DUST Search - Catching up: Proposals surrounding the SP cap.

Vell0cet wrote:

So I finished reading everything and I have some concerns about some of the proposals:

Cap is based on highest playerGÇÖs cap.

The problem with is is we essentially have 2 groups: (a)those who are pushing the cap forward every week and (b)everyone else. The first group represents the most hardcore players (who are most likely to be buying boosters). Only one player from this group needs to run boosters to move the soft cap forward each week, the rest can simply grind (at a slightly slower pace) un-boosted to catch up with the leader each week. So CCP would be killing their revenue from a huge chunk of the players most likely to be paying them. The second group essentially has no cap at all (practically speaking) so they have no penalty for not logging in. I know I personally would take a lot more breaks if I knew I could catch up later and not be missing out on SP. I would probably have half the SP I currently have now under such a system, whereas the current system incentivizes regular play. I donGÇÖt think IGÇÖm alone, and there are probably many people who wouldnGÇÖt bother to log in if they know theyGÇÖre not loosing out on potential SP, like they currently are.

There are other suggestions that want to accelerate the rate of SP gain under various circumstances.

I have 2 problems with this. The first is that it de-values the effort already put in by players with a lot of SP. They had to spend hundreds of hours to get where they are, and itGÇÖs kind of a slap in the face if the same could be achieved in a small fraction of the time. Another issue with this is that the system actually incentivizes NOT playing. Why would I want to grind now at some slow rate, when I could simply wait and be more GÇ£productiveGÇ¥ later (with each in-game minute generating much more SP for me)? Furthermore, if people cap quicker with a system thatGÇÖs accelerating their gameplay, then theyGÇÖre playing fewer matches every week which means that number of concurrent users will plummet. If that number gets too low (I donGÇÖt know what the threshold is), the matchmaker will really start to struggle, which will cause more people to leave and we will have a downward spiral clusterf*ck that would kill the game.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
emtbraincase Falconpunch Hatesurfers 30	Posted - 2013.11.17 04:28:00 - [1] - Quote This thread TL;DR But I hope the gist of it was "We will have an updated method of earning SP SoonGäó" My preference is to scale back the bonus as you progress, to the point where you end up at the cap we have now. If possible it would be nice for it to be a percentage of the highest SP character in the game as of the last day/week/month/etc, but any ridiculously high value where you have the option to be full proto with passives in a chosen role. Dividing effectiveness would then be a detriment early on. So a new recruit would have no cap to their SP until they hit, saomething like, 1 million SP earned (not counting starting sp). Then you start to begin getting capped at an increasing rate as you reach certain SP milestones, and eventually ending up at our current cap level once you are within 10% of the top SP player (who is always capped at our current level). Nobody has to be able to "overtake" the top spot unless they play less than the person below.
emtbraincase Falconpunch Hatesurfers 30	Posted - 2013.11.19 01:52:00 - [2] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: So I finished reading everything and I have some concerns about some of the proposals: Cap is based on highest playerGÇÖs cap. The problem with is is we essentially have 2 groups: (a)those who are pushing the cap forward every week and (b)everyone else. The first group represents the most hardcore players (who are most likely to be buying boosters). Only one player from this group needs to run boosters to move the soft cap forward each week, the rest can simply grind (at a slightly slower pace) un-boosted to catch up with the leader each week. So CCP would be killing their revenue from a huge chunk of the players most likely to be paying them. The second group essentially has no cap at all (practically speaking) so they have no penalty for not logging in. I know I personally would take a lot more breaks if I knew I could catch up later and not be missing out on SP. I would probably have half the SP I currently have now under such a system, whereas the current system incentivizes regular play. I donGÇÖt think IGÇÖm alone, and there are probably many people who wouldnGÇÖt bother to log in if they know theyGÇÖre not loosing out on potential SP, like they currently are. There are other suggestions that want to accelerate the rate of SP gain under various circumstances. I have 2 problems with this. The first is that it de-values the effort already put in by players with a lot of SP. They had to spend hundreds of hours to get where they are, and itGÇÖs kind of a slap in the face if the same could be achieved in a small fraction of the time. Another issue with this is that the system actually incentivizes NOT playing. Why would I want to grind now at some slow rate, when I could simply wait and be more GÇ£productiveGÇ¥ later (with each in-game minute generating much more SP for me)? Furthermore, if people cap quicker with a system thatGÇÖs accelerating their gameplay, then theyGÇÖre playing fewer matches every week which means that number of concurrent users will plummet. If that number gets too low (I donGÇÖt know what the threshold is), the matchmaker will really start to struggle, which will cause more people to leave and we will have a downward spiral