| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Chances Ghost
Inf4m0us
511
   |
Posted - 2013.08.25 15:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
there are a few topics on the forums that revolve around things balanced around isk cost.
i see phrases like "just because his setup costs -insert cost here- he thinks he should be invincible"
so lets do a rundown on what exactly it means to balance something based on its isk cost, and how one would determine what something SHOULD cost.
its a reality in this game that things cost isk, and that an increase in power means that its cost is also going to increase
standard suits cost around 25k
advanced suits are more powerful and so have their cost raised to 40-60k
proto suits range from 100-200k
this is because this game is about profit, and we fight for money.
so heres an example of why things are balanced around cost (in addition to other factors)
setup A costs 50k and has a power rating of 50
setup B costs 60k and also has a power rating of 50
which setup would you use?
well obviously you would use setup A and setup B would widely regarded as useless and would never be used by anyone looking to maximize their game
so lets expand this
militia suits have a power rating of 15
standard suits have a power rating of 30
advanced suits have a power rating of 50
proto suits have a power rating of 70
(non linear on purpose, just because it costs 4x more doesn't mean its going to be 4x more effective)
spending isk on power has diminishing returns, so the higher in power you go the more its going to cost you to get even a slight increase in power
so with this in mind what would it mean if a tanks power was 70 and it cost 800k
well that would mean there would be no reason to use it over a proto suit because its cost to power ratio doesn't justify the extra cost. and it would be in your best interest to just use a proto suit saving you potentially 600k per death without losing any power
now im not saying tanks DO have a power of 70 but what if their power was only 80
would you pay 600k per death for an increase in 10 power?
im sure some would, but only those who use the setup to its highest potential could really make use of it while still being able to justify its cost.
this is because while something has a power of 80 doesn't mean that your going to be able to bring its full power to bear in any particular situation.
power rating would be more akin to potential power rather than a static value
aka proto would have UP TO 70 power, but that doesn't mean it will have the full 70 in every circumstance.
so the process of balancing around cost is one where you try to match the cost based on its power in such a way that its inst invalidated by other cheaper more effective options.
in this case right now as tanks stand their power on the field is invalidated by having much cheaper and much more effective options, making it not cost effective for all but the most dedicated to the roll
to fix that you would have to either increase its power or decrease its cost
so yes you SHOULD have higher power if your setup costs more. because the game is purposely designed like that.
if it weren't true then proto suits wouldn't cost so much.
this game is pay isk to win folks...
|
Scheneighnay McBob
Bojo's School of the Trades
3140
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 15:26:00 -
[2] - Quote
Or just lower the ISK cost if something is under-performing.
God-mode tanks are so replication build. |
Chances Ghost
Inf4m0us
511
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 15:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Scheneighnay McBob wrote:Or just lower the ISK cost if something is under-performing.
God-mode tanks are so replication build.
that is definatly an acceptable option |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
753
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 15:34:00 -
[4] - Quote
That's a dangerous line of thought in New Eden. I mean the ISK vs. relative efficacy part of your argument.
Because every one of these items will be produced by EVE-side player-manufacturers(and DUST-side too, once i get my way) from blueprints that specify refined mineral and other inputs. A blueprint for an AR may have 10 different inputs.
These minerals feed other industries in EVE, and we can expect with absolute certainty that various input will vary their values by hundreds or even thousands of percent at various points in the future.
We can also expect, with certainty, that there will be DUST players so wealthy that ISK values of items has absolutely no meaning for them.
In new Eden, ISK cost must never enter the balancing argument for items. Imo.
Our current situation in DUST is a special, temporary case - we are currently buying our stuff from an npc market. But those days are numbered.
This is why i want CCP to set the mineral requirements for every dust item(this means effectively writing the blueprints - they don't need to reveal them) and have our DUST npc market pricing follow market pricing in EVE. No currency is flowing, only information. But it will give us players a gentle introduction before getting thrown to the insanely wealthy hyperinDUSTrialist wolf pack that is the EVE market ;) |
Chances Ghost
Inf4m0us
512
|
Posted - 2013.08.25 15:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vrain Matari wrote:That's a dangerous line of thought in New Eden. I mean the ISK vs. relative efficacy part of your argument.
Because every one of these items will be produced by EVE-side player-manufacturers(and DUST-side too, once i get my way) from blueprints that specify refined mineral and other inputs. A blueprint for an AR may have 10 different inputs.
These minerals feed other industries in EVE, and we can expect with absolute certainty that various input will vary their values by hundreds or even thousands of percent at various points in the game.
We can also expect, with certainty, that there will be DUST players so wealthy that ISK values of items has absolutely no meaning for them.
In new Eden, ISK cost must never enter the balancing argument for items. Imo.
Our current situation in DUST is a special, temporary case - we are currently buying our stuff from an npc market. But those days are numbered.
This is why i want CCP to set the mineral requirements for every dust item(this means effectively writing the blueprints - they don't need to reveal them) and have our DUST npc market pricing follow market pricing in EVE. No currency is flowing, only information. But it will give us players a gentle introduction before getting thrown the the insanely wealthy hyperinDUSTrialist wolf pack that is the EVE market ;)
theres are a few other differences as well, our income comes from NPC contracts, whereas most eve based income comes from other players
we also dont yet know just how ISK is going to transfer from eve to dust, most talk of it indicates there will be a tax that will greatly reduce the potential dust income to be gained eve side without significant investment into eve.
i do like your idea of floating gear costs based off eve side mineral values, but i dont think the manufacturing process is finalised quite enough yet to make such a move.
ideally your correct the prices should fluctuate but the mineral requirements would probably be balanced to make it so that they would cost relativly the same with very small fluctuations in price.
meaning they can effectivly create an ISK price for something by setting its materials cost. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |