System Architect payment should be 25x if to be meaningful

Starshot_Jigawatts

Starshot_Jigawatts
Moochan said:
If you deliver all of the required materials, or none of the required materials (other commanders deliver them), the pay is the same. Therefore, the weekly payment has nothing to do with the hauling by definition. Try to be more objective with your posts and conversations will be more productive. You seem to post a lot on "feeling" rather than objectivity.
Click to expand...

I never said the payment had to do with the amount hauled, now did I? Straw man non-sequitur. You aren't even making an argument. In fact you must have made up that talking-point to steer the conversation away from the fact that the payments are a score for my side of the argument. Why would they go to just ONE person? The same person with their name on the system? Even if other players help build that system up, why no profit-sharing for them? It's almost like the Devs wanted the Architect to feel like they...hmmm there's a word I'm looking for here - oh yeah OWN the system.

You think we play games for objective facts and NOT "feelings"?? If they listened to you Elite Dangerous would be shuttered in 3 months. You don't want anyone to enjoy or feel personally invested in Trailblazers which is bafflingly dumb and vindictive. Sorry Space Ben Shapiro, this isn't formal logic debate class. That argument isn't the winner you think it is. We're talking about a video game here, how these systems make us feel and the enjoyment we get from them, or not, is literally PARAMOUNT to this discussion. I not only refuse to be shamed by this tactic of yours, I embrace it. Yes, I AM posting on feeling lol. That's why we play this game!
 

Starshot_Jigawatts

Starshot_Jigawatts
Moochan said:
I respect that you admit that. Unfortunately, I can't communicate with people who do this, as I base my opinions on rational objective thought. Fly safe commander.
Click to expand...

So you're a Vulcan. I respect that too. So can I just ask you then, how is playing a video game logical? Or even rational?

Also you will be communicating with me, because every single time you lecture some poor commander about why those systems don't "belong" to him, I'll be there to remind you why you're wrong.
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
I'd say that the system architect payments are designed to encourage connection with "our" systems (and having a small number of them) - just not in quite the direct way of giving credits. The credits are just an in-universe excuse to send you the message at all.

The payout is based on two things:
1) system score
2) system happiness as a modifier to that

Boosting the system score is easy: build more stuff. Building in existing systems seems to be a lot more score-efficient than building new ones.
Boosting the happiness is a bit trickier: establishing and maintaining positive BGS states seems to be the key

So to get a higher payout, you need to construct things and then do other gameplay in your system (which nicely breaks up the hauling...) to keep the inhabitants happy. The more systems you own, the more you'll have to do to keep them all in a happy state, which again encourages keeping a small number of well-built systems.

(Both BGS and construction activity are profitable enough in their own right that the architect payout is then a bit "get paid twice" already, so I don't think it needs to be more than a token one.)
 

root2

root2
Well...

With the current statement of FDev announcing balancing for Trailblazer, that CMDR Mechan posted on YT: (click here), I'm done with colonization...

  • Doubling the costs of T3 stations after the first station is built
  • Lowering the price reduction for architects in their systems with > 10 facilities from 3% down to 1%
  • Cutting the architects weekly payment down to 1/10th of the current payments

And he did not even mention the reduction of the colonisation contact range from 15LY to 5LY and the halving of the time to built your first station from 4 weeks down to just 2 weeks... Oo

Is just enough for me to quit this thing and start rambling grumpy passengers in Robigo again...

Don't worry CMDRs, this was an April's Fool - just keep on colonizing ;-P
 

Kzak

Kzak
root2 said:
Well...

With the current statement of FDev announcing balancing for Trailblazer, that CMDR Mechan posted on YT: (click here), I'm done with colonization...

  • Doubling the costs of T3 stations after the first station is built
  • Lowering the price reduction for architects in their systems with > 10 facilities from 3% down to 1%
  • Cutting the architects weekly payment down to 1/10th of the current payments

And he did not even mention the reduction of the colonisation contact range from 15LY to 5LY and the halving of the time to built your first station from 4 weeks down to just 2 weeks... Oo

Is just enough for me to quit this thing and start rambling grumpy passengers in Robigo again...

Don't worry CMDRs, this was an April's Fool - just keep on colonizing ;-P
Click to expand...
Did Mechan post this on April 1st, aka April Fool's Day, by chance?
 

Starshot_Jigawatts

Starshot_Jigawatts
root2 said:
Well...

With the current statement of FDev announcing balancing for Trailblazer, that CMDR Mechan posted on YT: (click here), I'm done with colonization...

  • Doubling the costs of T3 stations after the first station is built
  • Lowering the price reduction for architects in their systems with > 10 facilities from 3% down to 1%
  • Cutting the architects weekly payment down to 1/10th of the current payments

And he did not even mention the reduction of the colonisation contact range from 15LY to 5LY and the halving of the time to built your first station from 4 weeks down to just 2 weeks... Oo

Is just enough for me to quit this thing and start rambling grumpy passengers in Robigo again...

Don't worry CMDRs, this was an April's Fool - just keep on colonizing ;-P
Click to expand...

Wait that's for real or an April Fool's joke? I can't believe those changes are for real!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom