| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jadd Hatchen
The Phoenix Federation
547
   |
Posted - 2014.04.22 16:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ok, so this one is not new, but I'll explain it in a way that EVE devs and players will get it...
In EVE, some sites/missions are limited in what ship types are allowed to enter the site. These are usually limited by ship size so that you cannot bring a battleship or capital ship into a site that is meant for a frigate. Something similar is needed to even out difficulty level in DUST. So I suggest something similar to the following:
- Academy - Like it is today except it needs a MAJOR overhaul, more detailed objectives (to teach stuff like uplinks, nanohives, and capturing points), and a skill respec to finish it off so that they can fix mistakes after they graduate.
- Basic Tier - Only basic and militia quality gear is allowed in these matches.
- Advanced Tier - Only advanced, basic, and militia quality gear is allowed in these matches.
- Prototype Tier - Any gear is allowed here.
Now these would all be in the "public matches" as in when you open op the public match category you would then see the three options of "Basic", "Advanced", and "Prototype" (unless you are still in the Academy and then you only see that one). then within each of the tiers, you can still select Ambush, Domination, and Skirmish (or whatever modes CCP comes up with).
Oh and most importantly! To lesson on the newbie beating if high skilled players just keep doing Basic only matches to farm ISK, the ISK rewards would also need to scale with the difficulty! Thus Basic tier matches would pay the least while Prototype matches would pay a whole lot more.
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
2090
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 16:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
I think equipment tiering would be a very poor design. Better matchmaking based on effectiveness in combat in general would do a lot more for balance. Gear has much less to do with winning matches than squad coordination and skill. It'd be extremely restrictive on fitting to move to a model where you can't mix up your fitting design with different levels of different equipment, or be prevented from carrying a proto uplink into certain matches, even on a militia suit. Issues like that. And the ability to choose to put more at stake in certain fights based on the situation on the ground is an important part of the gameplay design.
This game needs to be more of a sandbox. Now you're talking about cutting it into four smaller segregated sandboxes?
I'd like to be your CPM1 candidate
|
Jadd Hatchen
The Phoenix Federation
548
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 19:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:I think equipment tiering would be a very poor design. Better matchmaking based on effectiveness in combat in general would do a lot more for balance. Gear has much less to do with winning matches than squad coordination and skill. It'd be extremely restrictive on fitting to move to a model where you can't mix up your fitting design with different levels of different equipment, or be prevented from carrying a proto uplink into certain matches, even on a militia suit. Issues like that. And the ability to choose to put more at stake in certain fights based on the situation on the ground is an important part of the gameplay design.
This game needs to be more of a sandbox. Now you're talking about cutting it into four smaller segregated sandboxes?
I understand your argument, however how do you "quantify" those items such as "effectiveness in combat"? I was originally of the opinion that you are pointing out, but in the end there is no magic matchmaking algorithm that players won't be able to eventually exploit or break. That and one day a player is very effective, and then the next they aren't. Why? Did a patch do it? Did they injure their thumb? Did they get a bad connection? Too many things that are out of CCP's control.
Just divide by tier, and then play whatever tier you prefer. Besides which, the public matches are the furthest from the "sandbox" or "emergent gameplay" as you can get in this universe as it's all created out of thin air and meaningless in the end save for the ISK you win and loose and the SPs you gain.
I agree that doing stuff in a "basic" match changes the dynamic a LOT compared to a no holds barred match. In a basic tier the scouts would be able to own all in the current configuration while the heavies wouldn't be worth playing. But in the top tier the heavies would become more worth while. Similarly for some vehicles.
But in the end there is no perfect way to do this, so I'm just proposing the simplest way to do it so that CCP has less chance to screw it up.
|
BL4CKST4R
WarRavens
League of Infamy
2561
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 20:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Our remove tiers and avoid splitting our already pathetically small playerbase.
For the Federation!
|
Soraya Xel
Abandoned Privilege
Top Men.
2094
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 20:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jadd Hatchen wrote:I understand your argument, however how do you "quantify" those items such as "effectiveness in combat"? I was originally of the opinion that you are pointing out, but in the end there is no magic matchmaking algorithm that players won't be able to eventually exploit or break. That and one day a player is very effective, and then the next they aren't. Why? Did a patch do it? Did they injure their thumb? Did they get a bad connection? Too many things that are out of CCP's control.
Well, first of all, you need to figure out how to get the average war point gain between roles to some level of parity. Right now, for instance, Logis often make more war points, average, than other classes. A lot of dropship pilots and such get very few, in comparison. But if you can get this to some semblance of parity, so that each player's war points is fairly representative of how much they did in combat, regardless of specialization, then you have a metric from which to base matchmaking of better players, against worse players.
Win/loss ratio, war points per clone lost, there's a lot of metrics that can work somewhat independently of just kills/deaths or suit type to determine how good a player is.
I also think you would see a much better balance situation if more emphasis was placed on letting solo players play against other solo players, and organized squads playing against other organized squads. Often the biggest issue is simply pitting a organized full squad on voice comms against newbies fresh from the Academy.
Most of the things I listed can be done without making people make choices. It's about letting the system make those choices more intelligently than it does now. Boxing people off into tiers that limit their options is not a good direction for the game to go in.
I'd like to be your CPM1 candidate
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 :: [one page] |