Discovery Gaming Community

Full Version: Improving money-sink (Sci-Data)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
As Durandal and others mentioned, scidata isn't a pure money sink, but a money sink for some and a huge money source for those who are able to get it in events.

There are several ways to make the scidata reward gear money sinks (just sell it for very high prices at conn). Although overall, I think gear as well as commodities could use some tweaking:

Step 1: Reduce every single price in the game (ships, gear, commodities, ore) by a factor 4, to beat the 1.8 billion char value bug

Step 2: Reduce commodity and ore prices again by a factor of 2 (commodities cheaper than 8 credits will jsut become more expensive compared to the rest), to make credit progress less fast. Missions need to be rebalanced a bit anyway, but thats another topic

Step 3: create additional gear items which are a little better than existing items, but much more expensive. The performance/price ratio should be low enough so that people who have many chars don't get easily get the best stuff on every char (as it currently is for most vets), but only for their favorite chars. Gear items should have between 2 (for example guns) or 3 (for example armor) categories. For armor, it should be balanced so class 1 armor is very cheap but a substantial upgrade (like doubling hitpoints) so noob can upgrade their ship early on without saving for the best one with a boring grind. Class 2 should be the standard for vets (about a factor 2.3 or 2.4) , and class 3 (factor 2.5) should be that much more expensive that vets wouldnt want to use it on all chars. Similar balancing philosophies for guns/thrusters/scanners. All in all, there should be a "this is my best ship" feeling for favorite characters, instead of a "just another throw-away ship I only used to go around ZOI restrictions and engagement permissions)". To reduce workload for devs, most "elite" guns should be generic and not faction base and sold in few locations.

Step 4: More and heavier credits fines for sanctions, and shorter bans.

(07-25-2018, 06:34 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: [ -> ]
Can't we just replace the PvP Death Penalty of forced off-hours with cash loss upon death? Something like 1% of total ship and equipment cost (except ammo, you lose it either way), how about that?

That would enable players to do more harm to other players than they already can (like with bases), which would result in having the community even more at each others throats.
(07-25-2018, 07:11 AM)Karlotta Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-25-2018, 06:34 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: [ -> ]
Can't we just replace the PvP Death Penalty of forced off-hours with cash loss upon death? Something like 1% of total ship and equipment cost (except ammo, you lose it either way), how about that?

That would enable players to do more harm to other players than they already can (like with bases), which would result in having the community even more at each others throats.

Only if those other players let those players do that harm. PvP is still a thing already, that wouldn't change, and a cash penalty of 1% of ship and equipment costs would be nowhere as significant as losing a PoB. On the other hand it would sooner or later force players to trade. Like a true money sink. Not a big one but still more than what we have now.
(07-25-2018, 07:11 AM)Karlotta Wrote: [ -> ]As Durandal and others mentioned, scidata isn't a pure money sink, but a money sink for some and a huge money source for those who are able to get it in events.

There are several ways to make the scidata reward gear money sinks (just sell it for very high prices at conn). Although overall, I think gear as well as commodities could use some tweaking:

Step 1: Reduce every single price in the game (ships, gear, commodities, ore) by a factor 4, to beat the 1.8 billion char value bug

Step 2: Reduce commodity and ore prices again by a factor of 2 (commodities cheaper than 8 credits will jsut become more expensive compared to the rest), to make credit progress less fast. Missions need to be rebalanced a bit anyway, but thats another topic

Step 3: create additional gear items which are a little better than existing items, but much more expensive. The performance/price ratio should be low enough so that people who have many chars don't get easily get the best stuff on every char (as it currently is for most vets), but only for their favorite chars. Gear items should have between 2 (for example guns) or 3 (for example armor) categories. For armor, it should be balanced so class 1 armor is very cheap but a substantial upgrade (like doubling hitpoints) so noob can upgrade their ship early on without saving for the best one with a boring grind. Class 2 should be the standard for vets (about a factor 2.3 or 2.4) , and class 3 (factor 2.5) should be that much more expensive that vets wouldnt want to use it on all chars. Similar balancing philosophies for guns/thrusters/scanners. All in all, there should be a "this is my best ship" feeling for favorite characters, instead of a "just another throw-away ship I only used to go around ZOI restrictions and engagement permissions)". To reduce workload for devs, most "elite" guns should be generic and not faction base and sold in few locations.

Step 4: More and heavier credits fines for sanctions, and shorter bans.

(07-25-2018, 06:34 AM)Thyrzul Wrote: [ -> ]
Can't we just replace the PvP Death Penalty of forced off-hours with cash loss upon death? Something like 1% of total ship and equipment cost (except ammo, you lose it either way), how about that?

That would enable players to do more harm to other players than they already can (like with bases), which would result in having the community even more at each others throats.

+1. More customisations and gear would be nice to have. Disco would also need lower prices as right now it's pure stupidity (looking at you, <ORE>). The rebalance you're suggesting is interesting.
The only situation where sci data is a moneysink is when it's traded for non-permanent items such as NEMPs, CAU X, Jumpdrive generator parts, etc. Anything else can be sold later at a price to regain money or even directly regain sci data. In order to make it a full moneysink, the solution is simple:

Make sci data rewards untradeable by locking the ship that gets the reward permanently. No unmounting or transfering to another ship as well as no selling the ship to other players. That'd mean once you buy a gun, it's over. That money is never coming back, you traded it for something that has no worth on the market which is exactly the definition of a moneysink.
Making something unsellable is rather harsch, especially when it's so hard to get, and so hard to test or correctly assess the performance prior to owning it like some of the weapons rewards.


p.s:
It looks like 2 posts disappeared from this thread. Was there a forum hickup or something?
^ nope , just power of editing.
We had Midnight Runner selling it for like 6 or 7 millions per piece. Since it was admin POB, the money was removed from economy at higher rate than buying it from people who got it from events, as in latter case, it's just changing hands.

Easy solution is to bring it back and sell at X% above street value, so that it is easy to obtain on demand and yet be actual money sink.
When I bought 100 SciData from the Runner, I bought them for 4mil per unit.
Might be that the prices for SciData was around two millions per piece back then.
(11-28-2016, 10:47 AM)Skorak Wrote: [ -> ]The amount of Data flooded into the server environment per month highly depends on the existing amount of the commodity circulating ingame as well as the active reward holders.
Pages: 1 2 3