Would it be a good idea to change the way Wing Missions are paid?

[Stealthie]

Must admit, I'm not entirely familiar with how mission payments are since 3.0 so this is just based on my limited observations, but still....

At the moment it seems like "Python missions" are where it's at; 15 minutes to haul 180t of a commodity to an orbital platform for Cr5m or more.
Big-ship missions can't match Python missions either on a Cr/hr or a Cr/tonne basis.

Wing missions aren't even in the same league. I've seen Wing missions that pay Cr2m to haul 4,600t of a commodity.
That's fifty times less than a decent Python mission is paying, on a Cr/tonne basis.


So, would it not be better if Wing missions actually just paid the "full value" of the mission to the person who accepted the mission and then put an extra step in the payment routine so the payment could be distributed among the Wing?

So, for example, you might be offered Cr40m to haul 4,000t of cargo (still a rate of pay only 1/3rd of what you get for Python missions) and then, upon completion, you'd have the choice of either taking all the Credits yourself or dividing them up among wing members?

I guess the only ways this could be "abused" would be, firstly, to keep all the payment yourself and rip-off your Wingmates or, secondly, to hand over all the payment to a Wingmate - perhaps as a means of getting a newbie started.

In the former case, it might even create some gameplay if somebody tried to rip-off their partners in a Wing mission.
In the latter, if anybody wants to go to the effort of hauling 4,000t of cargo and then give away all the payment to a newbie, good luck to them.

And, for all the people who want to solo Wing missions, it'd finally make them worthwhile.


Personally, I don't think there should actually BE any such thing as a "Wing mission".
I think there should just be the option to split the payment for ANY mission among members of a Wing.
Take on a massacre mission, Wing-up with somebody and split the payment.
Somebody lends a hand during an Assassination mission, Wing-up and split the payments.

If the game just offered some kind of "split payment between Wing members" option automatically whenever you hand-in ANY mission (only when you're actually IN a Wing, obviously) it'd be more straightforward and it'd allow the bulk-cargo missions to be paid at a more sensible level and work more organically.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Generally, I think Wing Missions should have a value and that value is the same regardless of how many commanders do it.
That value should be scaled in a similar way to solo missions of the same type - rank, distance, SC distance, etc.

However, I do think the Wing does need control of how the rewards get distributed.
These could be appropriate options when handing in the mission or a global Function setting for your wing that applies to wing missions you take - your wingmates might have different settings that apply to the missions they take.

- Even split - the reward is divided equally between all wingmates - suitable when all members perform the same role.
- % split - potentially a controllable set of sliders that you can use to control who gets what - may be more suitable when wingmates perform different roles, e.g. haulage with escorts.
- By quantity - suitable for bulk haulage/massacre wing missions - splits the reward based on who did what.

 

[Stealthie]

However, I do think the Wing does need control of how the rewards get distributed....

See, I'm not sure about this...

If you Wing-up and go into, say, a CZ or go hunting 'goids, there's nothing to prevent a Wingmate from backstabbing you.
It's just up to you to make sure you're working with people you can trust.

I think it might be more interesting if the same thing applied to splitting the payments for missions too.
Hook up with some randomer and you might get ripped-off - which might lead to you looking for revenge.
Conversely, there'd also be opportunities for CMDRs to farm rep' and become Allied in profitable systems and then gain a reputation as a trustworthy "Wing Leader" who people could hook up with and get a fair slice of well-paid missions.

Fundamentally, though, the main thing is that they need to get rid of the whole "payment/4" thing and just pay Wing missions what they should actually be worth - so you get the full payment for doing them alone or a sum that reflects your contribution and the amount of players in the Wing.

And, once they change the payment system to be more flexible, there's no real reason why the same thing couldn't be applied to every mission.

*EDIT*

I see Yamiks just made a video on pretty-much exactly the same subject, with most of the same suggestions. [up]

 

[Shiro Akai]

Patch on a patch while patching patch.... Way too many changes put one on top of another when we need clean system.

Taking OP's Python, 180t and 5M as an example.

5M / 180t = 27.7k per t

With above math 4k t cargo should pay:
4,000 * 27.7k = 110.8M

4k t in a 728t Cutter is 6 runs and would spend 2 hrs doing it alone
4k t in a 180t Python is 23 runs and would spend 7 hrs doing it alone

Assuming 1 run can be done in 20 minutes (10 min delivery time, another 10 min to return for next part):
- Cutter owner would earn 50M/h
- Python owner would earn ~16M/h

Wing payment is split in accordance to cargo delivered (Python and Cutter in Wing, 5 runs):
- Cutter hauled 3100t (77.5%)
- Python hauled 900t (22.5 %)

110.8M is split:
- 85.87M for a Cutter
- 24.98M for a Python

Say, what's wrong with above? Apart from earning level being way above (supposed) FDEVs limit of 10M/h?

 

[Aashenfox]

I'm not in favour of party leaders (ala WoW model) deciding distribution of rewards. It causes enough problems amongst teams of friends, let alone strangers.

I basically agree with you Stealthie, but let me put it in my own words...

What I think should be the case is that the rewards are much higher for wing missions and that award is simply split among participants. Let;s do a logic check for all scenarios...

'Python' mission as you call them. 6m for 180t of superconductors in one jump. That's about the best I've seen in 3.0 so far, but I haven't been very far yet, and that does not include 'special' missions like Palin's meta-alloy hauling.

The first modifier of the wing mission value should be destination pad size, with destinations with medium pads paying MUCH MORE because these have to be done in pythons and there will be MANY more trips for the whole wing.

The next modifier of payout COULD be the value of the goods (though I really feel only hazardous or high risk cargo (diamonds, explosives, weapons, anything illegal) should be counted as higher value than non hazardous goods). I don't see why I get more to ship 120t of silver over 120t of biowaste, for example, and nor would DHL today.

The next modifier should be distance in light years from the mission giver to the destination

The next modifier should be distance in LS from entry point of the destination system

The next modifier should be if planetary or surface base, with surface bases paying a little higher.

The last and most important modifier should be the legality of the goods in the destination system. I took a mission to source and return personal weapons to Sol. I had no idea they would be illegal in the jurisdiction in such a cut-throat galaxy, and the missoin giver gave me NO indication that this was a smuggling job (no illegal text) and the pay didn't reflect that either.

Right, back to the feasibility study of reward dstribution...

So, let's say we arrive at a value of 38m for a mission from Daedalus in Sol to one of the 100kls distant bodies in Mildeptu (close in ly, far in ls) of 4000 biowaste. Let's say it's a large pad mission, so I can assemble a wing of T9s that can defend themselves and simultaneously haul 540t each. That's 8 trips to fulfil the requirement, or two trips each. So in this case, the slpit is going to be 38m 4 ways, almost 10m each for TWO trips each, compared to 6m for 1 trip for a single player. I'd say that almost sounds balanced.

Now let's look at the single player doing it on his own, he's going to have to make all 8 trips himself and deserves the full reward.

Feasibility study passed. As a general rule, it would seem reasonable that under 'average' circumstances, wing delivery missions to large pads should pay about 10m per 1000t and the reward should be split between all wing members. Wing deliveries to medium pads should pay about 2.5 times more to reflect the cargo hold size difference, OR the amounts of goods to be delivered to outposts should be 2.5 times less.

Anyone see anything I missed?

 

[MadDogMurdock]

See, I'm not sure about this...

If you Wing-up and go into, say, a CZ or go hunting 'goids, there's nothing to prevent a Wingmate from backstabbing you.
It's just up to you to make sure you're working with people you can trust.

I think it might be more interesting if the same thing applied to splitting the payments for missions too.
Hook up with some randomer and you might get ripped-off - which might lead to you looking for revenge.
Conversely, there'd also be opportunities for CMDRs to farm rep' and become Allied in profitable systems and then gain a reputation as a trustworthy "Wing Leader" who people could hook up with and get a fair slice of well-paid missions.

Fundamentally, though, the main thing is that they need to get rid of the whole "payment/4" thing and just pay Wing missions what they should actually be worth - so you get the full payment for doing them alone or a sum that reflects your contribution and the amount of players in the Wing.

And, once they change the payment system to be more flexible, there's no real reason why the same thing couldn't be applied to every mission.

*EDIT*

I see Yamiks just made a video on pretty-much exactly the same subject, with most of the same suggestions. [up]

A Wing Mission is taken and shared by 1 player - I'm saying that player should have control of the split terms.
Perhaps the rest of the wing can have a Refuse / Accept option based on the terms.
Once Accepted, it can't be changed.

Backstabbing is emergent gameplay, no?

Agreed on the rest - there shouldn't be separate Wing Missions at all, just Missions that can all be shared.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

I'm not in favour of party leaders (ala WoW model) deciding distribution of rewards. It causes enough problems amongst teams of friends, let alone strangers.

I basically agree with you Stealthie, but let me put it in my own words...

What I think should be the case is that the rewards are much higher for wing missions and that award is simply split among participants. Let;s do a logic check for all scenarios...

'Python' mission as you call them. 6m for 180t of superconductors in one jump. That's about the best I've seen in 3.0 so far, but I haven't been very far yet, and that does not include 'special' missions like Palin's meta-alloy hauling.

The first modifier of the wing mission value should be destination pad size, with destinations with medium pads paying MUCH MORE because these have to be done in pythons and there will be MANY more trips for the whole wing.

The next modifier of payout COULD be the value of the goods (though I really feel only hazardous or high risk cargo (diamonds, explosives, weapons, anything illegal) should be counted as higher value than non hazardous goods). I don't see why I get more to ship 120t of silver over 120t of biowaste, for example, and nor would DHL today.

The next modifier should be distance in light years from the mission giver to the destination

The next modifier should be distance in LS from entry point of the destination system

The next modifier should be if planetary or surface base, with surface bases paying a little higher.

The last and most important modifier should be the legality of the goods in the destination system. I took a mission to source and return personal weapons to Sol. I had no idea they would be illegal in the jurisdiction in such a cut-throat galaxy, and the missoin giver gave me NO indication that this was a smuggling job (no illegal text) and the pay didn't reflect that either.

Right, back to the feasibility study of reward dstribution...

So, let's say we arrive at a value of 38m for a mission from Daedalus in Sol to one of the 100kls distant bodies in Mildeptu (close in ly, far in ls) of 4000 biowaste. Let's say it's a large pad mission, so I can assemble a wing of T9s that can defend themselves and simultaneously haul 540t each. That's 8 trips to fulfil the requirement, or two trips each. So in this case, the slpit is going to be 38m 4 ways, almost 10m each for TWO trips each, compared to 6m for 1 trip for a single player. I'd say that almost sounds balanced.

Now let's look at the single player doing it on his own, he's going to have to make all 8 trips himself and deserves the full reward.

Feasibility study passed. As a general rule, it would seem reasonable that under 'average' circumstances, wing delivery missions to large pads should pay about 10m per 1000t and the reward should be split between all wing members. Wing deliveries to medium pads should pay about 2.5 times more to reflect the cargo hold size difference, OR the amounts of goods to be delivered to outposts should be 2.5 times less.

Anyone see anything I missed?

As regards your 4 T9s scenario. Revisit the scenario with 2 T9s and 2 T7s all hauling, or perhaps 2 T9s hauling and 2 Vultures providing escort.
Allowing players to set the terms means that FD don't have to write a whole bunch of code to cater for all the potential scenarios.

 

[Majic-12]

I think distributing the reward based on participation makes the most sense.

Kill more stuff, haul more freight, get more goodies.

And I agree with the suggestion that the rewards be comparable with solo missions, just more of everything to appeal to multiple players, with efficiencies over solo missions for good teamwork.

 

[Aashenfox]

As regards your 4 T9s scenario. Revisit the scenario with 2 T9s and 2 T7s all hauling, or perhaps 2 T9s hauling and 2 Vultures providing escort.
Allowing players to set the terms means that FD don't have to write a whole bunch of code to cater for all the potential scenarios.

Agreed, and I think both those scenarios would pass my feasibility evaluation too. The T9s if they have escorts can be shieldless, so can haul more, it works nicely.

 

[SpaceScania]

The wing missions looked exciting at first, but they are not a useful way to make a living for solo CMDR’s with a large ship. I’d be fine with that if Frontier would throw us a bone and make the solo missions bigger and better. If Frontier would just add 200-700t missions that took advantage of ships like the Type-9 and Cutter I think a lot of people would really appreciate that and be very very happy.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

The wing missions looked exciting at first, but they are not a useful way to make a living for solo CMDR’s with a large ship. I’d be fine with that if Frontier would throw us a bone and make the solo missions bigger and better. If Frontier would just add 200-700t missions that took advantage of ships like the Type-9 and Cutter I think a lot of people would really appreciate that and be very very happy.

Or, maybe you know just have Hauling Missions, that range from 1T up to 10kT.
Let the player decide if they want to do it with friends.
And if the haul is bigger than the ship you decide to use, apply the depot feature.

Most of these balancing problems are down to FD thinking too narrowly and implementing multiple versions of the same thing.
Let the game mechanics do the work, and let player agency do the rest.

 

[LP Garnell]

No matter the trade mission, my floor is 4k credit per ton profit (and no, not imp slaves). Can do that all day long just by hauling from point A to B, without regard to faction status. Far too many of the current wing missions are in the 800-1100 credit per ton range. Which means I'd have to round up 3 wingmates just to hit 4k per ton.

And that's if everyone gets paid the full amount. Much less any distrubution scheme based on amount actually delivered. Why bother?

They need to wind the clock back to 3.0 and just leave things alone. When, for the first time in my 18 month ED existence, there was a reason for trading as wingmates. Even if you didn't know them before, it was fostering a sense of a trading community for the first time. Even if it wasn't "fair"? I don't care; it was my choice to do or not do.

 

[tomalus]

Its scaled to favour 4man wings,but I wish wing missions would not spawn on solo boards.So when I play solo I dont get 33% of all missions wing delivery (6000t)

 

[Stealthie]

Taking OP's Python, 180t and 5M as an example.

5M / 180t = 27.7k per t

With above math 4k t cargo should pay:
4,000 * 27.7k = 110.8M

4k t in a 728t Cutter is 6 runs and would spend 2 hrs doing it alone
4k t in a 180t Python is 23 runs and would spend 7 hrs doing it alone

Assuming 1 run can be done in 20 minutes (10 min delivery time, another 10 min to return for next part):
- Cutter owner would earn 50M/h
- Python owner would earn ~16M/h

Yep, that does present a glaring anomaly in the payments... which is why it's probably wise to consider missions in terms of Cr/hr as well as Cr/tonne.

A Solo Python Mission might pay Cr27k per tonne but it also has you earning around Cr20m/hr (4 x Cr5m missions per hour).

I'd suggest that the payments for Wing Missions should probably be based on Cr/hr rather than Cr/tonne.

Let's say we've got a mission to haul 4,000t of stuff over a 1-jump distance (similar to a best-case Python Mission).
4 players, all flying T9s or Cutters, are going to have to make more than 1 run to complete that mission, so we have to round it up to 2 runs.
That means those 4 players are probably going to take half an hour to complete the mission.
That, in turn, means they should each earn around 10m as their share of the Mission so they can do two of those missions per hour and be earning the same Cr20m/hr as Python Missions provide.

So, the Wing Mission should pay roughly Cr40m.

And, by the same token, if a player decides to solo that mission, they're going to spend almost 2 hours doing it in a Cutter or T9 so the payout would somewhere near the same Cr20m/hr rate.


The overall point being, if FDev really WANT to encourage people to participate in Wing Missions, the payouts for them really need to be a little bit higher than Solo Missions - not much, much, much, lower.
If they're not, smart people will always prefer to opt for a series of Solo Missions instead.

Again, for me the fundamental thing is to make the "Pay Wing Members" component of the payment system apply to ALL missions.
Once you do that, you can get rid of "Wing Missions" entirely, and simply replace them with regular missions which may, or may not, be completed by Wings and provide people with roughly the same rates of hourly income.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Yep, that does present a glaring anomaly in the payments... which is why it's probably wise to consider missions in terms of Cr/hr as well as Cr/tonne.

A Solo Python Mission might pay Cr27k per tonne but it also has you earning around Cr20m/hr (4 x Cr5m missions per hour).

I'd suggest that the payments for Wing Missions should probably be based on Cr/hr rather than Cr/tonne.

Let's say we've got a mission to haul 4,000t of stuff over a 1-jump distance (similar to a best-case Python Mission).
4 players, all flying T9s or Cutters, are going to have to make more than 1 run to complete that mission, so we have to round it up to 2 runs.
That means those 4 players are probably going to take half an hour to complete the mission.
That, in turn, means they should each earn around 10m as their share of the Mission so they can do two of those missions per hour and be earning the same Cr20m/hr as Python Missions provide.

So, the Wing Mission should pay roughly Cr40m.

And, by the same token, if a player decides to solo that mission, they're going to spend almost 2 hours doing it in a Cutter or T9 so the payout would somewhere near the same Cr20m/hr rate.


The overall point being, if FDev really WANT to encourage people to participate in Wing Missions, the payouts for them really need to be a little bit higher than Solo Missions - not much, much, much, lower.
If they're not, smart people will always prefer to opt for a series of Solo Missions instead.

Again, for me the fundamental thing is to make the "Pay Wing Members" component of the payment system apply to ALL missions.
Once you do that, you can get rid of "Wing Missions" entirely, and simply replace them with regular missions which may, or may not, be completed by Wings and provide people with roughly the same rates of hourly income.

Except there are no solo Python missions, but for a quirk of FD's outfitting and ship size design decisions.

 

[Vedmo]

In regards to the math post: On paper yes, but there are other variables. Mainly landing pad size. In some areas medium landing pads will make it far more profitable to use a Python, and I don't see that as a problem in need of a fix.

There are also stations that offer enough missions to large landing pad destinations to make the Python no match for a Cutter or Type-9 in efficiency.

As far as the wing missions, I see where people are coming from on it, but you really have to multiple the reward by 3 if you want to make a comparison. They aren't solo missions, they are wing missions, and pay as such. If I'm running an A-B route on missions in a large ship, a wing mission is a great way to fill the hull when the solo missions won't, adding a bit of a bonus to what I was already doing.

I wouldn't complain though if the pay was restructured for solo appeal.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Must admit, I'm not entirely familiar with how mission payments are since 3.0 so this is just based on my limited observations, but still....

At the moment it seems like "Python missions" are where it's at; 15 minutes to haul 180t of a commodity to an orbital platform for Cr5m or more.
Big-ship missions can't match Python missions either on a Cr/hr or a Cr/tonne basis.

Wing missions aren't even in the same league. I've seen Wing missions that pay Cr2m to haul 4,600t of a commodity.
That's fifty times less than a decent Python mission is paying, on a Cr/tonne basis.


So, would it not be better if Wing missions actually just paid the "full value" of the mission to the person who accepted the mission and then put an extra step in the payment routine so the payment could be distributed among the Wing?

So, for example, you might be offered Cr40m to haul 4,000t of cargo (still a rate of pay only 1/3rd of what you get for Python missions) and then, upon completion, you'd have the choice of either taking all the Credits yourself or dividing them up among wing members?

I guess the only ways this could be "abused" would be, firstly, to keep all the payment yourself and rip-off your Wingmates or, secondly, to hand over all the payment to a Wingmate - perhaps as a means of getting a newbie started.

In the former case, it might even create some gameplay if somebody tried to rip-off their partners in a Wing mission.
In the latter, if anybody wants to go to the effort of hauling 4,000t of cargo and then give away all the payment to a newbie, good luck to them.

And, for all the people who want to solo Wing missions, it'd finally make them worthwhile.


Personally, I don't think there should actually BE any such thing as a "Wing mission".
I think there should just be the option to split the payment for ANY mission among members of a Wing.
Take on a massacre mission, Wing-up with somebody and split the payment.
Somebody lends a hand during an Assassination mission, Wing-up and split the payments.

If the game just offered some kind of "split payment between Wing members" option automatically whenever you hand-in ANY mission (only when you're actually IN a Wing, obviously) it'd be more straightforward and it'd allow the bulk-cargo missions to be paid at a more sensible level and work more organically.

Yep I agree. Maybe have some time related bonuses. But yeah it should be a share of the rewards and make all missions shareable.

 

[master_xean]

Wing missions must pay each player more than solo missions or else there's no incentive to do them its human nature 101.

 

[MrFailfactory]

I think Frontier went about this the wrong way - there should just be: Missions.

If you are in Solo Mode or not in a Wing, then the Missions present themselves as they have been. No sweat, no changes.

If you are in a Wing, you get the option to run the Mission (nearly any Mission) as the Wing. It determines your Wing size, and inflates the requirements and rewards accordingly, then you (all) choose whether or not to accept it. Equivalent participation is required to get your share, and each member of the Wing gets their (50%, 33%, or 25%) share upon completion. No one gets more than those payout percentages, regardless of how much they carried someone.

If they had set it up this way, they wouldn't have to worry about abuse or even balance (since you can neither completely carry someone nor redistribute the payout), and as such, they could inflate the payouts to something that would be considered worthwhile, or even lucrative. Personally, I would say they should lean towards lucrative - that whole incentivizing people to play together, and all that.

Sorry loners (me, by the way) and Solo-only players; you should never have had any reasonable expectation of being able to do these Missions for large profits per time spent by yourself, and I think Frontier should put the kibosh on it sooner, rather than later. I would also advise Frontier to make an attempt to prevent Wing-botting, though that might be a tall order.

I suppose, if anyone wanted to take on the joy of managing 4 Commanders at once to "solo" these, well...have fun with that, I guess.

Just my own quick thoughts - if someone sees big holes in this, I would be happy to see them pointed out and discussed. I really think this would be cleaner, simpler, and better than the current implementation.

Riôt