Players argue either that the game should reward all play styles or activities roughly equally, or that higher risk activities should have significantly greater rewards than lower risk activities as a rule.
I think that most people understand and accept that, for example, mining and selling gold is typically more lucrative than being a soldier in active duty, even though soldiering has much greater personal risk. The argument for some then, is that this level of realism should not be reflected in the game, as it pushes more players to a select fewer types of gameplay and interactions, which is a fair enough point.
However, others find this type of realism adds credibility and integrity, and thereby greater immersion to the game world. That's also a fair point.
In my view, the cause of contention here comes down to reward being equated mostly with compensation in credits. There are exceptions to this, such as unlocking modifications with Engineers, unlocking ships with Imperial or Federal ranks, unlocking custom weapons with Powerplay, and getting access to higher paying missions with faction reputation.
I think this should be taken one step further, and have successful activities in any of the playstyles result in qualitative rewards, which could potentially shift the total value of rewards for higher risk activities to be greater than rewards for lower risk activities overall, despite credit compensation being widely disparate. So the realism would be kept in terms of financial viability of activities, while another reward system would make up the difference for higher risk activities.
The way I would like to see this implemented, is with something resembling a tech tree, which unlocks certain advantages or abilities when the required experience is gained from the activities or playstyles that are relevant to that tech branch. These tech branches would work off a points system contributed to by activity type, but would also tie in certain existing achievements that would act as requirements for certain unlocks. For example, Imperial, Federation, as well as Pilots Federation ranks will count as requirements for unlocking leaves/nodes in the "tech" branch you're working on.
Higher risk activities should grant more significant qualitative rewards, so there should be a grading system decided by Frontier. This would be a good way to balance some aspects of the game out, without resorting to nerfs or artificially applied restrictions.
This could also be used to add a little RPG style element to the game, by applying more attributes to the pilot based on their achievements and choices, such as Fame or Infamy, Leadership or Loyalty, Shrewd, Shady, etc, which level up as you climb up the tech tree. These attributes shouldn't directly assist in any skill based activities, but are more to do with how the game world interacts with the player.
I haven't mentioned any specific qualitative rewards, because the New Era update could change a lot of things, and because I'm more interested in seeing if players would tend to support this as a general idea, rather than get into arguments about particular implementations.
I think that most people understand and accept that, for example, mining and selling gold is typically more lucrative than being a soldier in active duty, even though soldiering has much greater personal risk. The argument for some then, is that this level of realism should not be reflected in the game, as it pushes more players to a select fewer types of gameplay and interactions, which is a fair enough point.
However, others find this type of realism adds credibility and integrity, and thereby greater immersion to the game world. That's also a fair point.
In my view, the cause of contention here comes down to reward being equated mostly with compensation in credits. There are exceptions to this, such as unlocking modifications with Engineers, unlocking ships with Imperial or Federal ranks, unlocking custom weapons with Powerplay, and getting access to higher paying missions with faction reputation.
I think this should be taken one step further, and have successful activities in any of the playstyles result in qualitative rewards, which could potentially shift the total value of rewards for higher risk activities to be greater than rewards for lower risk activities overall, despite credit compensation being widely disparate. So the realism would be kept in terms of financial viability of activities, while another reward system would make up the difference for higher risk activities.
The way I would like to see this implemented, is with something resembling a tech tree, which unlocks certain advantages or abilities when the required experience is gained from the activities or playstyles that are relevant to that tech branch. These tech branches would work off a points system contributed to by activity type, but would also tie in certain existing achievements that would act as requirements for certain unlocks. For example, Imperial, Federation, as well as Pilots Federation ranks will count as requirements for unlocking leaves/nodes in the "tech" branch you're working on.
Higher risk activities should grant more significant qualitative rewards, so there should be a grading system decided by Frontier. This would be a good way to balance some aspects of the game out, without resorting to nerfs or artificially applied restrictions.
This could also be used to add a little RPG style element to the game, by applying more attributes to the pilot based on their achievements and choices, such as Fame or Infamy, Leadership or Loyalty, Shrewd, Shady, etc, which level up as you climb up the tech tree. These attributes shouldn't directly assist in any skill based activities, but are more to do with how the game world interacts with the player.
I haven't mentioned any specific qualitative rewards, because the New Era update could change a lot of things, and because I'm more interested in seeing if players would tend to support this as a general idea, rather than get into arguments about particular implementations.
Last edited: