Nonsense post makes no sense!?
Solution for balancing the credit economy after countless exploits
- Thread starter fuub
- Start date
I'm ignoring the flawed use of a double negative to try and posit logic at all.
Anyone who has done the beta has seen the changes to mission board rewards and the new choice of rewards offered for any given mission.
The creation of choice (credits, materials, cargo, rep and inf in any combination) go a long way to balancing the whole economic system as driven by the BGS.
Well, if you want to state it that way, yes.
Credit rewards for missions have already been multiplied many many times over. I remember at 2.0 days gleefully doing cut the power missions for 75k, by 2.1 those same missions were 350k, now they are anywhere from 11M to 1.7M; yet the eagle or DBS I use for them still costs the same. I also remember that the powerplay 50M looked like an unbelievable amount of in game money, where as now its less than an hours grinding. My point? Missions have already been over buffed, costs either need to come up to follow them or rewards need to come back down. I'm hopeful, although concurrently cynically pragmatic, that frontier would use the looming thargoid incursion into the bubble to inflate costs due to war shortages, and those prices would never come back down.
The economy in elite has always been skewy,a unit (tonne) of gold costs about 9,000 credits. But at todays exchange rates its about $42 million us dollars per tonne. Therefore in 3304,Gold costs 1/4,666 of what it does today.
Aluminium, is 82 credits per tonne in game, versus $3000usd IRL. 36:1 cheaper.
The economy in elite has always been skewy,a unit (tonne) of gold costs about 9,000 credits. But at todays exchange rates its about $42 million us dollars per tonne. Therefore in 3304,Gold costs 1/4,666 of what it does today.
Aluminium, is 82 credits per tonne in game, versus $3000usd IRL. 36:1 cheaper.
*What* next week?
Every single week where at least one new player purchases the game, else it wouldn't be fair.
I would very much like to see some sense to making credits.
I'm nearly Elite x2, fly an Anaconda, and I'm allied with every faction in many systems, but I still see 200 ton cargo missions that pay the same as a new player's 10 ton cargo missions.
IMO that should be the exception, not the norm. But it could be a momentary thing with a fix coming for all I know.
I also need missions to pay enough to justifying running them, and running a big ship that's worth over $500 Million means $20K-$100K missions aren't very appealing to me.
The problem is that the credit ship has sailed. There are already too many players with so much cash that it no longer matters and are flying the big ships.
Frontier dropped the ball early on this. Elite was always about credits, it was always a trading game with added tasks that you couls do. Elite Dangerous improved on that but at some point the payment system got messed up.
The money making should expand with the ships you have available to buy so in the beginning it would be very hard to make cash but eventually you would work up to a large ship. This should take a long long time. As it currently stands you can get the big ships within a few hours of dedicated play. The ships should always have been a progression tool for increasing possible turnover and hence should have almost been a pipedream at the beginning. Now it isn't is almost an expectation that you can have an anaconda in a week.
Its good to have things to look forward to.
But as I say thats no longer an option. The game has changed its roots and I am not really sure where Elite is going at this point.
Frontier dropped the ball early on this. Elite was always about credits, it was always a trading game with added tasks that you couls do. Elite Dangerous improved on that but at some point the payment system got messed up.
The money making should expand with the ships you have available to buy so in the beginning it would be very hard to make cash but eventually you would work up to a large ship. This should take a long long time. As it currently stands you can get the big ships within a few hours of dedicated play. The ships should always have been a progression tool for increasing possible turnover and hence should have almost been a pipedream at the beginning. Now it isn't is almost an expectation that you can have an anaconda in a week.
Its good to have things to look forward to.
But as I say thats no longer an option. The game has changed its roots and I am not really sure where Elite is going at this point.
by not implementing a working economy
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.
Firstly Ba, and secondly HAHAHAHAHAHA.
You forget to think about the players who spent months grinding without 'exploits' to make those credits which you would nerf back to the stone age illegitimately... silly idea.
I refute 99% of all claims about making 200mil an hour also... anyone who made this spent a LOT of unaccounted for time grinding rep and credits to have a ship capable of anywhere close to this which isn't being accounted for at all. Even if they are making a ton of credits, shouldn't this be expected when they spent all that time to get end game / large ships which already can't land at 2/3 of the stations? What else would you do with larger ships? I'm sure lots of people buy 150-400 mil credit cost Anacondas so they can be out earned by a sidewinder doing data transport missions...
PS: I also entirely disagree with the use of the word exploit here, as I have yet to see a single actual 'exploit'.
Board flipping, and long range missions simply aren't exploits. You 'high speeds' labelling it as such are simply proving you have a lot of hate in your heart. An example of an actual exploit would be if I found a way to blow up my ship and gain credits instead of losing them due to a bug in the code, THAT would be an exploit, and I have yet to see a single one with which anyone made any credits.
And by "early", do you mean "1984"? Being able to go pretty quickly to the biggest ship if you know how has been part of the series from the start. (For that matter, there's been complaints about the balance of the payment system in Elite Dangerous since before 1.0)
Elite I: you couldn't change ships, but an absolutely fully-equipped Cobra III would cost about 35,000 credits. Once you'd got going with a large cargo bay and a bit of reserve cash, you could make about 1000 credits profit on each trade run. So you could get the maximum ship in maybe 50 (fairly safe) trips.
Back in those days no-one did because we didn't have the internet to read up on all the tips and tricks for fast progress, of course, but it was very possible.
FE2/FFE: A Panther Clipper plus equipment might set you back 3.5 million credits. Doing completely safe high-profit runs between Barnards Star and Sol - and trading up to the next largest ship frequently - it didn't take long at all to get this sort of money. You could make over 1000 credits per tonne profit on cargo if you took advantage of the frequent "X needed" missions, so you only needed to haul 3500 tonnes or so.
Could not agree more, tired of seeing every set of missions where a 200+M ship could make more money than sub 10M ship could make get nerfed to oblivion by 'high speeds' crying EXPLOIT, EXPLOIT, EXPLOIT! Come on, guys you wouldn't know an 'exploit' if it slapped you in the face. I do think a serious look at chart showing time investment and risk needs to be taken by FD to determine what missions provide what payouts. Hunting a corvette pirate should not pay more than moving a couple of data sets to the next system... Considering one can be done in a sidewinder with basically 0 credit risk or time and the other requires hunting time and a significant ship risk of millions of credit rebuy if you fail...
![[DOOK] Droogie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/124/124078.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Reported for exploiting the exploitation of the word exploit so exploiters can't exploit the exploiters exploiting exploits.
Exploiting a function like reporting exploitable posts after being indeed exploited, is the very definition of the exploited word EXPLOIT, and can cause exploitable exploits to actually exploit exploits by exploitation.
To be honest, the problem is that the money exploits have been going on for so long that many players are almost considering them to be the new norm. Players are now considering 50+ million per hour to be acceptable, while originally getting 20 million an hour was considered to be a veritable goldmine and reaching double figures of millions in a Cutter wasn't bad going. Because of this shift in player perception, whatever is actually done needs to be gradual as otherwise there will be a major player backlash as they have having their stuff devalued.
Rather than simply resetting the economy with some ham-fisted method that would involve much player rage, I'd be much happier if FD were simply to introduce full galactic inflation as a proper mechanic. Every week during the server tick, depending on the number of factions/systems/stations in a boom state, increase the costs of all goods, services, ships and modules by a small percentage (including ships and modules already owned). What might seem like a nice little novelty to add depth to the galaxy without significant complaint will eventually become a compounding juggernaut that will silently make the player stockpiles significantly less valuable over a couple of years. The die-hard exploiters that have stockpiled billions of credits might take a few years to properly bring down, but the longer the system continues for the better it would work, meanwhile the players who keep on chipping away and building up additional funds would see their income match the inflation, so it would only really affect existing stockpiles. Of course, in order for such a method to work FD would have to actually fix income in the first place and not let themselves add in ridiculous income exploits like they seem to always do, as every exploit added and not immediately removed would add another year's worth of damage to the economy.
Rather than simply resetting the economy with some ham-fisted method that would involve much player rage, I'd be much happier if FD were simply to introduce full galactic inflation as a proper mechanic. Every week during the server tick, depending on the number of factions/systems/stations in a boom state, increase the costs of all goods, services, ships and modules by a small percentage (including ships and modules already owned). What might seem like a nice little novelty to add depth to the galaxy without significant complaint will eventually become a compounding juggernaut that will silently make the player stockpiles significantly less valuable over a couple of years. The die-hard exploiters that have stockpiled billions of credits might take a few years to properly bring down, but the longer the system continues for the better it would work, meanwhile the players who keep on chipping away and building up additional funds would see their income match the inflation, so it would only really affect existing stockpiles. Of course, in order for such a method to work FD would have to actually fix income in the first place and not let themselves add in ridiculous income exploits like they seem to always do, as every exploit added and not immediately removed would add another year's worth of damage to the economy.
At least someone who actually understand what im saying, thanks was losing hope.
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.
This would be equivalent of slashing everyone's credit balance by a factor of 10. I don't think I have to explain how that would be a terrible "solution" to anything.
So instead of saving up, people would just invest their money immediately into ships, guns and modules, to liquidate whenever needed. Rebuy cost? No point in keeping money for rebuy cost, because when you take a break and come back a few months later, you'd be flying without rebuy again; instead just keep a stockpile of ships worth enough to cover that, since you can liquidate them if your ship gets destroyed.
Last edited:
Replace all credits with cheese cake. Problem solved.
The game balance lever isn't a monetary issue, but an RNG and grind time issue. For example, I could play 24 hours a day for 5 years and have a weaker ship than someone who's only played a week or two, due to RNGineers. Power creep went from having more credits to grinding more in Powerplay for special weapons to now just a random toss of the dice umpteen billion times. The game has become 50% chasing materials for rolls to get better modules and results, so you can chase materials better, so you can get better rolls, etc...
500b or 500m, no real difference if you have the ship you want to fly, and you can only fly one at a time.
But I'm one of those exploiters who took advantage of a rising market, what do I know?
500b or 500m, no real difference if you have the ship you want to fly, and you can only fly one at a time.
But I'm one of those exploiters who took advantage of a rising market, what do I know?
Or just make something we want to buy. Problem solved.