Ship Rental Prices - Evocati Leak

rpmcmurphy

An idea of how much ship rental currently costs

Full discussion about the prices here https://old.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/d7e1ae/star_citizen_37_ship_rentals_kiosk_ui_and_prices/

For perspective, the prices are like hiring something like a Honda Accord for one day and it costing $4500.

===

Edit: Prices have been halved (1.25% for 30 days is 37.5%, was 75%)

So now a ship like the Prospector will cost 772,875 UEC for 30 days.

MaxBacon

EDIT: This thread is no longer relevant in just 2 days from the first implementation the system it was already drastically rebalanced:

• Updated ship rental price model dramatically so that common ships are 2% of value for 1 day and 1.25% of value for 30 days and rare ships are 3% value for 1 day and 1.5% of value for 30 days.

And here is the money-making guide:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/d7p3pm/moneymaking_guide_especially_for_those_worrying/?sort=confidence

A fresh player can farm up the first 140k UEC investment...

Rent an Avenger Titan for 1 Day and earn up to 400-500k UEC, doing this method alone in a few days playing casually you can buy the Avenger Titan permanently. 

The game money-making is quite able to cope with it, the trade routes runs going as a high as 300k PER HOUR is quite good. Now I think rent price has a weird scaling, as with everything being rebalanced this likely will get outdated soon.


There is a general perception the earning rate is too low, not at all.

Slapshot1188

Those rental prices do seem out of line with purchase costs.

What is included?  Do they come with a crew or something?
Kind of like hiring the Millenium Falcon and getting Han and Chewie?  I hope?

MaxBacon

Slapshot1188 said:

Those rental prices do seem out of line with purchase costs.

What is included?  Do they come with a crew or something?
Kind of like hiring the Millenium Falcon and getting Han and Chewie?  I hope?

These first implementations tend to be the programmers themselves just using a general metric and scaling it, I think the rent price or at least the longer rent option has to scale down.

The thing is, even like it is now you still outearn that cost, so a starter ship player can get permanent ownership of the Freelancer Max in less than a week or the time that it takes to sink 25-30hours on the game, then achieve mid-tier cargo hauling that is around 100k per hour.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

And here is the money-making guide:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/d7p3pm/moneymaking_guide_especially_for_those_worrying/?sort=confidence

A fresh player can farm up the first 140k UEC investment...

Rent an Avenger Titan for 1 Day and earn up to 400-500k UEC, doing this method alone in a few days playing casually you can buy the Avenger Titan permanently. 

Missing the forest for the trees Max

Ships should not cost 75% of their purchase price for 30 days rental. Like why would anyone even bother renting when they could just earn another 25% and buy the thing outright?

On top of that these figures in your link are extremely idealistic. I challenge you to earn those numbers yourself.

They also show how much better income one gains for having a better ship which adds support for the P2W discussion.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Missing the forest for the trees Max

When you bring the missing the forest for the trees you need to understand that on 101 balance the renting mechanic can't be self-sustainable.

If you can simply just rent the ship and keep outearning by multiple times the rent cost, then no need to buy a ship at all just keep renting them  

The renting needs to be a temporary way to scale player earning and achieve a new ship without being locked to that one ship that you have until you reach the purshase price, or to try out a new ship yourself.


The renting price needs to be balanced per ship what will likely be the next steps considering the general earning rate of that ship against the renting price/duration. You should be able to earn money but at a cost that motivates you to save up to buy the ship.

Utinni

MaxBacon said:

And here is the money-making guide:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/d7p3pm/moneymaking_guide_especially_for_those_worrying/?sort=confidence

A fresh player can farm up the first 140k UEC investment...

Rent an Avenger Titan for 1 Day and earn up to 400-500k UEC, doing this method alone in a few days playing casually you can buy the Avenger Titan permanently. 

Why do I doubt that "a few days playing casually" will get you things people payed real money for? People will flip shit if you can play "hardcore" for a few days and buy their $500 ships in game.

MaxBacon

Utinni said:

Why do I doubt that "a few days playing casually" will get you things people payed real money for? People will flip shit if you can play "hardcore" for a few days and buy their $500 ships in game.

You can doubt but the earning rates aren't that low, they scale, the renting system is just allowing people to play with new ships sooner and reach higher earning rates to buy what they want.


