CCP, in addition to aforementioned method:
If you want to step up the incentive once implemented,
remove the hacking cards from daily missions gradually,
but not completely.

Furthermore have NPC corporations pay less and less bonus
to the mercenary perma-protoing the pubs. after all.
the contracting corporations know them for risking and
wasting their expenses. Treat this as a standing loss, that
can be healed again over time.

What are you getting at here?

I see some great ideas in this thread. Many of us have asked for ISK Efficiency (ISK Destroyed / ISK Lost) to matter more. The more you make it matter, the more you will reward the underdog and the more you will encourage vets to "do more with less". Whether it's for a shot at exclusive rewards or just to prove they can do it, encouraging ISK EFFICIENCY is a helluvalot better than meta level lockout.

so +1 to this idea or any idea along the same line of thought.

This is merely a theoretical escalation of my first thought.
ISK efficiency not on a battle to battle basis only, but ISK
efficiency over time (ISK eff. ratio) affecting the to be payed
out bonus for coming public contracts.

"...after all, the contracting corporations know them..."
This came off a bit too RP maybe?

I think ISK efficiency would be a good metric to add to the leaderboard, but I don't think it'll change much of anything in pubs. Most of the people that cause the tears have incredible ISK efficiency while wearing the most expensive stuff they can get their hands on.

I'd say the low payouts have been driving the behavior that has lead to so many lopsidded matches (people using cheap gear 24/7). Giving people another reason to be concerned about what they are spending will only drive a portion of the player base to be even more passive.

I think a lot of the veteran, PC corps would hardly entertain public matches if platoon/team deploy were available through raids and FW 24/7. You don't have to re-invent the wheel here, just provide content to entertain the veteran skilled players while also providing the casual and/or low SP players something to strive for at a later date.

I was implying more than just a leader board stat, though that would be the beginning. The game designers are better at figuring out a good reward scheme but doing "more with less" I feel is something that needs to be encouraged in game. It needs to be incentivized by making the player want to do it for more than just bragging rights.

With the removal of passive ISK in PC there are no longer any payouts or bonuses being paid by corporations.

I think a lot can be done once other game modes are there for corporations to build for. A lot of the discussion about the future of PC is focused on activity within the corporation building resources to allow corporations to conduct PC operations. Hopefully players will be rewarded automatically by their corporations for successfully defending against raids or for fulfilling faction contracts, etc.

...
In my opinion the only way to turn it around in the short term would be to incentivize higher level gear in pubs to give the higher skilled players something more difficult to kill.

Basically turning their COD story mode from Beginner to Intermediate.

I would agree with you, if and only IF an ISK efficiency ratio was the only metric here.
My approach has two variables coming into play here:

[1]
Overall ISK efficiency ratio:
This counts into the bonus as a general with a factor of, say: Bonus x 0.5 (inefficient) GåÆ Bonus x 1.0 (efficient)

[2]
Ad-hoc efficiency:
This will be determine the payout in a single battle the most:
EOM Favorites (Suit+Weapon)
MLT GåÆ BONUS x 4.0
STD GåÆ BONUS x 3.0
ADV GåÆ BONUS x2.0
PRO GåÆ BONUS x1.0

Okay, now I'm buying in. But there has to be a point where this kicks in. You can't have a dude that goes 4-0 with 200 WP getting 4x his normal payout because he sniped in a starter suit.

These are all awful ideas. Don't reward the shitberries not capable of bringing a well fit advanced suit that will actually be contributing to the win.

If anything, running better gear should net better payouts.

tl;dr; you're a shitler if you don't bring the best gear you can afford to at least profit with.

Don't worry, dude, I did not expect YOU to understand this....

On a sidenote:
The people you describe as shitberries I call newbros, which implies that they are
people, new to the game and its ways, capable of learning, adapting, growing to
be awesome mercenaries and later potential game bros if provided with proper NPE
and a prolific environment that does not drive them away from a game I very much
enjoy; an environment you are not willing to contribute to, judging from the shortness
of your posting and the lack of any productive element in it.

A1: My approach would have vets care about ISK again, because risking to go in the reds in every
public match will make them. At least that's what I hope.

If everyone at least ran a well fit advanced suit instead of hurrdurr millitia 1337 isk efficiency the game would be much better. It would even band-aid fix specific roles that are garbage at lower tiers.

Locking out end game content to people willing to play "end game" competitive game-modes is stupid.

More people running overall better fits is good for the game.

While retards running around in militia getting farmed isn't if YOU don't understand this, than I don't know what to tell you.

What we need isn't people downgrading because it would be more efficient than it already is, it's people to run better gear and be overall more effective in pubs.

It's not that they're new, they're just bad or don't know enough about the game to be effective.
It's been said time and time again, skill > gear.

Big thing with lots of words

Wall of text with some sound numbers and good ideas.

I don't see why you can't just fix the NPE without screwing over the already ****** end of match payouts. It's the far better option.

Forcing pubs to be a standard gear **** show won't make the gap between new players and vets any smaller.

And? Was it THAT hard to contribute in a constructive manner finally?
Anyways, great post of yours.
Your idea of tiered matches is a good one and has been brought up before
by others than you, no belittling intended here.


It only falls short in the two most vital points:
My so called big thing with lots of words addresses two factors
you chose to oversee time and time again:

GåÆ there is not enough players or player influx and retention to allow for
further player base fragmentation via tiered matches. Once Dust got
the numbers, YOUR excerpt should be CCP's bedside reading first thing
in the morning, last thing of the day. But we are not really there yet, are we?

GåÆ the last patches and hot fixes showed already that CCP Shanghai's
small team is making a lot of the little resources and manpower they have
at hand. I simply do not get the impression there is much room in the budget for
your idea. Not until Dust gets considerably higher player numbers.
And it won't be us vets creating new players, we are just the ones killing them off,
because we are "bored" to use your words, and seemingly do not care enough
to make it any better.

Your idea is great, I only fear it glaringly oversees the most pressing
realities we are dealing with here.


If you could come up with something low budget, low manpower, short production schedule:
THAT would be an awesome idea for matchmaking.



*pardon my english, Iam no native.*

The Underlined is the primary reason why we will never have decent matchmaking.

Not enough players, not enough resources. Everything we can do will be a band aid, that really doesn't address the real problem.


Oh, and the bolded. IF I had such an answer, I would be working for CCP (Or somewhere else). I'll never understand why everyone thinks we should be doing CCP's job for them.

CCP should have someone sitting down, at a desk, right now. Doing exactly what we are doing in OUR SPARE TIME.

I love that the playerbase is so willing to try and fix this game. I hate the fact that CCP appears to have nowhere near as much drive.