|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1681
   |
Posted - 2015.01.13 13:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Iron Wolf Saber wrote:After rolling a few alts I have to wager that 12 million SP is veteran enough. By then even with badly spent SP you should be able to be still rather effective in at least one role or two.
Agreed. Somewhere between 10M and 20M SP. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1682
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 13:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
voidfaction wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:
3) To prevent exploits, there will be no Skill Points granted to Veterans with less than minimum War Points.
Attributes:
Veteran Minimum War Point Threshold = M (WP)
Please discuss and propose numbers
800 higher if you add WP for team scan kills for solo players like me.
That'd come out to 16 sniper kills, which would be very high for even a great sniper in an Ambush match.
We should differentiate Min(WP) by play mode, then look to historically low WP functions/roles (e.g. sniping, reconnaissance, transport pilot, etc) to come up with reasonable expectations. A Sniper in Ambush, for example, might end an "active" session with only 5 takedowns and 250WP. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1686
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 16:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Bright Steel wrote:Min WP threshold should be equated based off median team score which would allow it to more accurately respond to varying battle scenarios. Perhaps even a combination of mean and median calculations, perhaps preferencing the lower of the two.
^ Bingo.
voidfaction wrote:yeah, the sniper would have to come out of the red line and maybe help the team a little.
The sniper is as legitimate a role as the next. We should no doubt tease him, but labeling him AFK and docking his pay is a 'bit much. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1704
|
Posted - 2015.01.14 03:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:
Back in the beta days you had a LOT of crazy good players. You'd see the Imps, Zion, STB, PFBHz, etc and you knew you were in for a stomp. But you squaded up (there was actually auto squading back in those days) and did your best. I took it as a learning experience.
Now people just cry and deploy solo, derping around if they assume it's going to be a difficult fight. I'm not sure I understand why a person would even turn on a FPS with that attitude.
Back in Beta:
* all players had 1/2 to 1/3 of their present-day HP
* weapons hit harder and TTK was faster
* even the best players got wrecked when you got the drop on 'em or outplayed them
* Isk had value, and no one ran photon gear around the clock
* the SP gap between new and old player was not so staggering
* matchmaking failures happened, but they weren't as common as they are today
Player mentality hasn't changed. The game changed. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1719
|
Posted - 2015.01.14 12:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
IAmDuncanIdaho II wrote:Bright Steel wrote:Min WP threshold should be equated based off median team score which would allow it to more accurately respond to varying battle scenarios. Perhaps even a combination of mean and median calculations, perhaps preferencing the lower of the two. CCP Rattati I implore you to consider this excellent sounding idea. It shuts my moaning up and seems to make a lot of sense, balancing dynamically based on how the team is doing.
Agreed. Best suggestion so far. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1721
|
Posted - 2015.01.14 16:02:00 -
[6] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:sammus420 wrote:Make dust track the distance your character moves during the course of a match. If it's under X and you have less than Y kills, no SP and no ISK for you. Is it really that hard? And what about that guy who spent the whole match single handedly holding one of the outside objectives, rather than running from objective to objective with everyone else like a bunch of 6th graders playing Soccer?
Most of the AFKers I've encountered hang out in the MCC or squat/stand/squat/stand over the course of a match. They don't travel far, if at all. Then again, if squat/stand can be programmed so can walk-left/walk-right; distance traveled would likely prove an easily beaten filter. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1796
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 00:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
Thought this thread was about eliminating AFK.
Who would moan about that? |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1796
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 00:32:00 -
[8] - Quote
voidfaction wrote:Vitantur Nothus wrote:Thought this thread was about eliminating AFK.
Who would moan about that? I thought I hit the suggestion squad size thread notification.
I was referring to El Operator. He seems really upset. |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1798
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 05:18:00 -
[9] - Quote
I still don't understand what all the fuss is about ...
* Implement a baseline activity requirement to deter AFK
* Safeguard the newbros from said baseline requirement
^ What is fundamentally wrong with this concept? |
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1798
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 06:14:00 -
[10] - Quote
el OPERATOR wrote:I am exceptionally leery of the The Proposal wrote:
"... there will be diminishing returns above a certain number of War Points, a high number that is "next to impossible" to reach with normal gameplay..."
part for Veterans, since CCP has shown time after time, patch after patch, fix after fix, that they have little to no real concept of what goes for "normal gameplay" outside of the test server. You want to cap SP after a certain WP level for the guys who spent the time to learn AND the time to be able to build the fits to succeed? That is some garbage right there. But a "New" player accrues hand over fist? I'm calling BS on this part of this idea, right now.
Ahhh. I took this to mean we'd mechanically safeguard against boosting. Though I do remember Djinn Marauder triggering a "booster guard" through legitimate play sometime back. Then again, that was the old dev team :-) |
|
|
Vitantur Nothus
Nos Nothi
1805
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 21:09:00 -
[11] - Quote
One Eyed King wrote:
Some people boost, and there are even more pub stompers out there. I don't see why we should jump to drastic conclusions before we know what the upper limit is. I think that both boosters and pub stompers are something that I would encourage to have drastically reduced if done in a reasonable manner.
I understand and support the need to deter boosting, but why would we implement diminishing returns for legitimate, high-end performance? Other shooters do the exact opposite; the better a player performs, the bigger his killstreak rewards (for example). I'm of the opinion that we should be encouraging players to play their best, and appropriately rewarding (rather than punishing) those who do so.
Pubstomping, in my humble opinion, is an altogether separate issue. |
|
|
| |
|