I fail to see how someone else's credit balance matters to other people. Also the proposed idea, resulting in a net 0 change, isn't a good one. Let people play and stop worrying about the credits someone else has. Elite doesn't have a player run economy so my wallet balance has no impact on you at all.
Solution for balancing the credit economy after countless exploits
- Thread starter fuub
- Start date
That's a "wipe all the credits" thread in disguise. We had one of those about 3 weeks ago. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-future-of-Elite-included-a-full-Galaxy-reset
Exactly, but fairly without actually wiping them.
1 billion credits is about the price of a fully equipped Cutter ... and can be raised in about 20 hours focused play by a wide variety of methods, none of which have anything to do with previous "exploits".
If your opinion is that only through exploits should anyone have been able to get a Cutter ... I think you may be working on a very different definition of "exploit" to Frontier, let's say.
The credit economy can't be balanced at all while:
a) the price range for ships varies over a factor of 10,000
b) the capability range for ship varies between a factor of 1 and 60 depending on profession.
You literally cannot have a balanced credit economy on those terms - if you set earnings to 1 M/hour max, then it takes 1000 hours to buy the biggest ship (+another 50 hours for each rebuy) which is utterly ridiculous ... but you have a nice earning progression going on around the Cobra-Asp range. If you set them to 50 M/hour max (which is about what they currently are, though you could really min-max some of them to get maybe 50% more) then you can get the biggest ship in 20 hours and an extra rebuy in an hour ... but you can also skip straight to "A-rated Asp" in under an hour.
I'm not seeing the answer here. If you multiply everything by 10 then the only metric that means anything -- players' time invested -- remains the same. Same amount of time played yields the same relative growth in credits which buys the same chunk of hardware. And the next exploit to emerge would cause the same relative disparity between those with the time and inclination to grind it and those without.
I do agree that the price of spacecraft -- especially the cheap runabouts -- seems ridiculously low, but only in relation to the average galactic price for commodities. In relation to other players' wealth it's largely irrelevant for the reasons stated above.
The more time a player can invest in a game, the more "stuff" they will have compared with other players. That's inevitable, but of little consequence in this game, unless you're talking about Powerplay or high-end competitive PVP where you're expecting to lose from time to time and the war chest can pay for lots of rebuys, repairs and rearming. And even rearming is chump change, unless you're flying a torpedo boat.
One thing that might act as a money sink would be more believable running costs, scaling with the cost of the ship. Fuel and maintenance. It's something the very early versions had but, when players complained, the expenses they were nerfed instead of being balanced and they've never really come back. As soon as you can afford to buy a given ship you can basically afford to run it forever and not even think about the cost. Hell, most people only do a full repair when the paint's too worn.
I'd like to see bits of the ship getting more inefficient and even breaking down completely if not maintained. FE2 modelled this in a largely binary way with the jump drive (marginally increased chance of a misjump followed by catastrophic damage) but the options in ED could be much more interesting. Imagine an FSD that burns more fuel per jump because it's not been tuned or had an AFMU run over it in a while, or gimballed weapons that suddenly jam in one orientation when they overheat.
Whether to pay to repair these from limited funds, or live with the short-term consequences in the hope of a "big score" on the next trade run or mission, should be a serious consideration. But then we're back to the problem of the cheap cost of hardware. The repair cost would have to be less than the replacement cost, otherwise everyone will just swap a worn module for a new one. And because the purchase prices are so low, repair prices would be irrelevant in the same way that fuel costs are irrelevant.
I'm not sure there's an answer to this, but I'd start by reintroducing the percentage loss for selling hardware back to the Outfitters. It makes no sense that we can return worn hardware for the same price that we paid for it, especially now we have the option to store things. Maybe there's a midpoint; pay 1,000,000 for your module and accept a 20% loss if you sell it, or pay 5,000,000 for the same module "plus insurance" that guarantees the same 5,000,000 back if it's returned. An encouragement to buy only what you really need for most players, and a temporary money sink for super-rich experimenters.
On the flip-side, perhaps the Outfitters should offer a premium price for selling Engineered hardware back to them, on the grounds that you've increased its value by the time invested. I wouldn't want to see these modules purchasable by other players, as that would be a shortcut around Engineering. But it would be nice if, say, refitting a former combat ship for trade you could get some reward for having taken time to Engineer the weapons.
Still, most of this is moot. The magic credit spigots are spewing forth their contents into the galaxy as ever they did. Occasional exploits just temporarily increase the magic pressure. Trying to decide where the credit sinks or spending balances should be in ED is like trying to decide which bottle to fill with water while standing under Niagara Falls. Sooner or later they'll all be full whatever you do.
I do agree that the price of spacecraft -- especially the cheap runabouts -- seems ridiculously low, but only in relation to the average galactic price for commodities. In relation to other players' wealth it's largely irrelevant for the reasons stated above.
