DUST Search - The Mythical need for an ISK sink

Thor Odinson42 wrote:

Skihids wrote:

Thor Odinson42 wrote:

Skihids wrote:

I often throw money at a win, but I can do that because I've got a fat wallet from the Uprising buyback. Not everyone has that option.

As the OP said, DUST shouldn't contain ISK sinks for DUST players.

Rather DUST should be a huge ISK sink for EVE pilots. That's what CCP originally wanted for DUST.

Let's have EVE pilots hire DUST mercs for control of the ground. If they really want a win they will pay for us to run all proto, and if they want to be cheap we can run our cheap fittings. You get what you pay for.

You also get paid for your performance. All mercs get a basic fee for joining battle, but there could be a substantial winning bonus set by the contract maker. We'll get balance through supply and demand. We could get some really great battles if both sides in EVE are putting up huge success bonuses.

But until that time, which appears to be years away. We need to find a way to incentivize playing hard and performing well.

Most people here that are attempting to post in disagreement with me are proving my point.

People like to throw out pub matches are pointless, but it's what we do 99% of the time in Dust. Thus making the pointless statement ridiculous beyond measure. It's like saying oxygen is pointless to breathing. We have to grind in Dust, it's part of the deal. Why not make the grinding more FUN, why not encourage fierce battles?

If advanced and proto gear scare people away from this, then lets push for pub match modes that only allow certain tiers of gear.

The fundamental problem is that our "job" is really our hobby and we get paid in the ability to do our job better.

We fight for fun, it's an end in itself. We don't have anything to spend the money on other than more and better equipment to better in match.

Therefore people have the incentive to be careful with their money. If they have little they "play scared" and will naturally shift to a loss averse strategy. That's either cheap fittings or hiding in the redline. Neither make for great fights, though the latter is the worst.

Those that have a fat wallet can play to win, but those who don't are constrained. It's a fact that people are more affected by potential loss than potential gain, so rather than doubling down for a win you would likely see an even faster switch to loss conservation strategy.

I'm not sure you can fix that as long as all the money is coming from DUST.

