The Static Galaxy, the Background Sim, and the Economy: Why Player-Owned Stations is not the sole answer
Recently, there’s been a huge amount of talk on player-owned stations to add depth to Elite. While I personally stand neutral on this, I will say that owning stations does not add particularly interesting gameplay elements by itself.
To begin, I’d like to introduce myself. I’ve played with the PCI-Syndicate (now the Syndicate) with the goal of manipulating the background sim. I’d like to share with you all the limitations of the BGS and the ingame economy. This is why the galaxy feels completely static.
In Pand, we were blessed with a beautiful system. We were on the very edge of settled space, and had 8 terraformable planets.(!) Our objective was to create a safe and prosperous system and eventually push into uncolonized space. Realistically, Pand would be seen as an investment to be developed, a breadbasket to that sector of space.
Unfortunately, we quickly ran into the limits of the BGS. We could not spread our influence into other systems (20 lys) without developer intervention. We cannot build new stations without a local CG input by the developers, nor could we push terraforming or colonization on our own. *This is why the galaxy is static.* There is very little visible change in the galaxy without input by the developers. You can sit in the same system for years, hauling in food to lower prices for the population to drive population growth (which doesn’t work), haul in mineral extractors to increase the production of metals (we were an extraction economy)(PS it doesn’t work either), but nothing fundamentally changes. The only thing we were able to affect were states (Boom, civil unrest, etc)
What this game needs is a *procedurally generated method of expansion, colonization and development*. A faction rich in capital should look at controlling nearby systems (already in game) OR developing their current system if this is impractical or impossible (ex. Past range limit), based on exploration data sold to them. I want to see factions building new in-system stations to fill holes in their economy if local resources support it. They should begin terraforming where possible in controlled space and create agricultural stations.
Obviously, this cannot be done by any old faction. This can only happen through concentrated efforts of players, either over a long period of time or through intense activity to increase available capital for these very expensive investments.
Think about it. You jump into a system, see that they have a station under construction *without a community goal* You know that this means prices for metals and machinery will go through the roof due to high demand. For combat pilots this means they can get contracts to protect the vulnerable and uncompleted station from attack from hostile factions or from pirates (think of bridge thieves). Imagine fighting through the gut of an unfinished station. Consequently, the reverse should be possible. A faction should abandon unprofitable stations should they enter a state where they cannot maintain it. Another faction can move in and take the station, should they be able to afford it, or perhaps let it sit mothballed until someone can claim ownership of it.
The same goes for terraforming a planet. A faction gains enough capital to develop a planet, and therefore begins the process. You enter a system with terraforming in progress, and sell the needed products to aid this process.
This brings me to my second main point. Why do we have limits on commodity prices? This leads to simple A to B trading, or possible *gasp* A to B to C to A trading!
I propose we let prices rise/fall freely without a cap. If a station is experiencing a chronic food/medicine shortage, I damn well should see prices/profit rising to above 1k a ton, depending how severe it is. A faction building a new station should be paying a King’s ransom for needed goods *if this is not adequately supplied*. This should limit straight A to B trading and encourage traders to explore different stations and routes to earn the most profit. Sure, CR/Ton/H won’t be constant, but it will vary, and the old average should remain the same. Untrafficked areas should damn well be paying a premium for much needed supplies, and even more if they are experiencing a state, either existing or proposed in this post. *There should not be a situation where there are only 6 different goods traded by any trader worth their salt*
Additionally, why do we not have proper supply chains? A lack in say, explosives needed for the production of the extraction of metals should bottleneck it badly. A station should pay a premium for explosives until this is resolved, so long as there are buyers for metals. If not, production should drop, and therefore the need for explosives. Consequently, oft fulfilled supply chains could drive a station to invest in increased production and vice versa (imperial slaves for Empire, slaves where it’s allowed, robotics for feds, mineral extractors to increase metals, agricultural cultivators for food, etc).
*The current state of transport good A to place B ad nauseum should not be the most profitable route to take. When needs are not fulfilled, when goods are not bought to be transported, the prices should fall or rise meteorically until players are incentivized to take those goods instead/fulfil those goods*
My next point is population. Population change is not currently modelled at all. We do have a population number on systems, but this does not change at all. Population serves very little purpose save to determine supply/demand on goods.
Population should change freely as well. War refugees should flee to neighboring systems. Outbreak and famine should cause population decrease and emigration (it’s stated that this is modelled, but I personally have not observed it; correct me if I’m wrong). Bust should cause working age population to leave emigrate. Consequently, boom should cause an influx of population rushing to fulfil jobs. Cheap food should encourage population growth. A newly terraformed planet should increase a total population capacity and attract migrants.
All this means that more becomes possible on the nasty things to do to a system. Blockade a system, steal cargo and sell it elsewhere to drive prices up (and to trade things in to make a profit!) to wage economic warfare. Cause factions to abandon stations by cutting its supply routes and ability to make a profit on selling its goods.
If we can see this, then perhaps the galaxy will truly come to life. Frontier, you’ve created a wonderful, immersive sandbox. Give it life, let it change freely, and let us build sandcastles.
