CCP Rattati has stated they want to take away the welfare check method and make payouts align to warpoint earnings.

But before that can be a thing...

We need to know what the absolute minimum earning should be and where the cap should be on the earnings.

There should always be a cap on earning things in-game. Because otherwise, if an exploit is found, someone can REALLY exploit it. But in the ideal case, a cap should generally be something a player will rarely ever see.

CCP Rattati has stated they want to take away the welfare check method and make payouts align to warpoint earnings.

But before that can be a thing...

we need to know what the absolute minimum earning should be and where the cap should be on the earnings.

Does the capo stop at 500,000? 1,000,000? Less? More? Will it be a hard cap? Soft cap?

Seriously we can't provide any useful input until we know what the available parameters are.

Help Me Obi-Wan-Rattati, You're my only hope.

Where did it say that CCP Rattati was thinking about this? Link please.

Anyways, the idea of capping ISK earning is not natural to me. Since I come from Eve Online I can tell you that Eve doesn't have any cap at all on ISK earnings. One player can make 1 million ISK in one day and then maybe 2 billion ISK the next day. But of course I have to remember that Eve Online has a solid economy with plenty of sinks (fees, taxes, etc.) to drain the ISK and thus it all balances out.

Dust is clearly different though in the fact that it has no stable economy with very little sinks to balance it out. I like the idea of tying ISK earnings to WPs earned but it should also account for total ISK destroyed. If I finished a match with minimal WPs but do a damn good job wrecking people who are wearing protofits, I should earn about the same amount of ISK as one who earned a ton of WPs but didn't get much in the way of expensive kills.

Minimums? As far as I'm concerned it should be 0 WPs = 0 ISK. Then a diminishing returns on each WP earned. These numbers are purely used as an example...

001 - 299 WP: 200 ISK per WP
300 - 599 WP: 125 ISK per WP
600 - 999 WP: 75 ISK per WP
1000 - 1499 WP: 50 ISK per WP
1500 - 1999 WP: 25 ISK per WP

So if someone earned 750 WP in a match... (299 * 200) + (599 * 125) + (151 * 75) = 146,000 ISK
The exact numbers need to be tweaked, but I hope this illustrated my idea.

As far as a cap, I think the diminishing returns should make exploits a waste of time.

I can see why in the case of AFKers, but what about the guys that are legitimately trying, but end up going 0/10 with 0 WP?

If someone is that new that they are getting torched at 0/10 (it happens) there still has to be a payout.

500k hard cap sounds bad. I would think a soft cap would be appropos so there is more impetus to not grind the WP hard then hit hard cap and go have a smoke while everyone else plays catch-up

And 175k for 750 WP seems hardly worth it.

If we put in a soft cap (say 1000-1500WP) then dropped the WP payout to 20% thereafter with a decent ISK reward (example: 300-400 ISK per WP) then at 1000 you hit 300-400k and that guy who spikes 2500 gets 390k-510k.

I think Rattati would be the best man to comment on where CCP would like to keep ISK rewards and the reasoning. In fact I would love to have parameters we could use to make suggestions and tell the DEVs what we would like to see within the constraints of what we could potentially transfer to Legion without busting their merc model there wide open.

Bumping purely because of "Obi Wan Rattati"

CCP Rattati has stated they want to take away the welfare check method and make payouts align to warpoint earnings