| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aeon Amadi
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
2946
   |
Posted - 2013.09.17 10:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
Alright, so not too long ago the star map generally looked like this:
http://i.imgur.com/3cqIFtl.jpg
Now, I don't know what it looks like today but I do remember the Caldari only had two districts and the Amarr only had three. This was a MAJOR win for the Gallente and Minmatar both in Dust and Eve but literally no-one seemed to care, even the Gallente Faction Warfare guys didn't give a damn being as it just meant more or less LP gains.
Of course, this is solely due to the fact that you can play it for both sides. You can have one character working for the Gallente and another working for the Caldari - as soon as one starts winning you just switch teams and start in the other direction to maximize your profits. Why? Because no-one cares about role-playing in Eve Online and if it's not making you money there's no point in doing it.
Welp, same can be said for Dust 514. Despite how adamant I am about being this Gallente frontliner, barking up trees at money grubbers and religious fanatics in the name of peace, I can't stop the rest of ANONYMOUS from going over to Caldari because there's no matches available when fighting for Gallente.
Now, granted, that's because there was some under-estimation in just how many Dust players would go over to which side and apparently "freedom and liberty" is something the players crave right now over money making and religious fire (though, considering the state of real life politics, I can understand why).
On the other hand, half of the forum community turned around and said that fighting for the Gallente/Minmatar is "easy" mode. Which is a really stupid claim when you think about it because all it's basically saying is more of the skilled fighters in the game decided to pick the same team when both sides had an equal opportunity to win. The only real factor that you can consider as far as it being "easy mode" is the fact that we provide more orbitals for our teams than the opposing team - and that's saying a lot considering that capsuleers don't get anything besides a warm fuzzy feeling for performing one.
So, what you have is two factors: 1.) It's "easy" mode. 2.) You can't get into a match. So the inevitable solution? Switch sides, fight for the guys who are losing in order to maximize your profits - just like in Eve.
But see, there's an inherent problem here because now you've got to consider future FW changes. In the near future, Team True Grit is going to be introducing 'Standings' which you will gain when fighting for one particular faction. Fight with the Gallente more, get more standings. Which I'm sure is going to be more rewarding in and of itself. Problem is, those two factors mentioned above still exist - and if you can't get into a match than standings don't mean jack because zero games is zero payout. Doesn't matter how much of a bonus or incentive you're getting.
Likely conclusion? Dust retains the traditional Eve Online method of doing things. Players make more than one character which they switch as each side conquers the map to extend their profit margin. The cycle continues.
On the other hand, there will always be players like myself who continuously fight for the same side - regardless of which team the rest of their corporation is on. The players who actually uphold the values that their faction fights for regardless of the payout or how long it takes to get boots on the ground. This is largely E-Bushido and doesn't serve for anything but that warm fuzzy feeling mentioned earlier in regards to Orbitals, but the gist is this:
If you fight for Gallente, if you fight for Freedom and Liberty - than you can't fight for Money, and Freedom is never easy. |
CommanderBolt
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
295
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 11:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
You see Aeon, I would prefer it if once we chose a side then we have to stick with them. Possibly not permanently but at least for a duration.
It would be great if the standings, and how well your "team" is doing really made an impact.
As you fight more, you unlock weapons to buy? Possibly special variations that suit the race you are fighting for. Possibly "Faction level weapons" (Not as good as officer level, but better than prototype?)
Also, if your team is doing crap, if your race has lost all of its world then why would your pay out be just as high? Make the payouts reflect how wealthy and just how well your race is doing in the war.
If your race is scrambling all of its resources to hold on to its last few districts then you sure as hell shouldn't get full payouts.
I dont know, that could be a bad idea as why would anyone fight for the underdog is they give less pay? |
Aeon Amadi
A.N.O.N.Y.M.O.U.S.
2946
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 11:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
CommanderBolt wrote:You see Aeon, I would prefer it if once we chose a side then we have to stick with them. Possibly not permanently but at least for a duration.
It would be great if the standings, and how well your "team" is doing really made an impact.
As you fight more, you unlock weapons to buy? Possibly special variations that suit the race you are fighting for. Possibly "Faction level weapons" (Not as good as officer level, but better than prototype?)
Also, if your team is doing crap, if your race has lost all of its world then why would your pay out be just as high? Make the payouts reflect how wealthy and just how well your race is doing in the war.
If your race is scrambling all of its resources to hold on to its last few districts then you sure as hell shouldn't get full payouts.
I dont know, that could be a bad idea as why would anyone fight for the underdog is they give less pay?
There's been a few ideas proposed in the past that I thought were phenomenal but never made it through.
Of my favorite (and this is from an Eve perspective not a Dust perspective) is that influence Faction Warfare has on High-Sec. While it might not have been originally proposed by him, this came to my attention via Goonswarm's Courthouse.
If Faction Warfare had a lasting impact on high-sec, more players would be persuaded to get involved. If you're militia is losing than the faction associated with it should pay higher taxes to either force migrancy of players who are only interested in profit and revenue, or force them to support their militia to try and turn the tide. Taxes are associated with everything: mining, refining, mission running, broker sales... You name it...
Reducing payout values is never the way to go because it just forces one side to take an even rougher hit than they normally would - so you have think of creative and innovative ways to give lasting incentive toward the player to make that decision.
I had originally proposed the access to Faction weapons from a neutral stand point and I think it could still work - but the community (provided they like the idea) needs to step up and say whether or not they like the feature. Essentially what the idea was, was to provide Faction Weapons in return for Standings or LP (of which we've recently heard from Team True Grit that LP would not be likely). The weapons themselves could act like Aurum weapons, providing reduced skill level for weapons that are hard to obtain through use of standings.
Now, I don't like getting into specific details on certain concepts because then they look less appealing. However, I will say that the cost of these weapons should be higher as to not reduce the appeal of Aurum weapons - which I need not remind you all is how CCP Shanghai is gaining revenue from this game. It should be difficult, but not impossible and it should only be able to be obtained solely from your efforts for your particular faction.
To that extent, weapons might not be the best way to go because it poses a number of problems. Of which, I would potentially have to fight for a faction I don't like in order to gain prototype laser rifles faster than I normally would. That's not cool, because I fight for Gallente. So, there's the inherent risk of putting players on the spot for that. The only way to avoid that is to have all factions provide the same weapons, which isn't privy considering that it takes away from the uniqueness of fighting for that particular faction and we're right back where we started as to why we should have them stick with one faction over another.
What it boils down to is that Faction Warfare needs incentive, but in a creative way that retains your loyalty. This is insanely hard to hallmark on and even with race-specific LP rewards, Eve Online still has trouble mustering it up. Though, you also have to consider that there is potential that the player base won't use it at all: so the increased ISK value is the next best thing because it applies to everyone in a broad spectrum but it also retains the problematic "only if you can get into a match" issue.
As it stands, the only "migrancy" we're going to see is players bouncing between characters (or accounts) in an effort to increase their profit margins. I find this very unfortunate. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |