Why Frontier are wrong to keep nerfing high credit earning methods.

[Zer0cool]

As the person that pretty much kicked off the weekend Gold Rush by posting and sharing the Skimmer mission videos with Down to Earth Astronomy, Yamiks and Mini, I'd like to put my point across.

Before we start, let’s make a clear distinction between good credit making method and exploit.

Exploit is abusing game mechanics by forcing the game to do something or act in a way that it would not normally through normal play.

Good making method is the game working as the devs designed it, which may not be the way they intended it, but that's their problem and why they have PAID QA Testers.

Now we've got that out the way let’s looks at some facts.

Unlike games like Grand Theft Auto and many others, the base currency cannot be bought with real world cash. So players earning large amount of credits is not costing Frontier additional sales.

I would be interested to see as a result of the weekend Gold Rush, how many players got there first Anaconda or Python, and then went on to buy ship kits and paint packs. I'd say it's a fair assumption that this weekend’s Gold Rush made money for Frontier.

Some may argue that by allowing players to afford end game ships will cause them to lose interest in the game.

I don't think this is the case. To quote Obsidian Ant, "for many the game only truly begins when they get the ship they want and everything leading up to that is a grind". Over 100,000 follow him so it’s fair to say he has his finger on the pulse of the community.

In addition to the above, one of the biggest complaints since day one has been Combat Logging. So let’s ask ourselves why do people combat log?

The answer is way too many reasons to list, but one clear issue is rebuy and or loss of earnings.

Under the current economy is apparent that players are flying without rebuy, or with such low funds that the rebuy would wipe out too much progress. As a result they will easily combat log, or not play in open at all.

Can you imagine if players had enough credits for 4 or 5 rebuy's, they'd be more inclined to stay in open and less inclined to log at the first sign of trouble.

So to sum up, should players be instant billionaires, NO, clearly not. But should players be able to sensibly earn the credits required to buy and build the ships in game, YES and the recent gold rushes prove the game does not currently allow them to do this.

Just food for thought.

CMRD Shin_Akuma007

 

[Barking_Mad]

To quote Obsidian Ant, "for many the game only truly begins when they get the ship they want and everything leading up to that is a grind". Over 100,000 follow him so it’s fair to say he has his finger on the pulse of the community.

No, Ant is listening to a vocal minority who don't actually want to play Elite. They want a different game entirely.

 

[Roybe]

No, Ant is listening to a vocal minority who don't actually want to play Elite. They want a different game entirely.

I disagree...Ant's contention is that credits are 'enablers', basically, a wall that has to be climbed to play content that interests you. The problem is that the cost of loss is to high relative to the cost of replacement.

If you are flying a small ship...that has a cost of 300k to replace...and it takes 5 hours to replace that 300k..why bother putting yourself at that risk...even if you would enjoy that given content...particularly when learning some content is guaranteed to be a failure the first few times you do it (of course you could go watch a video about the puzzle and learn it that way...but then...where is the fun in that, particularly for those that would enjoy figuring out the puzzle themselves).

For many, the credit cost is out of balance..so anytime they see a low risk way to make a pocketful...they will always do the 'thing' of the hour...and the imbalance also means that there are many people that will keep looking for ways to increase their credits/hour to be able to 'play their way', constantly creating new 'things'.

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

I disagree...Ant's contention is that credits are 'enablers', basically, a wall that has to be climbed to play content that interests you. The problem is that the cost of loss is to high relative to the cost of replacement.

If you are flying a small ship...that has a cost of 300k to replace...and it takes 5 hours to replace that 300k..why bother putting yourself at that risk...even if you would enjoy that given content...particularly when learning some content is guaranteed to be a failure the first few times you do it (of course you could go watch a video about the puzzle and learn it that way...but then...where is the fun in that, particularly for those that would enjoy figuring out the puzzle themselves).

For many, the credit cost is out of balance..so anytime they see a low risk way to make a pocketful...they will always do the 'thing' of the hour...and the imbalance also means that there are many people that will keep looking for ways to increase their credits/hour to be able to 'play their way', constantly creating new 'things'.

Not to mention people have to farm all the materials now and have little time to earn credits at the same time. Players can't tear themselves in parts to get all of it done. And it's actually worse for long-time players, because they have a couple of ships to tend to.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

As the person that pretty much kicked off the weekend Gold Rush by posting and sharing the Skimmer mission videos with Down to Earth Astronomy, Yamiks and Mini, I'd like to put my point across.

Before we start, let’s make a clear distinction between good credit making method and exploit.

Exploit is abusing game mechanics by forcing the game to do something or act in a way that it would not normally through normal play.

Good making method is the game working as the devs designed it, which may not be the way they intended it, but that's their problem and why they have PAID QA Testers.

Now we've got that out the way let’s looks at some facts.

Unlike games like Grand Theft Auto and many others, the base currency cannot be bought with real world cash. So players earning large amount of credits is not costing Frontier additional sales.

I would be interested to see as a result of the weekend Gold Rush, how many players got there first Anaconda or Python, and then went on to buy ship kits and paint packs. I'd say it's a fair assumption that this weekend’s Gold Rush made money for Frontier.

Some may argue that by allowing players to afford end game ships will cause them to lose interest in the game.

I don't think this is the case. To quote Obsidian Ant, "for many the game only truly begins when they get the ship they want and everything leading up to that is a grind". Over 100,000 follow him so it’s fair to say he has his finger on the pulse of the community.

In addition to the above, one of the biggest complaints since day one has been Combat Logging. So let’s ask ourselves why do people combat log?

The answer is way too many reasons to list, but one clear issue is rebuy and or loss of earnings.

Under the current economy is apparent that players are flying without rebuy, or with such low funds that the rebuy would wipe out too much progress. As a result they will easily combat log, or not play in open at all.

Can you imagine if players had enough credits for 4 or 5 rebuy's, they'd be more inclined to stay in open and less inclined to log at the first sign of trouble.

So to sum up, should players be instant billionaires, NO, clearly not. But should players be able to sensibly earn the credits required to buy and build the ships in game, YES and the recent gold rushes prove the game does not currently allow them to do this.

Just food for thought.

CMRD Shin_Akuma007

I thought it was a bug which has been removed so they can fix it.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

I don't think this is the case. To quote Obsidian Ant, "for many the game only truly begins when they get the ship they want and everything leading up to that is a grind". Over 100,000 follow him so it’s fair to say he has his finger on the pulse of the community.

But issue is - that's their choice to do so. It is their approach. And they suffer for it.

I disagree...Ant's contention is that credits are 'enablers', basically, a wall that has to be climbed to play content that interests you.

Thus are breaks of open world game. You can't pick and choose. You take it whole. Otherwise what's the point it is one game.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

There's a vast difference between the gameplay styles of disposable ships vs. ship loss being a significant setback.

That pretty much defines one of the major divides in the player base.

 

[JohnRoberts]

So to sum up, should players be instant billionaires, NO, clearly not. But should players be able to sensibly earn the credits required to buy and build the ships in game, YES and the recent gold rushes prove the game does not currently allow them to do this.

You've offered no proof of that at all. The skimmers gold rush just shows that its human nature to look for the most efficient, least risk strategy for collecting resources.

And I'd be very cautious about declaring anyone knows what players want. This game is being played in very diverse ways, but its clear there are at least two broad camps - those for whom earning the ships is the game, and those for whom having the ships is the game.

 

[Zer0cool]

There's a vast difference between the gameplay styles of disposable ships vs. ship loss being a significant setback.

That pretty much defines one of the major divides in the player base.

That's a fair point, I personally wouldn't like to have so many credits that being killed was not a threat, but on the flip side having so few I dare not venture in to Open play is not great either.

I ran a live stream a few weeks ago for open play fun, a player group named Kill on Sight showed up and killed me 4 or 5 times, and at 31 million per death, it put a dent in my bank balance, but luckily not so much it put me off playing in open.

I only have so many credits due to Quince and Smeaton, without them my stream and everyone in it would have ended at death number 1 and that's not great for game longevity.

 

[zombieapocalypse]

The problem with posts like this, is there are no hard facts to back up the assertions. Not that I'm totally disagreeing, but we simply don't have any figures on what the majority of players want or dislike, or even how they play the game or why they choose to play the game the way they do. Even consensus opinion on these forums cannot be assumed to represent that of the player base as a whole. Ergo, it's just all speculation, extrapolation, and armchair psychology.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

You've offered no proof of that at all. The skimmers gold rush just shows that its human nature to look for the most efficient, least risk strategy for collecting resources.

And I'd be very cautious about declaring anyone knows what players want. This game is being played in very diverse ways, but its clear there are at least two broad camps - those for whom earning the ships is the game, and those for whom having the ships is the game.

Well said on everything. I think 'exploit gold rush' is just human nature. It doesn't say anything. Of course there's tons of people who doesn't find ED playing fully fun but they still want to trash it out with ships. For them this is issue.

 

[Vorxian]

Before we start, let’s make a clear distinction between good credit making method and exploit.

Exploit is abusing game mechanics by forcing the game to do something or act in a way that it would not normally through normal play.

Good making method is the game working as the devs designed it, which may not be the way they intended it, but that's their problem and why they have PAID QA Testers.

It's a great place to start. Is this then a communal agreement to dictate what is, and what is not OK?

Exploit: abusing game mechanics.
Good run: the game providing an opportunity to take advantage of, even if someone screwed up somewhere, and that is the paid QA dept issue not ours?

What if, you're not exploiting anything.. not mode switching, not encouraging the game to do anything it's not supposed to... but making enough credits to buy a Cutter, and A rate it every 15 minutes?

Just trying to gauge the line.. By definition, this is totally legal and as no exploits are taking place, it's perfectly ok to roll with..

 

[CMDR Ofan]

No, Ant is listening to a vocal minority who don't actually want to play Elite. They want a different game entirely.

Sadly true.
Buy a game with an established philosophy on time-to-progression then complain it needs changing into a different game, with a different philosophy.
At least in his most recent vid he partially accepted the fault might be with community perception, but then went on to completely not address it. It's fine for people to want to play a different game, it's questionable for them to demand that ED be converted into that game. FD already have a history of making things super easy enough as it is.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

As the person that pretty much kicked off the weekend Gold Rush by posting and sharing the Skimmer mission videos with Down to Earth Astronomy, Yamiks and Mini, I'd like to put my point across.

Before we start, let’s make a clear distinction between good credit making method and exploit.

Exploit is abusing game mechanics by forcing the game to do something or act in a way that it would not normally through normal play.

Good making method is the game working as the devs designed it, which may not be the way they intended it, but that's their problem and why they have PAID QA Testers.

Now we've got that out the way let’s looks at some facts.

Unlike games like Grand Theft Auto and many others, the base currency cannot be bought with real world cash. So players earning large amount of credits is not costing Frontier additional sales.

I would be interested to see as a result of the weekend Gold Rush, how many players got there first Anaconda or Python, and then went on to buy ship kits and paint packs. I'd say it's a fair assumption that this weekend’s Gold Rush made money for Frontier.

Some may argue that by allowing players to afford end game ships will cause them to lose interest in the game.

I don't think this is the case. To quote Obsidian Ant, "for many the game only truly begins when they get the ship they want and everything leading up to that is a grind". Over 100,000 follow him so it’s fair to say he has his finger on the pulse of the community.

In addition to the above, one of the biggest complaints since day one has been Combat Logging. So let’s ask ourselves why do people combat log?

The answer is way too many reasons to list, but one clear issue is rebuy and or loss of earnings.

Under the current economy is apparent that players are flying without rebuy, or with such low funds that the rebuy would wipe out too much progress. As a result they will easily combat log, or not play in open at all.

Can you imagine if players had enough credits for 4 or 5 rebuy's, they'd be more inclined to stay in open and less inclined to log at the first sign of trouble.

So to sum up, should players be instant billionaires, NO, clearly not. But should players be able to sensibly earn the credits required to buy and build the ships in game, YES and the recent gold rushes prove the game does not currently allow them to do this.

Just food for thought.

CMRD Shin_Akuma007

I missed out completely on the latest Skimmer escapades. I was off in some remote corner of nowhere studying Guardian Technology.
Prior to the launch of 2.4 and the multi-billion credit Passenger missions, I was out some 6k Light years transporting a passenger for 30m.
During the Dire Toilet Paper Shortage in Rhea, I was out tracking down INRA bases and scouting Thargoid space.
I've never beaten my Smeaton, and I've only passed through Quince once on my way to somewhere else.

And I own some 54 ships, all fully spec'ed the way I want them, all G5 engineered (Legacy), and stationed around the galaxy in places most useful to me.

There are PLENTY of good credit making methods that do not involve any of these kinds of activities. Many of them can be accomplished without ever firing a single shot. Have I ever shot skimmers? Sure, when I was Harmless/Mostly Harmless, because skimmers are Harmless/Mostly Harmless themselves. I think it took me all of two encounters to figure out how to hit them so they couldn't return fire.

I've even taken on a few Goliaths, because they're actually kind of tough from an SRV - at least Competent.

BUT.. I don't entirely disagree either here. There should be regular "hot spots" where something is in much higher demand than normal. Trade goods selling for 1/4 of their regular price out of some remote system. An unusually high demand for some rare commodity paying out 4x it's normal value. A Planetary Facility under ground siege by a seemingly endless wave of skimmers-gone-rogue. A mining "hot-spot" brimming with pirates in dire need of a wash where both spawn rates and bounties are up by a factor of three. A new "must see" spot for tourists to visit, or some grand convention event "Everybody" is attending (The Galactic Oscars with better viewership), a new Rand-McNally Cartographic Center opening pays a higher-than-average rate for cartographic data, or a budding new black market in dire need of sources paying above-market prices for anything they can get their hands on...

In short a "Gold Rush" for people to participate in, perhaps lasting a span of 3 days, like Boom states on performance enhancers. But these don't show up on the Galaxy Map, they don't have a gold-star marker like a CG. They just 'happen', and then they're over. It's good for everyone that way - credit chasers have credits to chase, profiteers have profits to make, ships sell, store-stuff sells, and in 3 days time this cultural phenomenon has moved on to the Latest Greatest Thing, making people have to vacate to some other location, engage in some other activity, in some other place. People don't get burned out doing the same thing, or have a cause to try something new. And with no way of knowing where or when this sort of thing will trigger, it's constantly fresh.

 

[Roybe]

But issue is - that's their choice to do so. It is their approach. And they suffer for it.



Thus are breaks of open world game. You can't pick and choose. You take it whole. Otherwise what's the point it is one game.

There is a better balance to the problem. Not wanting to admit there is a problem is only going to hurt the playerbase...and the game itself in the long run.

When I have 10 hours a day to play...I can agree. But, these costs kept me out of the game for 5 months...and almost bankrupted me as I came back and tried to play what I wanted.

 

[Zer0cool]

It's a great place to start. Is this then a communal agreement to dictate what is, and what is not OK?

Exploit: abusing game mechanics.
Good run: the game providing an opportunity to take advantage of, even if someone screwed up somewhere, and that is the paid QA dept issue not ours?

What if, you're not exploiting anything.. not mode switching, not encouraging the game to do anything it's not supposed to... but making enough credits to buy a Cutter, and A rate it every 15 minutes?

Just trying to gauge the line.. By definition, this is totally legal and as no exploits are taking place, it's perfectly ok to roll with..

I don't think we need community agreement to define what is and is not an exploit. The definitions are pretty clear and long established.

Yes, if normal game play allows you to earn just a few or trillions of credits, its not an exploit. The game is performing as designed. It's up to the developer to ensure that game is performing as they intended.

An exploit such as the grade 1 to grade 5 engineer rolling glitch is a true exploit as you are forcing the game to do something it was never designed to do by taking advantage of the time lag between screens updating.

As for opinions on how people enjoying playing, that is impossible to tell. My take on it is if 100,000 people choose to subscribe to your channel, then you are likely to be saying things they agree with or enjoy. Not everyone of course, but many.

 

[Pyrotiger]

Some really thought provoking posts here, from various viewpoints. I can't rep so hope there's lots flying about. Makes a nice change to some of the mud-flinging threads from yesterday. o7

 

[ITZC0ATL]

I missed out completely on the latest Skimmer escapades. I was off in some remote corner of nowhere studying Guardian Technology.
Prior to the launch of 2.4 and the multi-billion credit Passenger missions, I was out some 6k Light years transporting a passenger for 30m.
During the Dire Toilet Paper Shortage in Rhea, I was out tracking down INRA bases and scouting Thargoid space.
I've never beaten my Smeaton, and I've only passed through Quince once on my way to somewhere else.

And I own some 54 ships, all fully spec'ed the way I want them, all G5 engineered (Legacy), and stationed around the galaxy in places most useful to me.

There are PLENTY of good credit making methods that do not involve any of these kinds of activities. Many of them can be accomplished without ever firing a single shot. Have I ever shot skimmers? Sure, when I was Harmless/Mostly Harmless, because skimmers are Harmless/Mostly Harmless themselves. I think it took me all of two encounters to figure out how to hit them so they couldn't return fire.

I've even taken on a few Goliaths, because they're actually kind of tough from an SRV - at least Competent.

BUT.. I don't entirely disagree either here. There should be regular "hot spots" where something is in much higher demand than normal. Trade goods selling for 1/4 of their regular price out of some remote system. An unusually high demand for some rare commodity paying out 4x it's normal value. A Planetary Facility under ground siege by a seemingly endless wave of skimmers-gone-rogue. A mining "hot-spot" brimming with pirates in dire need of a wash where both spawn rates and bounties are up by a factor of three. A new "must see" spot for tourists to visit, or some grand convention event "Everybody" is attending (The Galactic Oscars with better viewership), a new Rand-McNally Cartographic Center opening pays a higher-than-average rate for cartographic data, or a budding new black market in dire need of sources paying above-market prices for anything they can get their hands on...

In short a "Gold Rush" for people to participate in, perhaps lasting a span of 3 days, like Boom states on performance enhancers. But these don't show up on the Galaxy Map, they don't have a gold-star marker like a CG. They just 'happen', and then they're over. It's good for everyone that way - credit chasers have credits to chase, profiteers have profits to make, ships sell, store-stuff sells, and in 3 days time this cultural phenomenon has moved on to the Latest Greatest Thing, making people have to vacate to some other location, engage in some other activity, in some other place. People don't get burned out doing the same thing, or have a cause to try something new. And with no way of knowing where or when this sort of thing will trigger, it's constantly fresh.

Very well said.

I think as it stands, we already kind of have that. Every now and then a gold rush appears and those that need credits can go and earn them. But you still need to learn how to play the game financially the rest of the time because you can never count on when a gold rush will pop up or when it will close. 20m CR/hr normally, 100m CR/hr for gold rushes.

Come to think of it, why would FDev even need to balance income earning when the bugs already (kind of) provide balance and content?

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Sadly true.
Buy a game with an established philosophy on time-to-progression then complain it needs changing into a different game, with a different philosophy.
At least in his most recent vid he partially accepted the fault might be with community perception, but then went on to completely not address it. It's fine for people to want to play a different game, it's questionable for them to demand that ED be converted into that game. FD already have a history of making things super easy enough as it is.

I like Obsidian Ant, I think he is great presenter and overall excellent human being (at least it feels like that).

Said that, he has a bit vested interest not to go against active parts of online community. He is not exactly journalist, nor I demand for him to do so. This however means he will avoid put any blame on players themselves. This is painfully visible in some videos where he tries to slide between blaming FD and putting some responsibility upon shoulders of players themselves - it never ends well and his forum section always remind him that he is dependant on them.

And I don't blame him for that. We all do what we have to do. Just it is important perspective to remember.

 

[Vorxian]

Everyone plays for their own kicks and enjoyment. Heck, some folk think it's fun to kick the balls on a charity event for a cancer patient. Some play to roam out, find epic fire fights, and live life on the edge. Some min / max ships to go out and hunt defenseless traders, some people find their fun throwing missiles through the letter box, some players find their fun exploring out in the void... each time, the player has a self defined reward based on how successful they are. Disrupting a charity event, they find fame and notoriety by all the fall out. Folks ganking traders get rewarded by extracting salt on the forum... ALL LEGAL in various forms.

I find enjoyment, flying out into space and finding quirky mismatches in commodity prices... my reward is not salt, public outcry, it's not about clicks on social media, it's measured in credits.

Out of all the examples above, how then, can ultimate credit machines banging out the mega money be so taboo ? I'm not talking about Quince or Skimmers. I'm talking about where you're able to load a cutter up with ....stuff...... and offload it at a buyer smoking some kind of weed, or elite form of cocaine... I'm just a trader, if someone wants to buy poo for 3,000,000 credits a unit, i'm not going to argue, i'll sell it to 'em.