clusterfck that would kill the game. edit, took out a section for space* Sorry so long a response I will try to address most of your comments/concerns, as to my own personal tastes and recent revelations thanks to your post above, without insulting you, as I agree with most of what you've said. It is that I think the conclusion is different, due to their effect and also a more fleshed out idea I now have. First, I also did mention in a post of mine that they would, in the highest tier (maybe within the top 10% of that top), be capped at our current levels to promote the top to keep fighting for it as is. It has worked as far as cash made (I hope), and this method doesn't rely on helping anyone who isn't in that bottom 90%. if the "cap" is only reset monthly (with monthly update/patch we seem to regularly see) then it would serve to increase the number of boosters, since nobody that far along can afford to fall behind by 1 month of SP without some repercussions. This value would be reset, and people would be established in their "SP tier". Then, at the immediately following Wed reset, you would be able to earn SP, capped at a weekly level, based on where you are compared to the top SP player. The following numbers are for basic framework, to be adjusted as those in power see fit. (before boosters added) 0 SP - 1,999,999 SP = No cap (get you playing and earning for every match) 2 Million SP+ will follow these rules 10-29% of "cap" = 1 million SP per week 30-59% of cap = 800,000 SP per week 60-74% of cap = 500,000 SP per week 75-89% of cap = 350,000 SP per week 90%+ of cap = current levels (maybe bumped to 250,000) The values are negotiable, as well as %, but this will make those new to the game to progress quickly early on, and maybe catch up quickly. I can also see exploitation in it at the top, but I will have to assume that it wouldn't be very feasible since the gap isn't large enough to make up for much. This is not a representation of the playerbase either. This is a static comparison of your SP to the top SP player at that time, so there could be 3/4 of the playerbase in the bottom tier. This would mean that moving up is possible, since you earn more early, and staying on top takes work. There could be a pool available, but cap it at whatever the bottom tier could have in a week (at least in this example). Second, I agree that it would devalue the time spent by those longer-term players. However, if it meant more noobs not giving up because they are actually seeing improvement in the merc, and those noobs becoming cannon fodder for the long-timers, then I think they will be OK with that. I also understand that it would limit player activity, but only of the top players in pub matches, which most would like to see less (can't be that many protostompers out there). Thus hopefully top players play FW or PC and leave pubs for noobs who can't go elsewhere (relistically) My goal would be to have 50% of the playerbase in the top 2-3 tier, with the bottom reserved for those who need the SP most to have a fighting chance in New Eden.
emtbraincase Falconpunch Hatesurfers 30	Posted - 2013.11.19 02:39:00 - [3] - Quote But as it stands, a newer player can never catch an established player. This would mean they could. Nothing more.
emtbraincase Falconpunch Hatesurfers 30	Posted - 2013.11.19 06:36:00 - [4] - Quote I was just assuming that new equipment, suits, and weapons will be coming out which will require SP as well. Not just in 1.7, but further on. In most games I would agree, but the fact that they appear to be expanding skill trees regularly (if not often, SoonGäó) and hopefully not giving more respecs, makes me think it could cause people to quit after only a short while since it can seem insurmountable. They have no real reason to feel they can be anything but some random 25 mil SP character k/d pad (K/d means nothing btw ) and who wants to do that for 3-4 months to get anywhere close to being able to hold their own. Not to mention the noob has no idea the true implications of his purchases early on. If they fail character creation early they can just build another. If they get a good way in and their "fix" build doesn't "work" then they are gone before anyone can even show them how things work. I also don't think it should be sped up, and realize that there are limited slots so SP isn't that important overall. However, in the beginning it completely does matter. New to the game mechanics, new to the hit detection, new to the maps, new to the equipment/mods/gear, and running mostly militia for too long can ruin the early experience (dying isn't fun). I understand that is also a mark of New Eden, Learn or Leave, but people need time to learn it. if the matchmaking isn't fixed, I don't see anyone playing more than 1-2 pub matches of protostomping to just turn off the game and uninstall it. Just give the noob something more to buffer them from the greater New Eden longer. They need to face proto, but their random lobby will likely get slaughtered. I hope on that I am wrong, but I think that it could happen often enough to matter. Out of the 15-20 people I got to start playing Dust, only 3 still play and it was because they came in awhile after "rollout", as well as a couple times in between, and were sick of full proto squads raping us and a team of several 1-3 man squads with a few lone blueberries for flavor. So it does happen. Fix matchmaking, or make some concessions to keep more people from the start. Again, I hope I am wrong.
emtbraincase Falconpunch Hatesurfers 30	Posted - 2013.11.19 06:51:00 - [5] - Quote Even if it's just lifting the cap until they hit at least 2 mil SP, while keeping everything else the same, would be a start.