Passive Upkeep Has. To. Go.

[CMDR ZERAS]

In reference to the changes announced today, I really do appreciate them. All except... for the changes to upkeep.

The only acceptable change to upkeep is total removal and replacement of the system.

Most of the proponents for upkeep that I've argued with seem to think we on this side of the aisle don't want to incur any operating costs at all, which is not true. I'd be fine with no upkeep but increased fuel costs. No upkeep but increased jump wear/tear repair costs. A flat percentage of earnings like SLF pilots take makes the most sense to me. Even a flat upkeep just for the time you're playing would be fine. It's the fact that it ticks away when you're offline that HAS. TO. GO.

Here's why upkeep doesn't work:

For easier math, let's assume we both have minimum loadouts, core only, with the proposed changes. Weekly upkeep: 5m each. Neither of us want to lose our carrier of course, so once we buy it, we're making this commitment from now until we quit playing for good. We don't play for the same amount of time per year, so we're going to reflect that with upkeep costs as an annual figure versus play time.

"Effective Weekly Upkeep" will be our measure of how much money you need to pay per week to keep your carrier for a year versus your time spent in game.

Total Annual Upkeep is 260,000,000c (5m x 52 weeks) for both of us.

I play 40/52 weeks a year - Effective Weekly Upkeep: 6,500,000c
You play 8/52 weeks a year - Effective Weekly Upkeep: 32,5000,000c

Now yes, when you do play for 40/52 weeks a year, 6.5m credits is easy to come by (and the real costs would still be much higher), but the less you play, the more time you have to spend grinding credits to pay for your own absence.

Making it more affordable doesn't change the fact that that's what the system is in place to do.

THAT's a textbook penalty ladies and gentlemen. Pure and simple. That's a tax on not playing, and it CANNOT be allowed in our shared game.

 

[photomankc]

Then don't buy a carrier if you think you'll be

A.) Unable to keep the lights on
B.) Unable to transfer more than next weeks upkeep.

It doesn't have to go, it just needs to be reasonable and feasible to plan for. You don't have to like it, but it's acceptable to plenty of players.

 

[Jockey79]

I play 40/52 weeks a year - Effective Weekly Upkeep: 6,500,000c
You play 8/52 weeks a year - Effective Weekly Upkeep: 32,5000,000c

1x 3 hour mining session in Borann - 250,000,000 (if you're taking your time)

Also, the SLF pilot always takes a portion of your income regardless of what you're doing. Even if they are not being used.
Power Play also has merit decay, so if you don't do a set amount each week you end up back at zero merits quite quickly.

So FCs having something to make you actively look after it makes perfect sense in relation to other features.
It will take a while for Frontier to balance the numbers, however.

 

[CMDR ZERAS]

Then don't buy a carrier if you think you'll be

A.) Unable to keep the lights on
B.) Unable to transfer more than next weeks upkeep.

It doesn't have to go, it just needs to be reasonable and feasible to plan for. You don't have to like it, but it's acceptable to plenty of players.

Wow, you're a condescending one, aren't you.

 

[Krash]

The upkeep is nothing now that its adjusted to acceptable levels. Your worst case scenario is 32mil per week? One massacre mission is enough to pay for it.

 

[Un1k0rn]

our shared game.

That is exactly why there is an upkeep.

 

[CMDR ZERAS]

1x 3 hour mining session in Borann - 250,000,000 (if you're taking your time)

Also, the SLF pilot always takes a portion of your income regardless of what you're doing. Even if they are not being used.
Power Play also has merit decay, so if you don't do a set amount each week you end up back at zero merits quite quickly.

So FCs having something to make you actively look after it makes perfect sense in relation to other features.
It will take a while for Frontier to balance the numbers, however.

First of all, with the proposed changes, we're looking at an actual annual upkeep cost, suspended of 500m+ credits, my numbers were for easy math, I said that.

Second, SLF fighters don't take anything when you're offline. That's all I'm arguing for. Don't take money while offline.

Comparing to powerplay merits to this is apples to oranges, not even sure what to do with that statement.

 

[Old Duck]

Passive Upkeep Has. To. Stay.

My font is bigger - I WIN!

 

[CMDR ZERAS]

The upkeep is nothing now that its adjusted to acceptable levels. Your worst case scenario is 32mil per week? One massacre mission is enough to pay for it.

