This is definitely bug or just bad bad math. I don't expect these ridiculous prices to stay for long.
Ship integrity in 1.3
- Thread starter geoffrey.hdt
- Start date
WoW. Bye my Big Berta Conda
Hope the Garage prevents rust. With the Clipper i don`t Pay this Stupid. Better Fly to 0% and Self Destroy (With the Discounted Clipper my Insurance is only 1,5Mio)
I am fine with the increased costs for maintenance and fuel. This is similar to the pre 1.2 price levels and adds to the realism. It does help to move to smaller more cost-effective ships. Another reason for buying the DBE or the Courier instead of using Asp or Vulture for those roles. Same for T9 vs Anaconda, or Clipper vs Python.
This is I guess also a compensation for not introducing 10% price reduction on the modules...
P.S. I agree however it does not make sense to spend more on a 100% hull repair than on the ship initially when bought new.
This is I guess also a compensation for not introducing 10% price reduction on the modules...
P.S. I agree however it does not make sense to spend more on a 100% hull repair than on the ship initially when bought new.
Last edited:
You say that it makes sense to pay more for integrity repairs but what you are also saying is if you buy a smaller ship like a cobra (or any ship for that matter) that it is ok to pay 100 percent hull in repair for 100 percent integrity, however, you then should not be ok with anything less than 100 percent buy back or 0 insurance.
-Nish
Last edited:
Oh yes... tell me, what ship are you flyieng? Sidewinder? Hauler?
Please do some maths... and then, think about this "change".
That is NOT the old price-segment for repcosts.
And you know what?
1% for a T9 > 1.5Mio. Credits... insurance > ~5Mio. so after 5% repcosts, it is cheaper to destroy the ship?
Please... read what you are writing... >_>
If FD had introduced these changes before V1.3 and people had a chance to adjust it would have been better.
As it is I have these arbitrary changes dropped on me (out of the blue) and an introduction of Power Play (which doesn't interest me) while several of the problems that have existed for quite some time are still in place.
I would just like FD to really address the CURRENT iteration of ED before expanding/adding new content.
I am actually more surprised the repair costs vary so much. Maybe it is also an intended feature to go and find the cheapest repair shop in town...
Maybe it's time for the silly yet useful car analogy.
I buy a car in New York (I know, dumb) for $120,000. We're not including the old "lose 20% driving it off the lot" thing; that is not about structural integrity.
I drive down to Florida to visit friends. Then I drive to FT Worth, Tx to see my sister. Finally, I drive up to San Francisco and then back down to Los Angeles.
Along the way, dings would happen: a stick here, a gravel chunk bounces underneath... it's been in storms and dustbowls; it's been humidified damply and dried in the desert. All the stuff that happens in a 4000+ mile drive (one I actually did many years ago).
When I get to LA, maybe the paint is scratched, or the dings are in the door, and maybe a broken front headlight. Those I can repair as "wear and tear." But structurally? No one is going to tell me I need to redo/buff/replace the frame of the car, nor it's many intact panels. That is ridiculous.
And! Before you start with the "in supercruise micrometeorites and space dust abrade the hull" stuff...
Space is mostly empty. Really empty. There aren't "clouds of dust" everywhere out there.
We have examples here now - the shuttle, for one; the ISS for another. They are in close Earth orbit, getting beamed upon by unfiltered cosmic radiation, bathing in the solar wind and the particulate matter caught in microgravitational orbits... but they don't have to repair the ISS's or the shuttle's main structural integrity at 30 orbits or 300.
No one would buy such a thing, car or spaceship.
I buy a car in New York (I know, dumb) for $120,000. We're not including the old "lose 20% driving it off the lot" thing; that is not about structural integrity.
I drive down to Florida to visit friends. Then I drive to FT Worth, Tx to see my sister. Finally, I drive up to San Francisco and then back down to Los Angeles.
Along the way, dings would happen: a stick here, a gravel chunk bounces underneath... it's been in storms and dustbowls; it's been humidified damply and dried in the desert. All the stuff that happens in a 4000+ mile drive (one I actually did many years ago).
When I get to LA, maybe the paint is scratched, or the dings are in the door, and maybe a broken front headlight. Those I can repair as "wear and tear." But structurally? No one is going to tell me I need to redo/buff/replace the frame of the car, nor it's many intact panels. That is ridiculous.
And! Before you start with the "in supercruise micrometeorites and space dust abrade the hull" stuff...
Space is mostly empty. Really empty. There aren't "clouds of dust" everywhere out there.
We have examples here now - the shuttle, for one; the ISS for another. They are in close Earth orbit, getting beamed upon by unfiltered cosmic radiation, bathing in the solar wind and the particulate matter caught in microgravitational orbits... but they don't have to repair the ISS's or the shuttle's main structural integrity at 30 orbits or 300.
No one would buy such a thing, car or spaceship.
Last edited:
I am actually flying that ship shown as my avatar at the moment...
I have just only recognized prices also seem to vary greatly where you repair your ship. I had thought it is a 100% linear scale.
I 'have' noticed going to a place where the repair was cheaper. I am not sure how it got cheaper but it was cheaper by a bit but not enough to say it was 'ok'. I do not know what makes these things cheaper but I am ranked Earl and Post Commander and it was only at 1-2 stations that I got this discount. It still amounted to a massive repair bill that would still make blowing up your ship more worthwhile.
-Nish
Their reasoning for not fixing assassination missions was simple. Missions were getting overhauled anyway. So why fix something that will change in a month or so anyway. Right now I'm happy for power play, I'm interested in how everything works now, adds somthing deeper than the bare bones of a space sim. While people are upset about 2 things that are imideatly apparent No one has had a chance to exsplore anything new. Rep decay may be a problem but it seems ENTIRELY overblown. No one has any evidence on how ship integrity effects a ship at all. For most people it may not be somthing most professions have to worry about.
And after you found it... you hit the selfdestruct Button to go cheaper XD... uhm... yee.. no.
They vary a bit, yes. A bit... but 250K or 220K... well... no.
I think there is a bug in the maths after the patch.
FD would increase the costs but set the numbers wrong.
The only thing I can say to this ATM is... A car doesn't go from 60 to 6 million in the course of a few seconds, the sheer amount of inertia could really put stress on a ship of larger size
Actually, be careful if the integrity gets very low. Small things 'will' cause your ship to explode. Your thrusters will not function correctly and I've even heard reports of people's weapons firing randomly. When the integrity of my python got very low it did not take much for it to blow up and it was one of the few times that I've actually had to rebuy it. I just didn't realize it had gotten that low.
-Nish
Hmm you would think that the engineers that come up with these ships would take this into account, kinda like how they do so in vehicles today that are meant for certain type of work, especially in 3300 heh?
Sorry but that is absolute nonsense, we had this discussion on the Beta forum. Integrity loss does not cause your ship to malfunction or explode, the most that will happen is you lose 30% hull strength.
It sounds like the costs are bugged, however I can't see what this obsession is with integrity on this forum. My large freighters have been flying for months and I never repair it, same deal when I go exploring for weeks.
Last edited:
