DUST Search - Sticky:ISK rewards

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:ISK rewards

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Talos Vagheitan Ancient Exiles. 1145	Posted - 2015.04.28 19:01:00 - [31] - Quote I think we should have weekly tournaments with large ISK payouts. Maybe Daily tournaments as well. Winners gets a large pot, loser gets nothing, good day sir. The tournaments could be a playoff style bracket, or simply one game you can play at a certain point of the day. This would give non-PC players something to do, and be a fun draw of competitive players. Who cares what some sniper has to say. **--CCP, let's push for the license of Dust/Legion on both current Gen consoles-
Archduke Ferd1nand Nos Nothi 386	Posted - 2015.04.28 21:13:00 - [32] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: well, AV would be getting a % of their vehicle kills, that could be really lucrative Which is why I like it. Make the scrubs pay for bringing out tanks. BRB, looking for socks PSN: tommygunboy2080 I shit shotgun shells and piss Remote Explosives
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 4531	Posted - 2015.04.28 22:20:00 - [33] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Dear players, we have been thinking long and hard about a way to make winning battles lucrative, and maybe throwing caution to the wind to do so. What do you think of two (or both) ways of increasing your reward. This bonus reward would only be for the winner, loser would get the normal payout Winner reward would be normal current payout + x% of own personal losses + y% of personally inflicted losses x and y to be decided I don't see an easy exploit to this system and it would mean that you would commit proto to claim the battle, instead of hunkering back in starter loadouts. I like the formula for the winner, but even the loser should gain a +y% of personally inflicted losses. If one is in the losing team and manage to do good it's even harder than being in the winning team, i think they deserve some love too for try to carry the not carriable. Shifted in time, your tomorrow, my today.
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 52	Posted - 2015.04.29 00:10:00 - [34] - Quote Mark my words. This will change Dust for the better more than any single thing we've seen since Uprising 1.0. I f'n love you Rattati. No h0mo. Thor's Emporium
Sardonk Eternia Tiny Universe 293	Posted - 2015.04.29 00:18:00 - [35] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: http://i.imgur.com/bZRpnMP.png Borrowed From: E-3 Trailer Kill a target? Displayed on screen: +50 WP +X ISK (where X = % of suit value * by meta adjustment) Examples: 1. Meta(30) Assault G-1 kills Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Assault is paid 20% of suit value (24k) * meta adjustment (60/30 = 2) for a total of 48k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +48k ISK. 2. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(30) Assault G-1 with a value of 30,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (6k) * meta adjustment (30/60 = 0.5) for a total of 3k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +3k ISK. 3. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(60) Assault Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (30k) * meta adjustment (60/60 = 1) for a total of 30k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +30k ISK. Quoted for great idea!
Thokk Nightshade Montana Militia 805	Posted - 2015.04.29 00:20:00 - [36] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: What's wrong with sharing ISK based on warpoints rather than kills? Otherwise it's unfair on people who contribute without focus on killing. Isn't that the whole point of the warpoint system? Otherwise I like the idea. Especially getting back a portion of loss if you win. It seems refunding loss is a much better idea overall, and I agree contribution should be measured in WP. However, it is a shooty killy gamed, and someone who destroys proto suits and tanks, still only gets 50WP. That reminds me of the good idea of boosted WP if using a weaker suit, that would serve a similar purpose. Couldn't we take this as a baseline and then take WP x 100 as an additional bonus for all? 3000 WP would be 300K extra. That is not a huge sum by any means but still incentivizes and rewards WP to make it worth trying. This should be for both winners and losers since if I am on a losing team but manage to put up 1000 WP, I think an extra 100k is a nice bonus for putting in the work and trying to help my team. Take this in addition to your x + y for personal losses and inflicted losses and we have a terrific system that rewards all the things. Logis/support will get paid by the War point multiplier and slayers will get paid by the items lost/gained modifier. Question on this. If I run a logi and have 3 adv. uplinks, 3 adv. nanohives, and 3 RE's deployed when I die, do I still get "credit" for personal losses? Is the system going to be able to differentiate between deployed equipment and equipment still on the suit? Thokk Kill. Thokk Crush. Thokk Smash.
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 53	Posted - 2015.04.29 00:22:00 - [37] - Quote You guys work out the numbers, I'll be rubbing one out in the corner. Thor's Emporium
Thokk Nightshade Montana Militia 805	Posted - 2015.04.29 00:24:00 - [38] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: http://i.imgur.com/bZRpnMP.png Borrowed From: E-3 Trailer Kill a target? Displayed on screen: +50 WP +X ISK (where X = % of suit value * by meta adjustment) Examples: 1. Meta(30) Assault G-1 kills Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Assault is paid 20% of suit value (24k) * meta adjustment (60/30 = 2) for a total of 48k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +48k ISK. 2. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(30) Assault G-1 with a value of 30,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (6k) * meta adjustment (30/60 = 0.5) for a total of 3k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +3k ISK. 3. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(60) Assault Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (30k) * meta adjustment (60/60 = 1) for a total of 30k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +30k ISK. The only problem I see is what if someone manages to kill someone who isn't that good running your 1st suit like 10 times? Just those kills would be worth 480,000 ISK. Seems like a huge bonus for 10 kills. I love the idea but I think the multipliers and numbers need to be toned down a bit. Thokk Kill. Thokk Crush. Thokk Smash.
Drogan Reeth Free Trade Corp 163	Posted - 2015.04.29 00:53:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: What's wrong with sharing ISK based on warpoints rather than kills? Otherwise it's unfair on people who contribute without focus on killing. Isn't that the whole point of the warpoint system? Otherwise I like the idea. Especially getting back a portion of loss if you win. It seems refunding loss is a much better idea overall, and I agree contribution should be measured in WP. However, it is a shooty killy gamed, and someone who destroys proto suits and tanks, still only gets 50WP. That reminds me of the good idea of boosted WP if using a weaker suit, that would serve a similar purpose. I think the main point has been nailed a few times in this topic. It's the losing side that needs more incentives to keep playing after they are already losing. NOT the winning side. As such you need to add things to reward the losers for trying. Not the winners for winning more.
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 54	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:05:00 - [40] - Quote Drogan Reeth wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: What's wrong with sharing ISK based on warpoints rather than kills? Otherwise it's unfair on people who contribute without focus on killing. Isn't that the whole point of the warpoint system? Otherwise I like the idea. Especially getting back a portion of loss if you win. It seems refunding loss is a much better idea overall, and I agree contribution should be measured in WP. However, it is a shooty killy gamed, and someone who destroys proto suits and tanks, still only gets 50WP. That reminds me of the good idea of boosted WP if using a weaker suit, that would serve a similar purpose. I think the main point has been nailed a few times in this topic. It's the losing side that needs more incentives to keep playing after they are already losing. NOT the winning side. As such you need to add things to reward the losers for trying. Not the winners for winning more. Proper incentives drive behavior. Perhaps this will drive people to squad up and put up with the extra 14 seconds between battles waiting for the squad leader to deploy. Hmmm, should I squad up and go balls out for the win or continue to roll solo and stay poor? ---Note, plenty of players will still be able to piggyback wins. If you want to be rewarded for losing go play PC, lol. Thor's Emporium

Drogan Reeth Free Trade Corp 164	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:10:00 - [41] - Quote thor424 wrote: Drogan Reeth wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: What's wrong with sharing ISK based on warpoints rather than kills? Otherwise it's unfair on people who contribute without focus on killing. Isn't that the whole point of the warpoint system? Otherwise I like the idea. Especially getting back a portion of loss if you win. It seems refunding loss is a much better idea overall, and I agree contribution should be measured in WP. However, it is a shooty killy gamed, and someone who destroys proto suits and tanks, still only gets 50WP. That reminds me of the good idea of boosted WP if using a weaker suit, that would serve a similar purpose. I think the main point has been nailed a few times in this topic. It's the losing side that needs more incentives to keep playing after they are already losing. NOT the winning side. As such you need to add things to reward the losers for trying. Not the winners for winning more. Proper incentives drive behavior. Perhaps this will drive people to squad up and put up with the extra 14 seconds between battles waiting for the squad leader to deploy. Hmmm, should I squad up and go balls out for the win or continue to roll solo and stay poor? ---Note, plenty of players will still be able to piggyback wins. If you want to be rewarded for losing go play PC, lol. Do you not see that people stop trying after their team is losing even by as much as 5 clone kills? But sure go ahead and implement some changes that go against human nature and see what it does. If you don't reward trying when lossing, then everyone will stop trying when they are losing, because they know they don't get the rewards anyways. So why risk the extra isk loss? Unless you can answer that nothing will change.
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 54	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:13:00 - [42] - Quote Drogan Reeth wrote: thor424 wrote: Drogan Reeth wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: What's wrong with sharing ISK based on warpoints rather than kills? Otherwise it's unfair on people who contribute without focus on killing. Isn't that the whole point of the warpoint system? Otherwise I like the idea. Especially getting back a portion of loss if you win. It seems refunding loss is a much better idea overall, and I agree contribution should be measured in WP. However, it is a shooty killy gamed, and someone who destroys proto suits and tanks, still only gets 50WP. That reminds me of the good idea of boosted WP if using a weaker suit, that would serve a similar purpose. I think the main point has been nailed a few times in this topic. It's the losing side that needs more incentives to keep playing after they are already losing. NOT the winning side. As such you need to add things to reward the losers for trying. Not the winners for winning more. Proper incentives drive behavior. Perhaps this will drive people to squad up and put up with the extra 14 seconds between battles waiting for the squad leader to deploy. Hmmm, should I squad up and go balls out for the win or continue to roll solo and stay poor? ---Note, plenty of players will still be able to piggyback wins. If you want to be rewarded for losing go play PC, lol. Do you not see that people stop trying after their team is losing even by as much as 5 clone kills? But sure go ahead and implement some changes that go against human nature and see what it does. If you don't reward trying when lossing, then everyone will stop trying when they are losing, because they know they don't get the rewards anyways. So why risk the extra isk loss? Unless you can answer that nothing will change. I do get your point, I'm just excited. Then use the same payout formula but add a bonus for winning. In the veteran bracket many people never start fighting if they see names that mean they'll have to try or they leave battle. Thor's Emporium
Leither Yiltron Molon Labe. RUST415 1137	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:17:00 - [43] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Dear players, we have been thinking long and hard about a way to make winning battles lucrative, and maybe throwing caution to the wind to do so. What do you think of two (or both) ways of increasing your reward. This bonus reward would only be for the winner, loser would get the normal payout Winner reward would be normal current payout + x% of own personal losses + y% of personally inflicted losses x and y to be decided I don't see an easy exploit to this system and it would mean that you would commit proto to claim the battle, instead of hunkering back in starter loadouts. You should be doing suit tiericide instead. Here. This idea you have posted will not work, and will have the opposite effect to what you intend. What you are trying to solve is a fundamental problem that Dust has had for a very, very long time. That problem is that the game's own subsystems are designed to encourage players to cut their losses by downgrading their gear class and participation as victory becomes less and less likely. Trying to counteract this effect by throwing further incentives at winning isn't going to cut it. Skirmish in particular, and all the game modes though perhaps to marginally lesser extents, have the quality of promoting defensive play. You can win a Skirmish match in the first 45s of gameplay by moving fast and hunkering down on the proper number of objectives. In Ambush the winning team is often the one that lives through the initial beginning-of-match onslaught to fortify a high-ground position with uplinks. No wonder, then, that matches "snowball". Even if you beat the odds to push back a match where you've lost the defenders' advantage, it will cost you tons of effort and gear. It is much lower risk to cut your losses and accept the lower reward than to fight hard against the odds and lose big. You might reply: "But that's precisely why there need to be incentives to kill, to win!" But that's not the case. Another big reason why matches snowball in Dust is that the disparity between the utility in gear classes is too damn high. A team in a defensive position has high incentive and little risk for pulling out progressively higher suit tiers that are available to them, since even if they lose the gear a few times they're still likely to pull extra ISK for the match because they'll likely win. You're looking squarely at the wrong side of the risk-reward equation. Defenders face low risk to their gear in a public match. Attackers (the "losing" team) face high risk. As you increase the reward, both sides can increase their risk. The thing is that this is completely symmetric- the attackers still face hugely high risk for the exact same reward that the "winners" are looking at with a lower risk. Do you know what would get people to fight more? People would fight more in pubs if they could have a fair, fun fight without risking millions of ISK for low expectations of payoff. STD vs PRO is not a fair fight. ADV vs PRO is not a fair fight. The view that people have incentive to play ******, unfun fights against people who sport higher gear classes than they have on is na+»ve. I think a lot of other people share this view: I don't log on to an FPS game to run endless matches against people who have an unfair, difficult-to-mitigate advantage over me. And this is ultimately was has stuck me in the redline with a sniper rifle upon occasion. It's absolutely no fun to This is the wrong solution to a problem that is better treated by lowering the utility gaps between suit classes. Spectral Clone has a thread which details one such implementation of "tiericide" that is relatively simple and if for some unfathomable reason it goes incredibly awry should be something that can be rolled back with more ease than others. If you increase the rewards for winning in pub matches, all that will happen is that you will find more veterans running in proto suits more of the time. You will make the game that much more hostile to new players who don't have the SP to run prototype suits. You will make the game that much more intolerable for people to play if they don't run with a team that can help guarantee them wins. People will still stick in the back not doing anything, because fundamentally you have not made a game more winnable. Increasing reward and decreasing risk do not have the same psychological effect, and increasing reward will not have the effect you want in this instance. Long term roadmap by Aeon Amadi Have a pony
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 54	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:18:00 - [44] - Quote ^doesnt play Dust Thor's Emporium
PLAYSTTION Corrosive Synergy Rise Of Legion. 1272	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:31:00 - [45] - Quote I think Losers should get normal pay. Winners get regular payout plus their losses back. Gassault Galogi Galsent `Open Beta Vet - 42 mil sp Director of Corrosive Synergy`
PLAYSTTION Corrosive Synergy Rise Of Legion. 1272	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:39:00 - [46] - Quote Quote: STD vs PRO is not a fair fight. ADV vs PRO is not a fair fight. I have done both of these whoever posted this. It is very fair. ADV can shred proto and is very equal to it and STD vs Proto is possible and maybe 30% of the time a win if tactics, cover and a fair 1v1 duel occurs but usually you wouldn't attack someone in Proto with basic unless you have squad support or surprise. If that doesn't work just avoid them. If you use all these tactics the only way you'll die is from engaging to many reds, being jumped (you'd die no matter what tier suit they're wearing) and trying to die. I support tiericied but I had to give this point. Gassault Galogi Galsent `Open Beta Vet - 42 mil sp Director of Corrosive Synergy`
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 9299	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:49:00 - [47] - Quote Thokk Nightshade wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: http://i.imgur.com/bZRpnMP.png Borrowed From: E-3 Trailer Kill a target? Displayed on screen: +50 WP +X ISK (where X = % of suit value * by meta adjustment) Examples: 1. Meta(30) Assault G-1 kills Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Assault is paid 20% of suit value (24k) * meta adjustment (60/30 = 2) for a total of 48k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +48k ISK. 2. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(30) Assault G-1 with a value of 30,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (6k) * meta adjustment (30/60 = 0.5) for a total of 3k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +3k ISK. 3. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(60) Assault Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (30k) * meta adjustment (60/60 = 1) for a total of 30k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +30k ISK. The only problem I see is what if someone manages to kill someone who isn't that good running your 1st suit like 10 times? Just those kills would be worth 480,000 ISK. Seems like a huge bonus for 10 kills. I love the idea but I think the multipliers and numbers need to be toned down a bit. Not following your math. The meta adjustment works both ways; see scenario 2 above. Using these numbers, a proto bear killing a newbro in a 20k suit ten times would net him under 50k. Not sure where you're getting 480k. I'm simply proposing a model (not married to these numbers). I think it'd be motivating to see on screen that you're earning $$$ every time you kill someone. And a "meta adjustment" which increases/decrease the amount of those payouts would definitely incentivize running lower-end gear. Overcome steep odds? Make big bucks. Shoot scout with yes. - Ripley Riley
