Beren Hurin
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
1664
   |
Posted - 2013.09.23 16:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think the best fit would be something that gives a sort of accelerated system of rewards for those people who WIN for whatever side they play for. If you play for each side 25% of the time, you will slowly get better rewards for each side. If you play exclusively for one side and win 25% of the time, you would get rewards at the same 'speed' as the former example (maybe a little worse).
However, there has to be a breaking point for some people. There has to be some kind of threshold where it is smarter to play pub matches rather than FW matches. Otherwise, pub matches become unimportant, other than offering domination and ambush matches. |
Beren Hurin
Onslaught Inc
RISE of LEGION
1664
|
Posted - 2013.09.23 16:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
chase rowland wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Reav Hannari wrote:FoxFour wants mercs to stay free to join either side to make it easy to join your friends. A valid concern. However, this breaks the commitment aspect and allows joining to help one side lose. Join PC or public matches for that. Faction warfare should be about joining a faction.
I vote for commitment. I think we have a design that is getting closer and closer to satisfying both sides. Hopefully I will have something to post later this week. give us higher sp or isk amounts equivilant to pc matches. loser gets no isk so its VERY competitive and prevents protostomping in pubs so its a buff for noobs. its a faction war for christs sake, not a pub match. give us a reason to like it.
No. The loser should get some consolation, and not as much as pub matches. Eventually though, if your loss record in FW continues to be poor, you SHOULD realize at some point that it is better for you to play pub matches, because of the mechanics of how it should work. We don't want FW to be the BEST place to make isk for everyone, otherwise you make PUB matches the new pointless place to play.
Profitability currently has only a few factors:
A) were you in the match for most of the battle's length?
B) how much is destroyed in battle?
C) does your team win?
D) did you significantly influence the battle?
E) did you keep your losses to a minimum?
If you have to answer 'No' to more than one of these questions, you probably won't have a profitable time. The key to making a more competitive FW is to make it harder to answer 'Yes' to all of these for each person. That can be done in a lot of different ways, some could include:
-making (C) matter more over time (faction contribution ranking),
-letting (B) being destributed to winners differently than pub matches (winners get 4/5ths of loot vs. 2/3rds)
-having (A) work differently as a reinforcement system (time in battle doesn't matter, only WP, after 10 deaths you leave match)
-having a completely different WP system for FW to change how (D) scales. (Extra WP for defensive kills near Objectives)
-having (E) work differently (maximum losses per person/squad) |