Wear & Tear logic

[ciger]

Did any of the developers actually give at least some thought to how wear and tear works? Flying an Asp I just checked my ship integrity which is @ 25% with repair cost of 1.4M cr. My insurance cost is about 900k cr. Why would I not just self destruct and would want to pay the 1.4M is beyond my comprehension.

 

[jadefriendly]

Wear & Tear worries me for long distance exploration...

 

[Vandaahl]

Wear & Tear worries me for long distance exploration...

With good reason. I just came back from a 9000 ly trip, earned 1.5 mil and lost 100k to repair W&T.

 

[Hawkmoon]

With good reason. I just came back from a 9000 ly trip, earned 1.5 mil and lost 100k to repair W&T.

So you earned 1.5 million and your over heads were 100k that's like a 1500% return I don't see anything there to worry about, I just had a run in with a nasty anaconda in my ASP collect a 150k bounty and had to pay out over 100k in repairs and ammo.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

-- Deleted --

 

[ciger]

Well, how long did you neglect your Ship then ??!?

I always keep my Ships at 100% - never had any issues (and I'm running a Python right now).

Although I never tested for it, I assume continued neglect accelerates the process.
So next time be good to your Ship and it'll thank you by far lower maintenance costs.

PS.
I agree though that no Ship tear&wear should exceed the cost of i.e. a self-destruct option.

I neglected it on purpose, wanted to see how high the repair cost goes. But after a day of interdictions I was very surprised to see that it is cheaper to destroy the ship compared to repairing it. I feel like I am forced to do trading to run anything bigger then Cobra. The numbers need to be looked at as the implementation right is feels just wrong.

To answer your question if wear and tear accelerates the process I think it does, it can be felt after interdictions mostly where hull takes up to 5% damage per drop.

 

[schuesseled]

Big ships need crew

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Wear & Tear worries me for long distance exploration...

Don't be. The payoff is much more than the cost, see below. (well, not sure if you decide to use an Anaconda for exploring, but that would probably be a silly idea).

And don't worry about reaching 100% W&T. Devs have stated it only reduces hull strength and perhaps (not sure) a bit of performance. Its not like you blow up when you reach 100%. How do you think people have reached the core?

@OP -

Did any of the developers actually give at least some thought to how wear and tear works?

Not really a good opening to a question is it? What, you think they really didn't put any thought into it? Of course they did. However, they could have got it wrong, or maybe they are perfectly happy with it and its you who just doesn't like it. Hell, you should have seen it back in Gamma. For a week or two the cost of W&T was insane and went up rapidly. Now its quite sane, although i believe the devs have said there is still going to be some tweaking here after owners of larger ships were a bit horrified by the costs.

And just a recommendation for you. In future, when posting an opinion, just remember, there is no need to be insulting to the devs or anyone. Just state what you view as the problem and offer a solution. Its much more likely to get a positive response from the devs.

 

[Devil's Refugee]

Surely this is just like RL ?
Wear and tear on a Ford Fiesta will cost nowhere near the same as a Range Rover or Porsche.
It goes back to the same argument each time, don't fly what you can't afford.
Same goes for cars, buying a nice fancy car is one thing but keeping it on the road is another.

Just you wait till the Federation asks for "Ship Tax". You'll get clamped and towed away if you don't pay it

 

[ciger]

Don't be. The payoff is much more than the cost, see below. (well, not sure if you decide to use an Anaconda for exploring, but that would probably be a silly idea).

And don't worry about reaching 100% W&T. Devs have stated it only reduces hull strength and perhaps (not sure) a bit of performance. Its not like you blow up when you reach 100%. How do you think people have reached the core?

@OP -

Not really a good opening to a question is it? What, you think they really didn't put any thought into it? Of course they did. However, they could have got it wrong, or maybe they are perfectly happy with it and its you who just doesn't like it. Hell, you should have seen it back in Gamma. For a week or two the cost of W&T was insane and went up rapidly. Now its quite sane, although i believe the devs have said there is still going to be some tweaking here after owners of larger ships were a bit horrified by the costs.

And just a recommendation for you. In future, when posting an opinion, just remember, there is no need to be insulting to the devs or anyone. Just state what you view as the problem and offer a solution. Its much more likely to get a positive response from the devs.

I am here since beta, and it is kind of hard not to feel sour as every time I log in to ED i am facing a ton of bugs and illogical decisions, so I am not looking for a positive response here on the forums but rather would like to see the game gets fixed

 

[Pete]

With good reason. I just came back from a 9000 ly trip, earned 1.5 mil and lost 100k to repair W&T.

Erm - do you actually scan anything?
I went on a short trip, only around 1000-1500 Ly out and around 250 systems, and earned over 2.5 Million cr...that you can go 9000 Ly and only earn 1.5 Million cr is surprising unless you are just hopping from system to system doing the big honk, and no further detailed scans?

-- Pete.

 

[beelbeebub]

Did any of the developers actually give at least some thought to how wear and tear works? Flying an Asp I just checked my ship integrity which is @ 25% with repair cost of 1.4M cr. My insurance cost is about 900k cr. Why would I not just self destruct and would want to pay the 1.4M is beyond my comprehension.