That example I gave as it is CURRENTLY but against a 500$USD ship...

So a week or two depending on time invested, you get the Freelancer ship under current balance, doing the cargo hauls it is currently around 100k per hour, let's say you do dedicate yourself to cargo hauling and for 20 Days play around 5 hours a day at that earning rate...

In those 20 days, you have earned enough to permanently buy the 600i, that is an ~500$ ship.

You will ofc discount fuel, fights, etc... part of gameplay but it still falls under a month with a medium-tier hauling ship (or low compared to the upcoming HULL's) to get one of the high tier ships in terms that already hit the capital ship tier.

You could just go on the hauling path and get a Caterpillar that has a higher earning rate on cargo hauls before going for the 600i.

Utinni

MaxBacon said:

Utinni said:

Why do I doubt that "a few days playing casually" will get you things people payed real money for? People will flip shit if you can play "hardcore" for a few days and buy their $500 ships in game.

You can doubt but the earning rates aren't that low, they scale, the renting system is just allowing people to play with new ships sooner and reach higher earning rates to buy what they want.


That example I gave as it is CURRENTLY but against a 500$USD ship...

So under a week, you get the Freelancer ship under current balance, doing the cargo hauls it is currently around 100k per hour, let's say you do dedicate yourself to cargo hauling and for 20 Days play around 5 hours a day at that earning rate...

In those 20 days, you have earned enough to permanently buy the 600i, that is an ~500$ ship.

You will ofc discount fuel, fights, etc... part of gameplay but it still falls under a month with a medium-tier hauling ship (or low compared to the upcoming HULL's) to get one of the high tier ships in terms that already hit the capital ship tier.

You would get it faster if you were to upgrade the Freelancer for a Caterpillar that has a higher earning rate on cargo hauls before going for the 600i.

I'm just assuming these rates aren't final since this game isn't even close to finished. Doesn't bode well for a game focused on selling ships for real money to make them so easily attainable.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Missing the forest for the trees Max

When you bring the missing the forest for the trees you need to understand that on 101 balance the renting mechanic can't be self-sustainable.

If you can simply just rent the ship and keep outearning by multiple times the rent cost, then no need to buy a ship at all just keep renting them

What? This makes no sense at all.

Ship rentals should be encouraged not priced prohibitively for a few reasons, they let people try ships at low cost in comparison to a full purchase (a small goldsink), they let people use a ship for an extended period while still saving money over a full purchase (a larger goldsink), and finally they let people earn enough to purchase a ship (a large goldsink).

I swear you only take this defensive stance because it is what CIG has written...

MaxBacon

Utinni said:

I'm just assuming these rates aren't final since this game isn't even close to finished. Doesn't bode well for a game focused on selling ships for real money to make them so easily attainable.

The numbers are obviously not final it's why this type of discussions are always self-defeating and only are relevant to who is playing the game and wants to reach X goal, something that is not happening much because of wipes.

While the ship sales continue to fund the game they are not what is still stood as the monetization model, things as the announced currency microtransaction will not work out while the game faces wipes, it needs global persistence first.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

What? This makes no sense at all.

Yes, it does make sense, think a bit.

If I can rent a ship where I can earn 100k per hour, let's cut 30% for all the shenanigans that will cause loss/lower income, you still earn on those 30 days multiple times the cost of the actual buyout ship price. Even if you are playing 3 hours a day doing it.

To me, the cost of that rent needs to be balanced with how much you generally will earn with that ship, to not make it so is worth to live out of renting ships instead of being a temporary measure to save up to buy them (like the current cargo-hauling earning rates against those prices).

On the other hand, ships like the Prospector rent cost I don't think that ship can cope with that daily fee. So balance to be done per individual ship.

After that is done, if we have 1 million per 30 days rent then the player has to reasonably earn that mill and a % over it, maybe the buyout is 3 so 2mill~ for a normal 3-5h a day player is fair.

rpmcmurphy

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

What? This makes no sense at all.

Yes, it does make sense, think a bit.

We're done here.

MaxBacon

I think we are.


Here is another player sharing how he manages 100K per hour with an Aurora starter ship:
https://www.reddit.com/r/starcitizen/comments/d7p3pm/moneymaking_guide_especially_for_those_worrying/f14i9z7/

I think I'll stick to that game plan to get currency up next wipe hmmm

Jamar870

Where's the  "BETA"?

rpmcmurphy

Uh huh.

Go on then, put your money where your mouth is and post a video of yourself earning 100k per hour in an Aurora...

Vrika

I think those rental rates are impossible to balance. At current rates RSI will create a situation where either someone playing 4 hours a day will always lose money when he rents a ship, or a situation where someone playing 12 hours a day can just rent the ship for 3 days and earn enough profit to buy it outright.

RSI needs to scrap the longer rental times and instead make it hourly rental rate.

rpmcmurphy

I was thinking a system where the ship is reasonably cheap to rent but they take a cut of what you earn in the time that you have it.

So if you don't play much it doesn't eat up a whole load of your income. It's not "forcing" you to play to maximise your expenditure. On the other hand if you do play a lot and earn a good amount in the time you have the ship, you pay more.

Slapshot1188

The whole rental concept seems bizarre to me.  It should be much rarer than it seems they are aiming for.  You should rent ships for a specific purpose such as hauling freight, or maybe a showoff speedster.  Renting anything military seems wrong on a fundamental basis.  And again, you should rent or hire the ship and crew together.  It's like renting a luxury yacht. You rent it for a few days. It comes fully crewed and they pamper you.  They do not hand over the keys to you at the dock.

MaxBacon

Vrika said:

I think those rental rates are impossible to balance. At current rates RSI will create a situation where either someone playing 4 hours a day will always lose money when he rents a ship, or a situation where someone playing 12 hours a day can just rent the ship for 3 days and earn enough profit to buy it outright.

RSI needs to scrap the longer rental times and instead make it hourly rental rate.

It is actually possible to fix that issue keeping the same general idea.


If it's changed so the rent is calculated by the time the ship is spawned in instead of an X number of days, having a rate like that will then scale accordingly on both scenarios.

rpmcmurphy said:

Uh huh.

Go on then, put your money where your mouth is and post a video of yourself earning 100k per hour in an Aurora...

I don't record, haven't tried that loop but I know I manage around 70k with the overall mission loops that are also explained on the main guide so I don't find it unrealistic that someone optimized their game loop to maximize it.

rpmcmurphy

Uh huh...

Hey, these prices are fine! Look, there are 2 people on the internet that have come up with optimized wonder routes that rely on good mission spawns, non-buggy missions (lol) server swapping and lack of competition. CIG should totally balance earnings around that! The game should be a lazer focused credit earning machine, screw the sandbox.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Babuinix

Yes they are absolutely fine and completely finished and set in stone forever and will never be changed anymore so that's a perfectly excuse to whine about Star Citizen lol

Open development really is the ultimate instigator of knee jerk reactions.

MaxBacon

rpmcmurphy said:

Uh huh...

Hey, these prices are fine! Look, there are 2 people on the internet that have come up with optimized wonder routes that rely on good mission spawns, non-buggy missions (lol) server swapping and lack of competition. CIG should totally balance earnings around that! The game should be a lazer focused credit earning machine, screw the sandbox.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Prices are not fine, prices are not balanced. Needs to be adapted to the earning rates of each individual ship and thei efficiency at different content, mining, cargo hauling, dogfighting, etc... Not expecting that on the very first time this gets implemented.

What happens here is that there is a higher-earning game loop that allows earning enough to decently to cope with those prices as they currently are, that is in a nutshell cargo hauling.

The balance the game has is pretty much general metrics the developers have been applying on the features they develop, they have people dedicated to balance but the flight model and combat balance are the current focus.

Kefo

MaxBacon said:

rpmcmurphy said:

Uh huh...

Hey, these prices are fine! Look, there are 2 people on the internet that have come up with optimized wonder routes that rely on good mission spawns, non-buggy missions (lol) server swapping and lack of competition. CIG should totally balance earnings around that! The game should be a lazer focused credit earning machine, screw the sandbox.

Absolutely ridiculous.

The balance the game has is pretty much general metrics the developers have been applying on the features they develop, they have people dedicated to balance but the flight model and combat balance are the current focus.

They might want to hire more people then cause havent they been working on the flight model for years and still can’t get something that’s halfway decent in a game that is supposed to be about flying spaceships.

BeansnBread

Jesus, it's almost 2020.

IceAge

Soon.. you'll be like 

BeansnBread said:

Jesus, it's almost 2030.