Drogan Reeth Free Trade Corp 166	Posted - 2015.04.29 01:51:00 - [48] - Quote thor424 wrote: I do get your point, I'm just excited. Then use the same payout formula but add a bonus for winning. In the veteran bracket many people never start fighting if they see names that mean they'll have to try or they leave battle. Ya, I am too, and i'll gladly take the extra payout for winning, however it won't have any impact on trying to make the losing side try harder. Which is the point of the proposed change. I'll still run my apex suits when our team has no chance to win, and risk nothing. Why would that change from what's been proposed?
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 54	Posted - 2015.04.29 02:07:00 - [49] - Quote Drogan Reeth wrote: thor424 wrote: I do get your point, I'm just excited. Then use the same payout formula but add a bonus for winning. In the veteran bracket many people never start fighting if they see names that mean they'll have to try or they leave battle. Ya, I am too, and i'll gladly take the extra payout for winning, however it won't have any impact on trying to make the losing side try harder. Which is the point of the proposed change. I'll still run my apex suits when our team has no chance to win, and risk nothing. Why would that change from what's been proposed? There's nothing that'll change the behavior of people like you. But most humans have competitive nature and realize they turned on a video game. Thor's Emporium
Thokk Nightshade Montana Militia 805	Posted - 2015.04.29 02:36:00 - [50] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Thokk Nightshade wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: http://i.imgur.com/bZRpnMP.png Borrowed From: E-3 Trailer Kill a target? Displayed on screen: +50 WP +X ISK (where X = % of suit value * by meta adjustment) Examples: 1. Meta(30) Assault G-1 kills Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Assault is paid 20% of suit value (24k) * meta adjustment (60/30 = 2) for a total of 48k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +48k ISK. 2. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(30) Assault G-1 with a value of 30,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (6k) * meta adjustment (30/60 = 0.5) for a total of 3k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +3k ISK. 3. Meta(60) Scout Gk.0 kills Meta(60) Assault Gk.0 with a value of 150,000 Isk. Scout is paid 20% of suit value (30k) * meta adjustment (60/60 = 1) for a total of 30k. Displayed on screen: +50WP, +30k ISK. The only problem I see is what if someone manages to kill someone who isn't that good running your 1st suit like 10 times? Just those kills would be worth 480,000 ISK. Seems like a huge bonus for 10 kills. I love the idea but I think the multipliers and numbers need to be toned down a bit. Not following your math. The meta adjustment works both ways; see scenario 2 above. Using these numbers, a proto bear killing a newbro in a 20k suit ten times would net him under 50k. Not sure where you're getting 480k. I'm simply proposing a model (not married to these numbers). I think it'd be motivating to see on screen that you're earning $$$ every time you kill someone. And a "meta adjustment" which increases/decrease the amount of those payouts would definitely incentivize running lower-end gear. Overcome steep odds? Make big bucks. I will be the first to admit I am an English major, not a math major. I am getting the 480000 from your first scenario. The total of 1 kill is $48,000. It the same assault killed the same scout 10 times, it would be worth 480k. After looking at it again, I am figuring out your Meta adjustment. Their suit Meta divided by your suit Meta. So the chances of a meta 30 killing a meta 60 10 times in a match is very slim so the 480k is unlikely. Scernario 2 and 3 are much more likely so it would balance it out and (mostly) prevent the payouts like I suggested. After mathing a bit and dissecting your theory, I get the theory and think it would work really well. Thokk Kill. Thokk Crush. Thokk Smash.