That's for a base carrier (Useless) for simple math, how are people not reading that part. Actual costs would be much higher.

 

[Krash]

That's for a base carrier (Useless) for simple math, how are people not reading that part. Actual costs would be much higher.

Good point. But a base carrier will give you a market. The market is a credit transfer opportunity. You're friends can now help you pay for it. Even a base FC is freakin huge accomplishment and something to be extremely proud of.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

First of all, with the proposed changes, we're looking at an actual annual upkeep cost, suspended of 500m+ credits, my numbers were for easy math, I said that.

That can be gotten in a week.

Second, SLF fighters don't take anything when you're offline. That's all I'm arguing for. Don't take money while offline.

Your SLF isn't active offline, your FC is.

Comparing to powerplay merits to this is apples to oranges, not even sure what to do with that statement.

I agree.

 

[maehara]

Hang on... Taking the upkeep reductions from Stephen's annoucement:

Here are the changes coming this week:

• The upkeep cost for all additional services will be reduced by 80-90%.
• Core running costs will be reduced by 50%

'Core costs' would presumably be the 10mil base upkeep - reduce that by 50%, that makes a carrier hull 5mil/week upkeep.

Rest of the additional costs.... I had a spec that was useful to me worked out (Shipyard, Restock / Repair / Refuel), upkeep for that would have been 81mil/week; take the 'worst-case' 80% reduction, makes the overall upkeep 19.2mil/week.

That can be done with an evening of BGS missions, which I'd be doing anyway. Or there are loop trade routes showing on EDDB that'll earn me 7mil per run with a T9 or Cutter - 3 of them and I'm sorted, would take less than 30mins.

New upkeep levels are not in any way onerous.

 

[CMDR ZERAS]

Your SLF isn't active offline, your FC is.

It shouldn't be.

Good point. But a base carrier will give you a market. The market is a credit transfer opportunity. You're friends can now help you pay for it. Even a base FC is freakin huge accomplishment and something to be extremely proud of.

I don't have any friends who play this game. I bought it for a couple, they all said it was too boring. They're not wrong most of the time. And even if I did, I wouldn't want them to help pay for it, that's not what this game should be to me.

 

[Jockey79]

That's for a base carrier (Useless) for simple math, how are people not reading that part. Actual costs would be much higher.

Also, you missed the fact that their 32 million is only spread out of 8 weeks a year playtime.
A regular player would hit the new figure really easily now. The occasional player could still get the cash if they focused on a cash grab activity.
But just like Power Play, this is a feature for regular players (PP has merit decay, so you end up back at zero merits if you don't play enough).

 

[Krash]

I don't have any friends who play this game. I bought it for a couple, they all said it was too boring. They're not wrong most of the time.

Sorry to hear that. I'm surprised a player who finds the game boring is interested in such a huge investment.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

It shouldn't be.

Why shouldn't they. Having them persistent means they can be used for many different purposes such as squadrons and other groups. Look at what the Distant Worlds team are planning. Without them being available when offline, it wouldn't be possible.

You make them online only, you limit what they can be used for.

It's much better like this, which then means that upkeep and decommission or a similar mechanic is a necessary evil.

 

[Old Duck]

I don't have any friends who play this game. I bought it for a couple, they all said it was too boring.

Well that just settles it then, doesn't it?

 

[Stelar 7]

If you want to get rid of upkeep offer some other method of getting rid of abandoned carriers. There are limited parking spots in each system. Some systems will be in high demand. New players should not blocked by people who stopped playing.

 

["Red" the Pirate]

Yeah, that really bummed me out. I appreciate them fixing everything that they did, but the credit drain is still there, which is still unacceptable.
Players should not be punished for not playing the game. I don't care if it's 1cr a week or 10bil a week.

 

[Turd Ferguson]

the point isn't that the passive costs are lower now...it's that there are still passive costs. It's a cheap ploy to keep player numbers up without providing anything outside of punishment of "losing your stuff" if you don't.

Let's say FDev handed you an ice cream cone (and for the purpose of this excercise, let's say you're not lactose intolerant or diabetic and like ice cream) and took a big dump on top of it.

would you still want it?

now let's say the scraped 80% of the feces off? better? would you eat it now?