself is not an issue, IMHO.
_

Fixing the problem:

There ought to be a risk reward curve that we ride. EGs: Turning asteroid collision damage to 3 times what it is now. Add more Pirate spawn on completion of refining the last chunk. Spawn ambushes at the high price stations, but leave the average ones alone.
Better/more careful pilots would cope. Lesser ones would incur more losses. The risks of mining and then optimized selling should increase to match the profits.

In the same vein, prices should routinely be higher in Anarchy systems, driving risk takers there to sell the cargo.
 
The origin of the problem all stems back to the price of ships and modules relative to each other.
And that relative to the earning potential of those modules. Exploration is the "worst" for this - a Sidewinder with a DSS and a Cutter with a DSS and an 8A fuel scoop have basically identical earning potential.

If the amount you could earn also went up exponentially with ship class there could still be a progression of sorts, though not a particularly good one.

Certain activities/mission types are just useless because there is no reason to do them
Well, no cash reason to do them. On the other hand once you've got all the cash you need, which doesn't take that long if you go all out for it, it no longer really matters whether what you're doing pays 1M/hour or 1B/hour.
 

Deleted member 182079

D
The issue for me is mining. It's too easy to find a hot spot and make credits. Credits allow you to bypass the ship progression.

Imagine playing the game without mining.

Interesting thought - with credits being so easy to come by look at the uptake on Steam recently, so almost the opposite is true and people want to max out asap.
Last night I reset my alt (again).

Did some missions in the Startwinder, payout was between 20k and 120k (the latter was combat, it was quite a slog) initially, then went up to 250k or thereabouts for cargo missions. The Sidey only had a jump range of ~15ly so most destinations were at least 2 jumps away.

Once I had enough credits, I bought an Adder, and fitted it out for core mining. Didn't even bother with LTDs, one Benitoite and a Monazite rock later...

BOOM

10 million credits, and I didn't even min-max on the market (270k/ton for Monazite, 480k/ton for Benitoite).

Within 4 hours of playtime, achieved solely thanks to a single and quick mining run.
 
Last night I reset my alt (again).

Did some missions in the Startwinder, payout was between 20k and 120k (the latter was combat, it was quite a slog) initially, then went up to 250k or thereabouts for cargo missions. The Sidey only had a jump range of ~15ly so most destinations were at least 2 jumps away.

Once I had enough credits, I bought an Adder, and fitted it out for core mining. Didn't even bother with LTDs, one Benitoite and a Monazite rock later...

BOOM

10 million credits, and I didn't even min-max on the market (270k/ton for Monazite, 480k/ton for Benitoite).

Within 4 hours of playtime, achieved solely thanks to a single and quick mining run.

I have a bunch of fresh and unspoiled new commanders under my wing now (just when I am at Sagittarius A* for the first time, my buddies decide to start with the game gnah). I am hell bent on NOT telling them anything about mining as the easy money maker. I'll have them learn and enjoy the game first, although there is always the chance that they might see YouTube videos or read in the forums and figure it out on their own. I just hope I can keep them interested in the game for long enough to become permanent players. I don't think having them rush to the Anaconda within hours would achieve that goal though.
 

Deleted member 182079

D
I have a bunch of fresh and unspoiled new commanders under my wing now (just when I am at Sagittarius A* for the first time, my buddies decide to start with the game gnah). I am hell bent on NOT telling them anything about mining as the easy money maker. I'll have them learn and enjoy the game first, although there is always the chance that they might see YouTube videos or read in the forums and figure it out on their own. I just hope I can keep them interested in the game for long enough to become permanent players. I don't think having them rush to the Anaconda within hours would achieve that goal though.
Yeah, the big caveat as always with posts like mine above is that I already have thousands of hours of experience in the game, but as you say even just a generic search on Youtube typing in "Elite Dangerous" will yield numerous "do XYZ the fastest way/earn most credits" videos.

I have actually parked the Adder in an LTD hotspot, but it's a normal single one, to make some more cash because I have a specific goal that I want to achieve quickly, so it works in my favour. I do feel sad for all the new players who will miss out on proper ship and module progression though - if you don't fly the respective ships, you won't know their strengths and weaknesses, which in a game of flying 35+ different types of spaceships and numerous outfitting options I believe is a big part of the fun.

Maybe newer players just don't think that way - but I've since come full circle and tend to fly small ships much more often compared to the supposed end-game ships that are either sold or catching dust.
 
yeah early stages are best part and new CMDRs are juts jumping right over it.. nuts.
rebalance needed.... ED was about combat with trade and thargoids.... its now Elite miner....
were have all the cool story lines gone, thargoids, guardians even the raiders.

too much money created in one area / activity
 
Yeah, the big caveat as always with posts like mine above is that I already have thousands of hours of experience in the game, but as you say even just a generic search on Youtube typing in "Elite Dangerous" will yield numerous "do XYZ the fastest way/earn most credits" videos.

I have actually parked the Adder in an LTD hotspot, but it's a normal single one, to make some more cash because I have a specific goal that I want to achieve quickly, so it works in my favour. I do feel sad for all the new players who will miss out on proper ship and module progression though - if you don't fly the respective ships, you won't know their strengths and weaknesses, which in a game of flying 35+ different types of spaceships and numerous outfitting options I believe is a big part of the fun.

Maybe newer players just don't think that way - but I've since come full circle and tend to fly small ships much more often compared to the supposed end-game ships that are either sold or catching dust.

Yep, I only started with Elite in late May/early June 2018. When I saw my first ingame Anaconda I thought "damn, I want one of those". So when I spent my first RL money on Elite cosmetics, I also bought the Anaconda bobblehead and placed it in every ship I owned to remind my of that goal. I eventually earned my first Anaconda with running trade missions in my Python and that feeling of accomplishment when I hit the "buy" button was great. Funnily enough, nowadays I spend most of my time in my Krait Mk II exploring the stars, while my Anaconda sits in Shinrarta

But I think it's really a question of personal mindset. I enjoy working towards goals and ultimately achieving them with honest work, it doesn't matter if it's just something in a video game or something actually important in RL. But I also have the time to do so, since Elite has become one of my most favorite games. Other players hop games much more frequently. They start a game, want to "complete" it and then move on to the next game in their library (one of my buddies clearly stated that he's only passing time until Necromunda is released)
 
That's the nature of exploration though, it's kind of ship size independent as it should be.
Well, that depends on your point of view about what the game should be in the first place.

If one wants "balanced earning rates between professions", as large numbers on the forum claim to, brandishing that Braben quote like a talisman at every opportunity, then exploration has to scale with ship class as strongly as trading does (and therefore be very differently constructed to now), or it'll inevitably either be far too strong for early-game earnings or far too weak for min-maxed earnings (or both).

Me, I don't really care what the credit earning rates are, beyond "everything is at least vaguely profitable", so it's fine for me if exploration is ship-independent.
 
then exploration has to scale with ship class as strongly as trading does
Why? Exploraton isn't about getting a bigger ship to carry more cargo or weapons, it's about being able to go further and investigate in greater detail
They can easily have a line of progression that doesn't equate to bigger and better ships.
 
Back
Top Bottom