The more time a player can invest in a game, the more "stuff" they will have compared with other players. That's inevitable, but of little consequence in this game, unless you're talking about Powerplay or high-end competitive PVP where you're expecting to lose from time to time and the war chest can pay for lots of rebuys, repairs and rearming. And even rearming is chump change, unless you're flying a torpedo boat.
One thing that might act as a money sink would be more believable running costs, scaling with the cost of the ship. Fuel and maintenance. It's something the very early versions had but, when players complained, the expenses they were nerfed instead of being balanced and they've never really come back. As soon as you can afford to buy a given ship you can basically afford to run it forever and not even think about the cost. Hell, most people only do a full repair when the paint's too worn.
I'd like to see bits of the ship getting more inefficient and even breaking down completely if not maintained. FE2 modelled this in a largely binary way with the jump drive (marginally increased chance of a misjump followed by catastrophic damage) but the options in ED could be much more interesting. Imagine an FSD that burns more fuel per jump because it's not been tuned or had an AFMU run over it in a while, or gimballed weapons that suddenly jam in one orientation when they overheat.
Whether to pay to repair these from limited funds, or live with the short-term consequences in the hope of a "big score" on the next trade run or mission, should be a serious consideration. But then we're back to the problem of the cheap cost of hardware. The repair cost would have to be less than the replacement cost, otherwise everyone will just swap a worn module for a new one. And because the purchase prices are so low, repair prices would be irrelevant in the same way that fuel costs are irrelevant.
I'm not sure there's an answer to this, but I'd start by reintroducing the percentage loss for selling hardware back to the Outfitters. It makes no sense that we can return worn hardware for the same price that we paid for it, especially now we have the option to store things. Maybe there's a midpoint; pay 1,000,000 for your module and accept a 20% loss if you sell it, or pay 5,000,000 for the same module "plus insurance" that guarantees the same 5,000,000 back if it's returned. An encouragement to buy only what you really need for most players, and a temporary money sink for super-rich experimenters.
On the flip-side, perhaps the Outfitters should offer a premium price for selling Engineered hardware back to them, on the grounds that you've increased its value by the time invested. I wouldn't want to see these modules purchasable by other players, as that would be a shortcut around Engineering. But it would be nice if, say, refitting a former combat ship for trade you could get some reward for having taken time to Engineer the weapons.
Still, most of this is moot. The magic credit spigots are spewing forth their contents into the galaxy as ever they did. Occasional exploits just temporarily increase the magic pressure. Trying to decide where the credit sinks or spending balances should be in ED is like trying to decide which bottle to fill with water while standing under Niagara Falls. Sooner or later they'll all be full whatever you do.
That doesn't remove exploits.
Changing numbers to effectively be the same to one another (everything times 10), has the same effect as what we have now, only the numbers are bigger.
A better solution (for the players), would be for all professions to earn higher amounts, and while making sure payments don't get higher than they are already. Now everyone is rich, and no one feels left out.
Changing numbers to effectively be the same to one another (everything times 10), has the same effect as what we have now, only the numbers are bigger.
A better solution (for the players), would be for all professions to earn higher amounts, and while making sure payments don't get higher than they are already. Now everyone is rich, and no one feels left out.
Strange request. This isn't a problem.
When I started playing, rewards were much less. Most of my ships I have earned "the hard way", whereas an alt account rapidly progressed.
OP should first articulate what the problem is, before proposing a solution, I reckon.
When I started playing, rewards were much less. Most of my ships I have earned "the hard way", whereas an alt account rapidly progressed.
OP should first articulate what the problem is, before proposing a solution, I reckon.
Nope, I saw it. Rebuy only affects you if you're on the losing end and don't high-wake.
The other person's rebuy is no one's concern but their own.
Thus your credit balance only affects you.
Their's only affects them.
And progression? What progression? There is no progression in Elite, except your own skills, and you can't buy skills with credits.
If you're a potato of a pilot in a Sidewinder, you'll be a potato of a pilot in an Anaconda, Corvette or Cutter.
So once more, your credit balance has no effect on anything but you.
Care to share your secret to earning 50 million credits/hour?
what a bunch of nothing who cares if you make good money and buy things its a game and should be fun and not like real life where you make little money and cannot afford to buy thing what a bunch of pansy's
FD just have to rise credits rewards and costs by x10.
Imagine that an anaconda now costs 1.5 billion, but missions now reward 10 million instead of 1million, as bounties etc, every reward x10 and every cost x10. As also the rebuy costX10
The ships before the "Big inflation" could be flagged as legacy, and selling them would return the previous payed prices.
It would balance out the game again, and people that exploited the game hard would not be much more op than people that didn't, almost like a fair economy reset.
I'm ignoring not logical arguments of not worrying about other peoples credit in a multiplayer game with pvp and some of the progression and the rebuys WITH CREDITS.
I am ignoring this puerile attempt to decide what is and is not a valid argument.
There is simply no player connected economy to protect. Credits are equally available to all Commanders based on their decisions. All is well, nothing to see here.
Fair, perhaps, as long as you don't mind totally screwing at least one segment of the community.FD just have to rise credits rewards and costs by x10.
Imagine that an anaconda now costs 1.5 billion, but missions now reward 10 million instead of 1million, as bounties etc, every reward x10 and every cost x10. As also the rebuy cost
The ships before the "Big inflation" could be flagged as legacy, and selling them would return the previous payed prices.
It would balance out the game again, and people that exploited the game hard would not be much more op than people that didn't, almost like a fair economy reset.
The payout for exploration scans is fixed at the time the scan takes place. Could be different, but that's how it is (it's that way for performance reasons and won't likely ever change now). Arbitrarily increasing all costs by 10 times is effectively making all exploration effort up to that date that hasn't yet been cashed in worthless. For some that will be months of effort. These are the CMDRs who are least likely to have benefited from what you consider to be exploits.
I assume that you are that aforementioned "new player"? Since there is only "singleplayer" economy in this game, wallet balance of others does not matter at all. What's your point? Perhaps you want to be filthy rich too? Or you want everyone to start game from clear save? There are a lot of money making opportunities in this game right now. Just play the game, have fun and don't look at stuff that doesn't matter at all. =)
I already have, several times. But, one more time, then:
- mining, done with a focus on collecting Painite only, can earn 30-60 with practice, especially when carried out in a wing to get faster prospecting and the not insignificant trade bonus, and this has basically been true ever since they invented limpets and Painite back in version 1.3. See for example https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteMiners/comments/6ynhnx/several_miningnewbie_questions/dmop90b/ (it must be the profession with by far the largest gap between "casual" and "optimised" earnings)
- there are missions available from Extraction economies (find one with lots of factions in Boom) which pay 10 million for a 1 hop mission transporting just 180 tonnes of Palladium - and between 3 and 8 million for smaller amounts or for Silver or Gold instead. Find the right system - which generates them in decent numbers and to a consistent location - and you can get at least 50 million an hour going back and forth (if you're lucky the return leg might have missions or a cargo to trade too, for a bit extra). I've made 30 million this way in under an hour with a Python - imagine how much I could have made if I'd had the cargo hold to take three or four missions at once... not quite 3 times as much - there's generally only 1 of the 10 million ones on the board on average, then a lot of 3-5s - but still. Works best if you already have Elite Trade rank so you get more of the max payout missions ... but lower will do - these missions are basically how I got both Entrepreneur and Tycoon ranks without actually trying (I was doing the missions to get faction rep and then at the end of it was rich).
- there are systems which generate a very large number of easily stackable and short sightseeing VIP passenger missions, which can be taken for about 8-10 million a run in a 9-cabin Anaconda, with 5-6 runs an hour being practical. If you got lucky with the BGS states so that they were mostly criminal passengers, you could probably make a bit more (just don't get scanned...).
- near Colonia, almost all "famous explorer" passenger missions go back to the bubble or very near it, they pay up to (and occasionally over...) 50 million each, and they're easy to find at any station, so if you have an Anaconda that can do the trip between Colonia and Sol in 3 hours (the record is under 2 hours, so even weighed down with a few passenger cabins this should be doable with practice), you can take eight of these to get 400 million in 6+X hours (where X is the time to pick up the missions and to hop around the bubble visiting the beacons, which shouldn't be more than 2 hours) ... will probably get even easier in Beyond when it's more straightforward to engineer up a super-range Anaconda.
The three mission ones, it of course helps to be Allied or Friendly with every mission-giving faction ... so it might take a while, having found a system, to "burn it in" so it generates max income. None of them require mode-switching at all to find sufficient missions (though I expect doing so might raise the earnings in some "not quite good enough anyway" systems)
And those are just the ones that I - as someone who has more money than I can possibly use already [1] and spends most of their time mucking about in a Cobra III - have spotted while casually flying about or reading around. Who knows how many others people who actually want money have found
[1] About 2 billion net assets, earned at an average rate of 0.5MCr/hour. None of the large ships interest me, but it's enough cash reserves to have hundreds of Python/FDL rebuys. So...
Clean save every account.
Clean save every account.
And do it every week, otherwise it wouldn't be "fair" to next week's new players.
(*) - just to make sure, yes, I'm being sarcastic.
FD just have to rise credits rewards and costs by x10.
Imagine that an anaconda now costs 1.5 billion, but missions now reward 10 million instead of 1million, as bounties etc, every reward x10 and every cost x10. As also the rebuy cost
The ships before the "Big inflation" could be flagged as legacy, and selling them would return the previous payed prices.
It would balance out the game again, and people that exploited the game hard would not be much more op than people that didn't, almost like a fair economy reset.
I'm ignoring not logical arguments of not worrying about other peoples credit in a multiplayer game with pvp and some of the progression and the rebuys WITH CREDITS.
That's assuming FD fixed every single current and future credit exploit before it gets in to live, otherwise we'll just have multi trillionaires instead, and we're back to where we started.
CMDR Cosmic Spacehead