I think the OPs point was that the repair cost of the ship was 1.4m whilst the insurance excess was only 900k i.e. why repair when you could do an insurance job and torch your ship!
.

It's a good point.

 

[Lodorenos]

I stopped worrying about wear and tear a long time ago. All it does is bring down your maximum hull strength to 70%. Pop some better shields on your ship or don't even worry about it at all if you only explore/mine/trade.

 

[Quineloe]

So you earned 1.5 million and your over heads were 100k that's like a 1500% return I don't see anything there to worry about, I just had a run in with a nasty anaconda in my ASP collect a 150k bounty and had to pay out over 100k in repairs and ammo.

You were punished for bad fighting performance. Not for simply playing the game.

 

[Hamerstein]

Did any of the developers actually give at least some thought to how wear and tear works? Flying an Asp I just checked my ship integrity which is @ 25% with repair cost of 1.4M cr. My insurance cost is about 900k cr. Why would I not just self destruct and would want to pay the 1.4M is beyond my comprehension.

Without testing it, do you know if the ship you get back from an insurance claim hasn't had it's wear and tear restored? I mean everything else you get back as if you hadn't lost it - including missing ammo if you'd expended some - it's a clone essentially. So logically (as in consistent with the other game mechanisms) you'd still be left with your wear and tear issue even if you "accidentally" set fire to it.

Also bear in mind that your insurance covers (for you) 95% of your cost, your repair bill is all down to you - that also explains the apparent discrepancy between insurance excess and repair cost.

 

[Elan]

They stated that 100% wear and tear would reduce your hull strength by no more than 25%.

Surely logic would dictate that this should not exceed 25% of the total value of your ship?

However seeing as kitted Asps etc could easily exceed 20 million in value I could see how these costs would become more expensive than the rebuy costs.

Looks like some tweaking of the numbers is required? Or at least some clarification on how the current numbers work.

 

[ciger]

I stopped worrying about wear and tear a long time ago. All it does is bring down your maximum hull strength to 70%. Pop some better shields on your ship or don't even worry about it at all if you only explore/mine/trade.

Not sure if this is the case, I have been experiencing a lot more modules malfunctions and higher repair costs all due to damage from interdictions. So for anyone who wants to pew pew the wear and tear seems like a thing to keep in mind actually.

 

[Mike Evans]

Did any of the developers actually give at least some thought to how wear and tear works? Flying an Asp I just checked my ship integrity which is @ 25% with repair cost of 1.4M cr. My insurance cost is about 900k cr. Why would I not just self destruct and would want to pay the 1.4M is beyond my comprehension.

It's a good point that I was sure would crop up eventually. We will look into this but one of the original solutions we did think about before it was too late to add was to not get a fresh ship back from insurance. So your ship would come with wear and tear, possibly the same wear and tear as you left it. Thus at some point you need to maintain your ship or suffer the consequences of lower hull strength and what not. This however is just an idea. It might be a while before this gets the attention it needs and I don't know what the solution might become.

 

[Darkfyre99]

I actually tested this by doing the Hutton Orbital run, after hearing about all these exorberant Wear and Tear costs. After several hours of playing in my courier Cobra, my W&T was usually under a 100 credits. Occasionally, it would creep up to 300, but that would be quite unusual. The Hutton Orbital run, which lasted about an hour and a half IIRC, inflicted 70% W&T damage to my cobra, doing 17,000 credits of damage. Which, coincedentally, is about 70% of my undiscounted insurance deductable.

Which, as an Alpha player, I get a 50% discount on. Since it is a matter of pride that my ship hasn't been destroyed (unless I'm testing something that requires my ship's actual destruction), I repaired the damage rather than self destruct.

It is very obvious to me now that Wear and Tear damage is primarily caused by supercruise travel, and it is accumulated not by time spent in supercruise, but by distance. Which I hope they fix, because it hurts the exploration of multi-star systems, and gives an advantage to those of us who are operating in systems were most destinations are under 500 light seconds. It should be what you do to your ship, like violent maneuvers, entering and leaving Witchspace, and engine boosting, that should stress your ship, not peacefully cruising in one direction. And the damage should be to the components themselves, not some "wear and tear" statistic.

 

[ciger]

Without testing it, do you know if the ship you get back from an insurance claim hasn't had it's wear and tear restored? I mean everything else you get back as if you hadn't lost it - including missing ammo if you'd expended some - it's a clone essentially. So logically (as in consistent with the other game mechanisms) you'd still be left with your wear and tear issue even if you "accidentally" set fire to it.

Also bear in mind that your insurance covers (for you) 95% of your cost, your repair bill is all down to you - that also explains the apparent discrepancy between insurance excess and repair cost.

Haven't tested it yet with this ship but previous ships claimed by insurance came back all clean and shiny. It would not make much sense to claim insurance and your replacement ship would be beat up. Only if insurance cost would scale with your ship's wear and tear level I could somehow see it as valid mechanics.