Why is ship pricing such an issue?

[Vhaegrant]

From a game design angle, controlling the pricing more separately from the chassis parameters allows easier changes to the values at a strategic level to reflect the changing situation on the ground, despite there not being any ground in space. A harder value system tied more closely to the ship mechanics would be less accepting of the latest changes in pricing, which again have much less to do with the "actual" value of the ships and more to do with letting pew-gaming actually have some lovin.

I should be clear at this point that I do not have an issue with the price certain ships have been dropped down to.
The point I was raising was the value should be based on a hard calculation that makes it fair across the board.
The 'loving' the combat players feel they are getting is going to be offset when they realise they still have to fork out a small fortune for decent weapons, powerplants, shields, etc... to make their ship perform as well as they want it to.
The only advantage I can see is that some players will get to improve their ship as they use it, rather than feeling a need to accumulate enough credits so they can upgrade to A rating as soon as they get it.
To be clear I wouldn't drop 19 million on a ship and take it out with stock modules... I still wouldn't at 5 million, but the 14 million I'd saved is going to go a long way to putting those modules upto A rating

 

[TankMaster]

From what i've read others say, the Vulture's new price now better reflects the cost of outfitting it...has anyone compared this?, do the module class it supports fit with the old 20mil price?, or does it support Asp sized modules or smaller?, because if so then 20mil was far too much to ask for it given the potential of the ship.

For 20mil i expect at least 1 or 2 class 7 compartments, instead, i see (according to ED Shipyard), a class 4 FSD (cobra sized), class 4 power plant (again, cobra sized), a smaller fuel tank than the cobra, one less internal compartment than the cobra and of those, two are class 1 compared to the cobra which doesn't have any class 1 compartments and 1 class 5 compartment...

So let me get this straight, do people really expect 20mil just for 2 class 3 weapons and 2 extra utility slots compared to the cobra?, i do not think class 5 thrusters, a class 5 power distributor and a class 5 internal compartment warrant such price, specially when the Asp, at 6.6mil, out classes the vulture in nearly every equipment slot and, at a total of 6 weapons, might do more damage than a vulture, or very nearly as much.

So yeah, i think the reduced price does justice to the ship...think about it, the Asp is a better ship, it's like what the cobra is to the viper, so i'd expect it to be more expensive than the Vulture.

Disclosure: haven't flown the thing yet as i am 10k ly from civilized space at the moment.

 

[Goilveig]

If price is meant to reflect balance surely each component should have a weighted value associated with it. If these values were applied it would give the 'balanced' cost of a ship.

There's a number of different "formulas".

The module cost estimates actually put the ships close to their current prices. Much of the reason the prices were so shocking was that they were the only ships whose hulls were significantly more expensive than the cost of upgrades.

From a purely economical point of view, the ideal way to price a ship would be by the earning potential the ship gives you. A ship in which you can earn money 10x faster is valued 10x higher, for example.

Another point of view would be to look at how well the ship can perform in various roles. Versatile ships (those that can support many playstyles) would be more valuable than ships dedicated to a single role, because of the greater number of options.

It's not really as simple as looking purely at modules or hardpoints and crunching numbers.

 

[Cmdr Thrudd]

No problem with the proposition at all.
The more powerful an item is the more expensive it is the longer it takes to get.
It's core to understanding the profit that should be returned from professions and so the rate at which a player can improve their ship.

I think you're thinking about the game too much in relation to money. This may be how most games work but really why is that other than something we've grown to expect from games?
I can go out and buy a £10 mouse or a £100 mouse. Does the £100 mouse perform 10x better than the £10 mouse, no. It's better, maybe more accurate and more buttons but not that much better. Ships in Elite are sort of the same. They fill roles and the price is really not important. It only seems important when you've not got enough money to get one. Once you do you start picking them purely based on how well they perform the role not on how much it costs.

 

[Connatic]

IMO the pricing itself was not an issue. Profession income & scaling was. Problem is instead of upping income & provides better scaling, they up income and lower the combat ship price. Fixing income and scaling instead of mucking with prices would have been better & FD would not have to redo their whole future ship meta because of the current combat ships now have a distorted price & performance (vs. their original plan)

Their original plan wasn't perfect. Seeing how the FDL is performing, it seems very similar to the Python in lethality. I think it's very appropriate they are similar in price now. I thought it was silliy to add an extra 50mil to the cost for role-playing luxury reasons. The vulture as well, although I would have stayed between 7-10mil, but it's still good.

 

[Midgardsormr]

"You don't see the whole. The parts are crap, but you put 'em together, you got a Firefly."

 

[Tarman]

From what i've read others say, the Vulture's new price now better reflects the cost of outfitting it...has anyone compared this?, do the module class it supports fit with the old 20mil price?, or does it support Asp sized modules or smaller?, because if so then 20mil was far too much to ask for it given the potential of the ship.

For 20mil i expect at least 1 or 2 class 7 compartments, instead, i see (according to ED Shipyard), a class 4 FSD (cobra sized), class 4 power plant (again, cobra sized), a smaller fuel tank than the cobra, one less internal compartment than the cobra and of those, two are class 1 compared to the cobra which doesn't have any class 1 compartments and 1 class 5 compartment...

So let me get this straight, do people really expect 20mil just for 2 class 3 weapons and 2 extra utility slots compared to the cobra?, i do not think class 5 thrusters, a class 5 power distributor and a class 5 internal compartment warrant such price, specially when the Asp, at 6.6mil, out classes the vulture in nearly every equipment slot and, at a total of 6 weapons, might do more damage than a vulture, or very nearly as much.

So yeah, i think the reduced price does justice to the ship...think about it, the Asp is a better ship, it's like what the cobra is to the viper, so i'd expect it to be more expensive than the Vulture.

Disclosure: haven't flown the thing yet as i am 10k ly from civilized space at the moment.

Vulture is the Viper writ large as far as outfitting. It'll cost you to get a really rocking fit, but you can't just fill it with A-spec and bomb out of the toaster. There's quite a bit of shopwork involved to make something that you can be happy with inside such a tight power restriction but there are a number of really successful builds of them already. Off paper and into the black, the ship handles beautifully, very responsive for what looks like an ungainly bird.

Compared to the ASP, Vulture will eat it in many fights of comparable piloting, with its very high agility letting it make the most of the available loadouts, but the ASP can just go do ten other things that the Vulture simply isn't suited for. ASP has waaaay more utility. A combat pilot could ASP up, but Vulturing your trade route is less productive.

 

[waimser]

IMO the pricing itself was not an issue. Profession income & scaling was. Problem is instead of upping income & provides better scaling, they up income and lower the combat ship price. Fixing income and scaling instead of mucking with prices would have been better & FD would not have to redo their whole future ship meta because of the current combat ships now have a distorted price & performance (vs. their original plan)

This exactly. The pricing was not the issue at all.
By caving to the vocal minority as someone else put very accurately, they have made it very hard for themselves to keep balance in the future without majorly messing with the pricing and upgrade mechanic.
Leaving the ships at the price they were and simply balancing the incomes and maintinence price would have made much better sense and allowed for ease of future balancing. Now everything they do will have to be balanced around these two new toys which are magnitudes more powerful than thier price suggests.
The fact that they then went overboard and changed the income of combat to an insane degree as well makes no sense whatsoever. It really does make it look like they are making it up as they go along.

Making everything worse is, as a result of these changes, the more fun profession is now almost as profitable as the supposed boring trading so the majority of players will now flock to it. This leaves the game in a state where 95% of people are doing nothing but PvE because there will be no traders for the pirates, hence no pirates for the hunters.

If FD keep caving to the whiners on this forum, who I wish to point out, make up maybe 1-2% of the player base, then this game will be a dead, forgotten wasteland very soon. They need to bite the bullet and return everything to its previous state, then start making balance changes in small increments. This is the only way to save the game IMO.

 

[Vhaegrant]

I think you're thinking about the game too much in relation to money. This may be how most games work but really why is that other than something we've grown to expect from games?
I can go out and buy a £10 mouse or a £100 mouse. Does the £100 mouse perform 10x better than the £10 mouse, no. It's better, maybe more accurate and more buttons but not that much better. Ships in Elite are sort of the same. They fill roles and the price is really not important. It only seems important when you've not got enough money to get one. Once you do you start picking them purely based on how well they perform the role not on how much it costs.

Of course money is important. In the original Elite it was considered the 'Score', of course in those days with only one ship available it was a lot easier
.
If you are seeking to address any sort of in game balance you have to establish some frame of reference, and the easiest frame of reference in this case is money (or credits as it is in game balance).
This is the issue when blurring the lines between simulation and game, certain compromises need to be made.
Games need a sense of balance and progression, a pure simulation doesn't.

 

[Connatic]

Nice dramatic doomsaying to get what you want. Don't pretend PvP piracy/hunting was profitable or even working before these changes.

In no way is the FDL with 100mil. Vulture may have went a few mil too low but it's still pretty fair. They are certainly not magnitudes more powerful than their listed price.

 

[Patagon]

Prices in this game refer to amount of play-hours to get the credits. The problem is that the only career that generates enough Crs/Hr to get big ships in a reasonable amount of time is trading. It all depends on how many hours you put, not skills, just time. Go in SOLO and trade all you want. This is not my idea of fun, so I'm stuck with a Cobra and a bounty hunting / exploring. (I can't put more than 10 hs a week also)

 

[Macgyver]

I think FD just caved in to a vocal minority who wanted new shiny toys now without getting their hands dirty trading.

they did it so new customers would buy the game...and rightly so, best thing that's been done so far.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I think FD just caved in to a vocal minority who wanted new shiny toys now without getting their hands dirty trading.

they did it so new customers would buy the game...and rightly so, best thing that's been done so far.

 

[Faded Glory]

I think this issue is blown out of all proportion. They discounted three ships, albeit by quite a margin. Big deal. This is a game, for having fun, not really even for winning, as it's meant to be an open ended sandbox. I played with both the FDL and the Vulture in the 1.2 beta, and to my surprise, liked the Vulture a lot more than the FDL. When it came out at 20 million, I resigned myself to grinding for a couple of weeks (that's right, I don't have a 1.5 million per hour trade route, and nor do I want one) so I could buy one and have fun. I was very happy when they reduced the price, and surprised it was by so much, but I've gone ahead and bought one, and have had a blast flying it around today. So well done FD, you've let me have fun in your game.

People seem intent on complaining whatever FD do, and I guess that's just life. The Vulture is still a pricey ship, I've spent 11 million so far, and it is good for combat / bounty hunting only. It also has power limitations, just as the Viper does, but it's great fun to fly. The other changes that FD made to bounties being more rewarding are far more important to the game, and I think in a good way. They have just opened it up to let people have fun doing whatever it is they want, and still be able to progress and not forced everyone to grind for credits.

 

[Yank31]

Why bother about long term equilibrium with the pricing? Surely it will be time to cut rebuy cost by 200 on a late tuesday patch, when enough people will cry on the the social network situation demands it. We believe rebuy cost should not be penalizing to commanders, therefore expect a slight rebalance shortly.

Here's some templates :

We now firmly believe in what you just asked on the social network. Game will immediately be changed accordingly, you know how we treat this sort of things. Tomorrow is another day. (Try to still) Fly safe, commanders.

Template for community response :

Bravo FD! This change is fine. We asked and we received. Why are people complaining all the time? lol

[XXX] is still too expensive though. I don't want to use the ingame mechanism to earn money, I don't like it. I have 5 dogs and 2 jobs. My cousin owns a Rift. I play [YYY] minutes on some week-ends. Anyways, [XXX] has quickly become my only reason to play this game, and I can't have it. Looks like I have no option but to quit. Best regards,