TL
R
BGS and Economy are static, build them properly and the galaxy will feel dynamic.
Recently, there’s been a huge amount of talk on player-owned stations to add depth to Elite. While I personally stand neutral on this, I will say that owning stations does not add particularly interesting gameplay elements by itself.
To begin, I’d like to introduce myself. I’ve played with the PCI-Syndicate (now the Syndicate) with the goal of manipulating the background sim. I’d like to share with you all the limitations of the BGS and the ingame economy. This is why the galaxy feels completely static.
In Pand, we were blessed with a beautiful system. We were on the very edge of settled space, and had 8 terraformable planets.(!) Our objective was to create a safe and prosperous system and eventually push into uncolonized space. Realistically, Pand would be seen as an investment to be developed, a breadbasket to that sector of space.
Unfortunately, we quickly ran into the limits of the BGS. We could not spread our influence into other systems (20 lys) without developer intervention. We cannot build new stations without a local CG input by the developers, nor could we push terraforming or colonization on our own. *This is why the galaxy is static.* There is very little visible change in the galaxy without input by the developers. You can sit in the same system for years, hauling in food to lower prices for the population to drive population growth (which doesn’t work), haul in mineral extractors to increase the production of metals (we were an extraction economy)(PS it doesn’t work either), but nothing fundamentally changes. The only thing we were able to affect were states (Boom, civil unrest, etc)
What this game needs is a *procedurally generated method of expansion, colonization and development*. A faction rich in capital should look at controlling nearby systems (already in game) OR developing their current system if this is impractical or impossible (ex. Past range limit), based on exploration data sold to them. I want to see factions building new in-system stations to fill holes in their economy if local resources support it. They should begin terraforming where possible in controlled space and create agricultural stations.
Obviously, this cannot be done by any old faction. This can only happen through concentrated efforts of players, either over a long period of time or through intense activity to increase available capital for these very expensive investments.
Think about it. You jump into a system, see that they have a station under construction *without a community goal* You know that this means prices for metals and machinery will go through the roof due to high demand. For combat pilots this means they can get contracts to protect the vulnerable and uncompleted station from attack from hostile factions or from pirates (think of bridge thieves). Imagine fighting through the gut of an unfinished station. Consequently, the reverse should be possible. A faction should abandon unprofitable stations should they enter a state where they cannot maintain it. Another faction can move in and take the station, should they be able to afford it, or perhaps let it sit mothballed until someone can claim ownership of it.
The same goes for terraforming a planet. A faction gains enough capital to develop a planet, and therefore begins the process. You enter a system with terraforming in progress, and sell the needed products to aid this process.
This brings me to my second main point. Why do we have limits on commodity prices? This leads to simple A to B trading, or possible *gasp* A to B to C to A trading!
I propose we let prices rise/fall freely without a cap. If a station is experiencing a chronic food/medicine shortage, I damn well should see prices/profit rising to above 1k a ton, depending how severe it is. A faction building a new station should be paying a King’s ransom for needed goods *if this is not adequately supplied*. This should limit straight A to B trading and encourage traders to explore different stations and routes to earn the most profit. Sure, CR/Ton/H won’t be constant, but it will vary, and the old average should remain the same. Untrafficked areas should damn well be paying a premium for much needed supplies, and even more if they are experiencing a state, either existing or proposed in this post. *There should not be a situation where there are only 6 different goods traded by any trader worth their salt*
Additionally, why do we not have proper supply chains? A lack in say, explosives needed for the production of the extraction of metals should bottleneck it badly. A station should pay a premium for explosives until this is resolved, so long as there are buyers for metals. If not, production should drop, and therefore the need for explosives. Consequently, oft fulfilled supply chains could drive a station to invest in increased production and vice versa (imperial slaves for Empire, slaves where it’s allowed, robotics for feds, mineral extractors to increase metals, agricultural cultivators for food, etc).
*The current state of transport good A to place B ad nauseum should not be the most profitable route to take. When needs are not fulfilled, when goods are not bought to be transported, the prices should fall or rise meteorically until players are incentivized to take those goods instead/fulfil those goods*
My next point is population. Population change is not currently modelled at all. We do have a population number on systems, but this does not change at all. Population serves very little purpose save to determine supply/demand on goods.
Population should change freely as well. War refugees should flee to neighboring systems. Outbreak and famine should cause population decrease and emigration (it’s stated that this is modelled, but I personally have not observed it; correct me if I’m wrong). Bust should cause working age population to leave emigrate. Consequently, boom should cause an influx of population rushing to fulfil jobs. Cheap food should encourage population growth. A newly terraformed planet should increase a total population capacity and attract migrants.
All this means that more becomes possible on the nasty things to do to a system. Blockade a system, steal cargo and sell it elsewhere to drive prices up (and to trade things in to make a profit!) to wage economic warfare. Cause factions to abandon stations by cutting its supply routes and ability to make a profit on selling its goods.
If we can see this, then perhaps the galaxy will truly come to life. Frontier, you’ve created a wonderful, immersive sandbox. Give it life, let it change freely, and let us build sandcastles.
TL
RBGS and Economy are static, build them properly and the galaxy will feel dynamic.