Go back and read Zdub's post

You are missing the point. Those with a fat wallet are still not encouraged to win. They are only encouraged to queue into the battle and move around a little bit to avoid getting kicked. That's it.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2288	Posted - 2013.10.21 05:55:00 - [1] - Quote We don't fight for money like real mercenaries do, rather we pay money for the privilege of fighting. There are no luxury goods or vacations to buy with our wages, only weapons to be used to fight with. There is no cost of living, we could just park ourselves in quarters and "live" for nothing. There is nothing to beyond war toys to spend our fortunes on, so what is our motivation to fight? We pay for the privilege of earning experience so we get better at fighting. We fight for entertainment. It's an end in itself. Realistic ISK sinks would mimic real life money sinks, stuff you want unrelated to going to work.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2292	Posted - 2013.10.21 12:40:00 - [2] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Skihids wrote: We don't fight for money like real mercenaries do, rather we pay money for the privilege of fighting. There are no luxury goods or vacations to buy with our wages, only weapons to be used to fight with. There is no cost of living, we could just park ourselves in quarters and "live" for nothing. There is nothing to beyond war toys to spend our fortunes on, so what is our motivation to fight? We pay for the privilege of earning experience so we get better at fighting. We fight for entertainment. It's an end in itself. Realistic ISK sinks would mimic real life money sinks, stuff you want unrelated to going to work. Weird post, I'd buy some hookers and blow for my character, but he's stuck in a video game. So do think mere participation should be rewarded so heavily? What if FW is filled with 5-10 snipers and tower forgers on each side over and over again? The point is that it's extremely difficult to balance monetary reward because of this dynamic. In reality the high ISK earners would spend their money on non-job related items which would divert their earnings. But since fighting IS our hobby all the money is plowed back into making us more efficient killers. That efficiency in turn gives us the lions share of the earnings per match, ensuring that the rich get richer while the poor stay that way. It's the same problem in PC where you get paid in the ability to fight (clones). The only way to create a real ISK sink is to offer something that doesn't directly improve your ability to earn more.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2294	Posted - 2013.10.21 15:58:00 - [3] - Quote The average KDR per match is <= 1.0 by definition. If you get a kill someone else gets a death, though someone can kill himself to add additional deaths. This isn't Lake Woebegone where everyone is above average and not everyone can run above 1.0. If anyone goes 2:1 someone else does worse than break even. When you say that the average person should go above 1.0 in STD gear you clearly wrong because it is impossible. That means the person is running with no gear advantage that separates him from anyone else. If we split the player base in a match between STD, ADV, and PROTO, then you can have higher tiers with an average > 1.0 if you allow the lower tiers to have an average < 1.0. This assumes an equal gun game, and that's likely where the posters logic failed. His "average" player is probably "an average of me and my elite friends" and not an average of all players. We tend to judge averages based on the self selected groups we associate with.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2294	Posted - 2013.10.21 17:07:00 - [4] - Quote I often throw money at a win, but I can do that because I've got a fat wallet from the Uprising buyback. Not everyone has that option. As the OP said, DUST shouldn't contain ISK sinks for DUST players. Rather DUST should be a huge ISK sink for EVE pilots. That's what CCP originally wanted for DUST. Let's have EVE pilots hire DUST mercs for control of the ground. If they really want a win they will pay for us to run all proto, and if they want to be cheap we can run our cheap fittings. You get what you pay for. You also get paid for your performance. All mercs get a basic fee for joining battle, but there could be a substantial winning bonus set by the contract maker. We'll get balance through supply and demand. We could get some really great battles if both sides in EVE are putting up huge success bonuses.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2294	Posted - 2013.10.21 17:24:00 - [5] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Skihids wrote: I often throw money at a win, but I can do that because I've got a fat wallet from the Uprising buyback. Not everyone has that option. As the OP said, DUST shouldn't contain ISK sinks for DUST players. Rather DUST should be a huge ISK sink for EVE pilots. That's what CCP originally wanted for DUST. Let's have EVE pilots hire DUST mercs for control of the ground. If they really want a win they will pay for us to run all proto, and if they want to be cheap we can run our cheap fittings. You get what you pay for. You also get paid for your performance. All mercs get a basic fee for joining battle, but there could be a substantial winning bonus set by the contract maker. We'll get balance through supply and demand. We could get some really great battles if both sides in EVE are putting up huge success bonuses. But until that time, which appears to be years away. We need to find a way to incentivize playing hard and performing well. Most people here that are attempting to post in disagreement with me are proving my point. People like to throw out pub matches are pointless, but it's what we do 99% of the time in Dust. Thus making the pointless statement ridiculous beyond measure. It's like saying oxygen is pointless to breathing. We have to grind in Dust, it's part of the deal. Why not make the grinding more FUN, why not encourage fierce battles? If advanced and proto gear scare people away from this, then lets push for pub match modes that only allow certain tiers of gear. The fundamental problem is that our "job" is really our hobby and we get paid in the ability to do our job better. We fight for fun, it's an end in itself. We don't have anything to spend the money on other than more and better equipment to better in match. Therefore people have the incentive to be careful with their money. If they have little they "play scared" and will naturally shift to a loss averse strategy. That's either cheap fittings or hiding in the redline. Neither make for great fights, though the latter is the worst. Those that have a fat wallet can play to win, but those who don't are constrained. It's a fact that people are more affected by potential loss than potential gain, so rather than doubling down for a win you would likely see an even faster switch to loss conservation strategy. I'm not sure you can fix that as long as all the money is coming from DUST.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2295	Posted - 2013.10.21 18:47:00 - [6] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Skihids wrote: Thor Odinson42 wrote: Skihids wrote: I often throw money at a win, but I can do that because I've got a fat wallet from the Uprising buyback. Not everyone has that option. As the OP said, DUST shouldn't contain ISK sinks for DUST players. Rather DUST should be a huge ISK sink for EVE pilots. That's what CCP originally wanted for DUST. Let's have EVE pilots hire DUST mercs for control of the ground. If they really want a win they will pay for us to run all proto, and if they want to be cheap we can run our cheap fittings. You get what you pay for. You also get paid for your performance. All mercs get a basic fee for joining battle, but there could be a substantial winning bonus set by the contract maker. We'll get balance through supply and demand. We could get some really great battles if both sides in EVE are putting up huge success bonuses. But until that time, which appears to be years away. We need to find a way to incentivize playing hard and performing well. Most people here that are attempting to post in disagreement with me are proving my point. People like to throw out pub matches are pointless, but it's what we do 99% of the time in Dust. Thus making the pointless statement ridiculous beyond measure. It's like saying oxygen is pointless to breathing. We have to grind in Dust, it's part of the deal. Why not make the grinding more FUN, why not encourage fierce battles? If advanced and proto gear scare people away from this, then lets push for pub match modes that only allow certain tiers of gear. The fundamental problem is that our "job" is really our hobby and we get paid in the ability to do our job better. We fight for fun, it's an end in itself. We don't have anything to spend the money on other than more and better equipment to better in match. Therefore people have the incentive to be careful with their money. If they have little they "play scared" and will naturally shift to a loss averse strategy. That's either cheap fittings or hiding in the redline. Neither make for great fights, though the latter is the worst. Those that have a fat wallet can play to win, but those who don't are constrained. It's a fact that people are more affected by potential loss than potential gain, so rather than doubling down for a win you would likely see an even faster switch to loss conservation strategy. I'm not sure you can fix that as long as all the money is coming from DUST. Go back and read Zdub's post You are missing the point. Those with a fat wallet are still not encouraged to win. They are only encouraged to queue into the battle and move around a little bit to avoid getting kicked. That's it. I'm saying that a fat wallet allows you to play for the win without specific encouragement from the game. I do it just because I like to win. It's simply more fun for me to pull a win out of a loss and that makes playing worth it. So I'll sacrifice a handful of very expensive logi fits to lay down more uplinks and ammo and triage hives to get my team back inot the battle and take the objective (mostly in Domination). I do it because sitting in the redline is real bore. Then when my team does well by themselves and I don't have to work so hard I make up for it and put the money back in my wallet.
Skihids Bullet Cluster 2297	Posted - 2013.10.21 20:29:00 - [7] - Quote I'd support a heavier weight on WP's for payout to encourage participation, but it would most likely generate even more crying from Assault players about the WP's Logis earn. I would be concerned that it might further discourage players from participating at all however. Beginners who get stomped pretty regularly won't be able to afford to try for those WPs in anything other than starter fits. It would be a case of those of us with the resources (ISK and SP) to generate the most WPs would continuously generate the most ISK so we could keep earning the lion's share of the ISK rewards. EDIT: CCP would also have to make it very clear in game that WPs were the main factor in ISK payouts because hidden incentives won't do any good. The formula would need to be right there on the end of match screen.