I’ve already said this before but this is where coins being a reward from missions comes in…
with a weekly or monthly cap…
that way the tax wouldn’t matter then and you can stop with this inflation bs… that is nothing more than a theory and can’t be proven since the idea hasn’t been tried…
And you accuse me of going off topic on discussions…
Stick to crossout, not other games…
then we should declare our taxes revenues and we don’t… the IRS will nerf we all
Coins for missions isn’t a great idea. If you look at old mud and mmorp game economics they flood their economy with money constantly and tend to lack ways to remove said cash from the game. This over time just breaks their game economies as the value of goods drop vs their accumulation in the game. One of the few good things about crossout is the market/crafting system and it’s attempt of reducing items from the game over time. i.e. it’s constantly reducing quanities so that items for the most part retain value unless players decided the items don’t have value anymore.
The tax plays into this reduction too it’s similar to the fuel you burn when making a product it’s a non-refundable expense. We could however without changing the rate, change how we do the deduction. We could split it 50/50 between the buyer and seller. So the buyer wouldn’t have as much of a free pass and crafter/seller gets a bit more of a break.
Something similar to coins per missions that I wouldn’t mind adding in is just the random chance of getting a little extra reward. i.e. you find 3 fuel and 2 electronics or any other resource as you dig through the wreckage of the battle. I don’t think a small percentage chance of an extra reward would break the market. As it’s random it just encourages players to play another match rather than being attached to any particular game action.
Honestly I’m not free from blame on going off topic, I placed the post here as I couldn’t decided between which posts to mention it on as taxes came up in a few. It’s at least game economics in a semi-related portion. i.e. interaction of real life cash and in-game market issues.
Going back to the original point I can’t blame them for trying. I don’t like it myself and am glad players are talking about resisting that attempt too. It reminds me a little of the Athena workpiece issue where people were irritated about it using pack items. They never ran that again but maybe they just didn’t learn enough from that experience.
I know I would complain less about this if all of these cust and rare workpiece blueprints were added to the badge exchange. I made that point on my post already though too.
So basically you are saying, taxing people will save the economy from inflation?, while the people taxing us to death keep printing money wich causes inflation?, sounds like a no win situation to me for the tax payers, and a double win win situation for the tax collectors
2 Likes
I thought about answering this 3 times over the past couple of days.
The tax isn’t the only thing removing stuff from the game. You don’t seem to understand that this is regularly done to maintain the health of the market. It might be annoying and could be costly but the game consistently pushes in resources that dwindle at a rate dependent on usage, this is done while currency is exchanged for coin and reduced via taxes.
If you really didn’t do this body of coins and resources would keep going up. This is one of the reasons most of the silo’s don’t work out well. Badges is the only silo I’ve seen kind of work outside of the base resources and the expansions to get it divided between raids. patrol, other missions and brawls.
It leans into some of the other problems we have with the other silo’s, they didn’t pull enough out of circulation to remain viable. Instead of fixing it right they just cut us off from it and now we have weapons and items we can’t craft even though the token goods are still in the game. This is fixable but it has to be integrated at the same deduction rates as the other working silo’s. Do you really not get the market?
I think this is fixable but if we don’t figure out some type of exchange rate draw down it’s just going to persist in the background until they do. I’m not trying or stating this to harsh to them but I’d would look at some of the legal stuff and just be like ok we honored some of our video pledges and sweet talk enough.
I honestly don’t know what to tell you as most things seem like they won’t do that. I try to poke for realistic stuff though. A hard sell would let us just remove upgrades like CK’s that would save us some money and let us move some residual items.
1 Like
you should see on reddit the amount of people who were saying theyd drop close to 100 dollars on that new stupid autocannon blueprint. dude, they can have it.
Don’t hold people to what you think is expendable.
I was using your ingame tax example to talk about tax in the real world 
That doesn’t work in practice, the games in general are simplified for economics and the logic is adjusted for the output values in the game normally. There is strange Fed top end level tax stuff they can adjust but it’s not the same. If you see a reduction via production means it’s a game tax.
In game mechanics items that drop or are given as rewards have to really over compromise their own silo growth rates. This rate reduction has to be found in craft able or usable consuable items.
In the end it doesn’t matter what i say, you’ll always try to override it with a ridiculious comment that very few to none seem to agree with.
If you wish for the game to be further ruined, go ahead
I play EvE online which has a real marketing system and although theres a tax
the currency can be accumilated by means that don’t include real money purchases…
And the market still works fine!!!
Im only playing crossout when a few real life friends are on and that’s very rare anyway…
i mean money is put back into the game via the subscription but its not very… fast… you get i think 55 coins per day. 15 for logging in and 40 for doing 2 missions i believe.
i mean thats still not a good way to have coins coming back into the game… relying on a subscription based thing to trickle some coins back into the game seems so dumb.
55 x 365 = 20,075
so if you do buy the subscription you get 20k coins per year looks like. still youd have to play every single day which some people cant do…
1 Like
The problem is how 20k isn’t too much today, i remember back in 2020 you could get a CW build for like 4k. Nowadays some meta 10k BfU / CC builds can cost more than 50k (like cust. elephant builds) and you’ll need everything fused anyways.
And even then it’s spread out over a year, by the time you save up for something, another metaslave part comes out so it’s pointless. With a one-time payout of 20k you could at least make a meta build and farm BfU’s for a few months until your setup gets nerfed
Eve has a good economic model though and is years more developed than what we have here in crossout. One of the reasons your market functions even with gold being generated in game is because the game also functionally removes currency from the game. Think of all the stuff that you pay for in game like: Replacing permanent losses from pvp and missions, repairs, skill and tech trees… All of that helps maintain the markets health over longer periods of time. This also functionally reduces the gross income from taking on a mission and leaves the player with the net income after they reduce the cost of preforming the mission.
We do not have the functionality to make an analog of that type of system here. The closest thing we have to that is maybe the new badge system but as we can’t trade badges on the market it doesn’t quite match up. However the badge system would probably collapse if you could sell them on the market right now. A fairway to think about it is how much does a badge go for in resources vs currency. Since we can sell resources for existing gold it’s like an extra step to get gold.
We could change how tax is experienced it wouldn’t be hard to change it to 50/50 between buyer and seller. It would still be a 10% tax which is the same as in eve but who gets taxed changes.
On Xbox the only system that has a really funky market free players earn around 5.5k per year just logging in. They are the only odd market within the 3 we can monitor. Sure PlayStation has 3 times more sales but I’m not sure how that actually reflects on the market outside of trying to do div3 on some of the prices. Both market prices are still off from PC after that but that might be the player number count for supply and demand.
That doesn’t matter, the expensive parts are basically supply side shortages which increases prices regardless of inflated markets. This basically increases the disparity in what is affordable between the new player and the player that is a year in by a lot even if it is frivolous purchases. The game suffers from this a lot but it’s expressly bad on the xbox. (I actually have a sprinter pack on there but don’t play on there just happened to see it free one day.)
I don’t really want to see the game trashed. I like it, and it’s my fall back that I play if something doesn’t distract me more. I actually agree with both you and @Zarrurer that it’s both possible and stupid to have the currency production mostly handled via purchases. The closest we actually got was the rust and dust repair function test.
That will change play behavior though as we never had to repair gear before and it is kind of annoying to have to drop back into the garage after each match. That could just be my opinion or my synopsis on reading comments but most players are use to going click go to next battle. As we are shorted on build spaces that might mean you need even more of them to cover repairs.
@Zarrurer once mentioned we have to be more aware of the grind as I thought multilayer upgrading was a good cost sink for recourses. He said that would make it cost more i.e. requiring more game time to finish a build. He is correct the idea would just delay that end point, The stabs to remove upgrades is a fail on the backs of the devs. I remember telling him it’s an adjustable price point. We could though keep the upgrades as a tech tree. This could be a cost sink across a rarity/weapon sub-type.
If we wanted to transition to a game economy more like eve we would have to fundamentally change how we use blueprints in the garage. Much like the rust and dust mode they tried you’d have a repair function but you should be able to recycle the entire build, and then on top of that you would have to be able to pay a material cost to produce a vehicle to play in via your earned resources. So look at the cost of the build in total and for each one of these I produce to play with I need x amount of each resource.
Most of the games are designed for players to age out as all the early coders were cis students coding for projects for other cis students. Early gamers are the remnants that enjoyed it much like the classical games.
I wish the dev’s would be more open about how much IRL currency it takes to run the servers. @HammeredByNature The prices of your market in in Eve far exceed ours in monetization means you have packs closing in on 200$ USD. Really look at their store: https://store.eveonline.com/ They monetize much of the game. I’m surprised you even try to compare the two.
I don’t even mind if the economics of the game changes but it has to look at each step to make sure it doesn’t fail more than it already has.
I’d like all these workpieces i.e OP to go up as badge and general rotating brawl rewards in game. Similarly with the cabs as they removed the unique label from their descriptions on the actual old sales pages they use to put up. As they are no longer unique they no longer have to be pack items. I don’t mind they still sell them as packs but they should be on the market too.
I think their biggest worry is no one will pay for them if you can earn them for free in game which isn’t true, I once just bought a pack for a crafting item that was in short supply. It doesn’t cut it off it just effects the frequency of the sale. That is a mental game economics issue I don’t know how to fix for them even though I think a purchase would still happen if the player wants immediate parts.
The game needs the extra functionality to allow for such things. We could also look at direct trading everything. Like instead of gold how much scrap copper, wires, plastic would you want for it? Those resources still has a gold equivalency to it no matter of how we trade it… Everything you own in game that is tradable is a gold bank. They just have a simplified market which requires conversion first. Being able to request any part for any transaction would be more like how this game world would probably function if it was real.
Sub note - I wouldn’t mind if we sold temp upgrades for items either by the way. One of the big issues is that players that can’t afford to upgrade to lose more. We can fix that easy with temp upgrades.
I do firmly think anything in the game if it is sold should be able to be crafted in game.
The edits are just typos and double types that could I could remove.
1 Like
I compared EvE and Crossout because one is successful and the other is not and yeh Eve does sell expensive pack bundles to but then again EvE is a far bigger game with so many options available,
Where as the most exciting thing you can do on crossout is build a leviathan that can only be controlled in GW’s… and only 1 member of each team can use theirs…
And deploying them in invasion is almost worthless as your lucky if your leviathan even gets chosen for 1 match.
Although Eve has been around longer than Crossout, the Targem Developers have had plenty of time to sort the market and it’s had long enough to develop economically so dont give me that BS!
The Solution is very simple… add a coin reward system in matches with a limited cap whether its weekly or monthly…
I said the Tax should be massivly reduced while generating coin only comes from Real money purchases, not gotten rid of it all together so please stop the lectures on marketing
1 Like
there is sending it off into invasions but… thats not exciting.
i want to do more with my leviathan, there is literally 0 reason to even make one because even if you send it out into battle for invasions your not guaranteed to get anything. you can go 24 hours and get nothing.
i mean im kind of glad they added it to clan wars to give them some meaning but it sure wasnt alot of meaning.
2 Likes
You can set up a custom battle using nothing but leviathans. You can even add bots, using their own leviathans.
that doesnt get you any rewards though, its just for fun with no payout.
i dont know anyone who plays custom battles either, to alot of people they are just pointless and not worth it.
2 Likes
My concern is well founded if established players have a larger coin base to play with it and it results in higher market prices, that will make it harder for new players to start. This also means they would have to raise the amounts of coin given in packs or it degrades their value to players there as well. That’s a cyclical problem. No one wants to pay the same for less value.
I’m going to break the block quote down a bit more from here, I do get the point is that you want to earn more gold though:
And
Glad we agree on the portion it would have to be limited. That still doesn’t give coin overflow an exit point in the game other than tax and seriously 10% is not that bad. (When people sell stuff on amazon digital press they take 70% from each product sold as commission fees. Sucks a lot but it’s common for those fees to be high.) 10% I think for games is often standard as it just makes calculations really easy as it’s a decimal place move if you do the math in your head when thinking about it. Cutting that in half would require the extra div2 for 5%. It makes it harder for players to calculate in their heads also.
Few ideas for coin sinks:
Let players buy with gold temporary time limited upgrades for non-upgraded items. These would be the same figures as the God tier upgrades they offer in the upgrade events. Not every user will buy these but the more competitive players probably will and it would help with removing some of the P2W imbalances that everyone hates. It would be fair cheaper for a player that wants to just see what an upgrade does for a item too. At the same time it would remove some of the extra currency coming into the game if offered coin based rewards are in the game.
Car Wash Tokens - Earn your mudding while playing, costs a small amount of coins to wash it off. Pretty much just paying to get Ivy’s crew to wash your car. You can wash it yourself but it takes a time cycle. Simple mechanic just to pull extra coins of the market and keep nominal prices the same. Silly idea but would be just about as much fun as a hot wheels carwash they could probably even get a corporate sponsor from it if they inquired about it right. Could even be a garage-yard item.
Closer to Eve - Instead of just instantly driving out and around your garage spot blueprint, you have to produce the vehicle at a gold cost (outside of test drives). Once played you could repair or recycle it provided it’s not a total loss. This I think players would complain about this as they are use to cycling battle to battle really fast. Outside of rust and dust alt universe there isn’t this type of function in the game. I hope they collected good player data from that mode though.
These types of ideas should be spread out across play styles, so that not everyone has to use all of them and there are ways to save more gold via the missions rewards you want.
Our game was built around crowdfunding development for a continual beta game and it works just for that type of development. I would agree with you on that they should transition out of that type of model but it still leaves the issue of how they move out of that type of model with the important condition that it doesn’t make the situation worse.
I’m sorry but they have not spent their development time on the economics portion of the game. I agree it’s boring to do econ lessons. Look at the ever slightly more fun portion of ideas I gave for currency siphons and come up with some of your own or make some changes to the ones I gave. What type of missions do you think would be good for it? I want to hear about those just as much as other as both have to function to do a systematic change like that. There is no easy way out if we are to convince the dev to make the change over.
I wouldn’t mind more ways to play with them too or at least watch how they do via a visual representation of battle log. Like have you ever put yourself into the spectator mode and let the bots fight and just watch a fully simulated battle from the 3d flyby mode they have?
1 Like
It’s so disappointing that they never went anywhere with this aspect of the game. I guess they added them to CW, but that’s not something I’m interested in.
I think it would be great if every once in a while each team got a single player controlled leviathan.
How do we do this?
I am very curious what their player data showed about that experiment. I loved playing it, but most on the forum seemed to hate it for reasons I struggled to understand.
I would have liked it more if they expanded it to include the whole Crossout universe of factions, but I definitely enjoyed the mad max vibes.
I know I am disappointed too, I have two of mine out in the garage for target practice but other than stopping around in the yard with them there is hardly anything to do with them. I most just use them to kill the garage visitors if I want to act like Mecha-Hamster (kind of like Mecha-Godzilla) Fun to piolit but have little practical usage plus the controls are horrible. I would much rather be able to label on the Levi which guns are AI commanded and which ones are manual.
I put it in a subtopic look at link added it as a subtopic for how it use to work. I have to file a bug report on it though. Looks like they broke it. I’ll deal with that tomorrow.
I would make it easier to explain stuff if they were more transparent but I do get that comes with risks for buisnesses too.
I think that could because unless your at the top of a match much of the time, a player that wants to stay in their current build is just trying to get to the next match for their next chance to maybe get there at the top. After so many years of playing it’s kind of like hit that next battle button too.
So anything between that and the next battle, seems off even if it probably shouldn’t though. Normally when I stop it’s just to look at current challenges to see how fast I can finish them this time around meaning daily or weeklies.
Some of this could be poor explanations from their communications department. I’m not involved with their project outside of general playing and asking for help when needed. Just the communication aspect can have a major impacts though, I know they have to translate for us. I might have been more willing to take part in that experiment if they said with a technical mind: Hello players we would like to test some functionality again and are going to run a test that gets us from this spot to another using this method. We had originally planned on using like this (what ever it was). I would have thought about it more and with how often they give up ideas I just didn’t want to waste my time.
Testing like this is a place where I think gold rewards are appropriate with less restrictions If we are going to keep using it as a premium currency and I do think they should do more live testing like that but it has to be clearer stated with the Devs objectives so the Devs can speculate if playing player participates or not against the later polling results. It probably got better player participation than the test server normally does regardless just from the crate offerings. As a stratagem this would allow players to earn gold via the beta testing in a fairway that people could appreciate later. It needs to be labeled as a test though and not be presented as an event. If they did in-game testing rewards like this clearly marked xbox and playstation could take part rather than just being random commentors on the test survey questions too. It’s like participation in a focus marketing group then.