Good Post. We would like a few comments from CCP on this topic.

Obvious attempt to drum up support of corpmate. GOONSPIRACY SPOTTED.


But if I can be serious, for a moment... I'm fond of this idea. I'm not fond of the numbers, but I'd rather leave that to someone more economically minded than I to sift through. The concept is sound, though. The system would need to take into account the possibility of gaming, to prevent boosting from being able to make someone too much ISK.

Obvious attempt to drum up support of corpmate. GOONSPIRACY SPOTTED.

These numbers are intended for FW and PC.

Screw pubmatches. cut the numbers in half for that.

Alright, just about everyone has noticed that the only real way to make ISK in DUST is to utilize freefits. It is cost-ineffective to use advanced or higher gear because there are maniacs who giggle at the prospect of destroying your stuff.

In my opinion, the mistake was marrying the payout to the cost of the equipment destroyed. This creates situations where utilizing militia and standard crapfits not only provides more payout, but denies the enemy money, because no matter how much value your actions have to the objective at hand, your rewards will be tied to how much of a cheapass the guy you ganked happens to be.

Then you have the biomass rewards. this is a payout based on how many clones killed. I am unclear if this adds to the destroyed equipment.

I believe that the way this is done is counterintuitive, and overcomplicated.

Instead I propose ISK bonuses to the base contract based on actions taken in-game. Further these bonuses should be based on the strategic value of your actions in play, not on how much ISK your opponent happened to blow on his fit.

I can run scout, assault, logi and heavy for basically free. Woohoo. I'm worth a bundle let me tell you.

Enough with the sarcasm.

The following is an example (not necessarily how it should end up) of how rewards should be given. Your kills, hacks, and logibro goodwork should net you rewards accordingly. the current standards are... weird. and they're not exactly up to par with the cost of fielding good gear.

But without further adieu, here is my example of how I would like to see rewards calculated:

Base contract payout: 70,000 ISK

Combat rewards: (destruction of neutral assets gains no ISK rewards)

Infantry Kill: 40,000 ISK
Infantry Assist: 20,000 ISK
Destroy Installation (enemy control only): 100,000 ISK
Destroy Turret: 30,000 ISK
Destroy LAV: 10,000 ISK
Destroy Scout/Logi LAV: 40,000 ISK
Destroy Dropship: 15,000 ISK
Destroy Specialist Dropship: 50,000 ISK
Destroy Militia HAV: 20,000 ISK
Destroy HAV: 80,000 ISK
Destroy Marauder/Enforcer: 120,000 ISK

Support actions:

Hack installation/turret: 50,000 ISK
Hack Assist: 20,000 ISK

Penalties for friendly fire: (friendly fire can put you in negative ISK gain, and force you to pay fines out of pocket)

Infantry Kill: -80,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Installation: -200,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Turret: -60,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly LAV: -20,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Scout/Logi LAV: -80,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Dropship: -30,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Specialist Dropship: -100,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Militia HAV: -40,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly HAV: -160,000 ISK
Destroy Friendly Marauder/Enforcer: -240,000 ISK

End of Match:

Warpoint Bonus: 200 ISK/Warpoint
Win battle: 1.25 multiplier
Lose battle: 0.75 multiplier (minimum payout 100,000 ISK)


In the example I will use we have a tank driver who goes 25/1 in his vayu enforcer. (this would represent a badass killing run)
Base contract: 70,000
25 infantry kills: 1,000,000 ISK
2 turrets destroyed: 60,000 ISK
3 LAVs destroyed: 30,000 ISK
1570 warpoints: 314,000 ISK
TOTAL: 1,474,000 ISK

If his team wins: 1,842,500 ISK
If his team loses: 1,105,500 ISK

If he goes on this beastly killstreak and wins he ends able to afford another vayu. If he loses, well at least he doesn't come away with a net 1 million ISK loss outright. Most tankers wouldn't last this long. But the rewards make the risk of dropping the Vayu enforcer on the field worthwhile, wouldn't you say?

Again, these numbers are meant to be an example, not absolute values that should be used. And yes, I intended for friendly fire incidents resulting in loss to cost twice the standard reward. You want to go on a blueberry killing spree? You can. Now just imagine that instead of a potential million ISK payout at the end of the match you are required to pay the DED fines in excess of 1 million ISK for lost assets and damages. Didn't get one million ISK from the match? No problem, they helpfully yank it out of your wallet.

This is intended to be capable of putting a player into negative ISK gains. So if you want to murder blueberries, be prepared to be using free fits a lot.

TL;DR: make the match rewards worth the risk.

Isk numbers need to be a ****-ton higher than they are now. freefits and absolute ebenezer scrooge levels of dropsuit spending shouldn't be the only way to make ISK.

The counter argument to this is that in EVE players dont use the best gear all the time, and this is why ISK gains are so low because of the mentality from EVE. In a FPS the mentality is do whatever you can do to win no matter what, so no matter the price players will always use the best gear possible even if they are going bankrupt.