dombolus KAPPA.514 Imperium Eden 1	Posted - 2015.04.29 06:03:00 - [51] - Quote i think both winners and losers should get X & Y, just that X & Y are higher for the winners than the losers. This would encourage people to try even if they are losing
pagl1u M Dead Man's Game 1976	Posted - 2015.04.29 08:42:00 - [52] - Quote You are receiving a lot of feedbacks from logis apparently. They are afraid they ll recive Less moneys because they do not Kill. While this is true it is also true that they receive more moneys from WPs because we all know it is way too easy for a logi to obtain a great amount of wps. So we really need that Y: moneys obtained from destroying stuffs. I think x and y should be 50 50. Assault since open beta.
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2886	Posted - 2015.04.29 10:24:00 - [53] - Quote Pagl1u M wrote: You are receiving a lot of feedbacks from logis apparently. They are afraid they ll recive Less moneys because they do not Kill. While this is true it is also true that they receive more moneys from WPs because we all know it is way too easy for a logi to obtain a great amount of wps. So we really need that Y: moneys obtained from destroying stuffs. I think x and y should be 50 50. I believe the intent of this design is to be in addition to regular match payouts. Most logi's are perfectly content in acknowledging that they can earn stupid amounts of WP which also = incredible isk. No sane 'logi' should be really worried about this design in regards to how it affect their earnings. Most people are trying to address issues about how people need to be encouraged to try even in lost matches as an example, this is a rampant problem in faction warfare, or in unocoordinated public matches when rooftop uplinks are deployed. People don't want to leave them and feel relatively content never actually trying to play. Some people like myself are trying to see extra ISK being used to teach, encourage, and reinforce positive play behaviour. The very last thing I want to see this become is extra money thrown at the most murdertastic of protostomp players. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Haerr 2865	Posted - 2015.04.29 10:43:00 - [54] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: What do you think of two (or both) ways of increasing your reward. This bonus reward would only be for the winner, loser would get the normal payout Winner reward would be normal current payout + x% of own personal losses + y% of personally inflicted losses If you want to incentivise trying to win then there is nothing wrong with implementing all different options, at least to some degree: Loser +y% :: Giving the losing side a higher +y% than the winning side will let them keep playing the game in spite of an imminent loss, trying to bleed more ISK out of the winning side could be a "fun" reward regardless of if you end up losing the match. It would also incentivise players to keep trying even if they are down a bit. Winner +y% :: Giving the winning side at least some of what they destroy would be necessary in order for the losing side to be given a higher +y%, since not doing so could end up incentivise losing a match. Loser +x% :: Covering at least some of the losses allows player to keep trying since the feeling of "wasting suits" is mitigated, and: Winner +x% :: Covering a higher percentage of losses for the winning side would allow player, on both sides, to keep trying to win since more of their losses would be refunded if they win, and compared to +y% it doesn't further reward clearly superior sides. ^ And yes this is basically a Care Bear package. But if you want players to keep trying (a.k.a. better matches) then I have a strong feeling that it will need to be. I can think of one more thing that would make people try, give salvage only to the winning side. If players want those ooh so shiny things they'll need to play for the win. GÖû HAERR'S GÖû
Celus Ivara DUST University Ivy League 360	Posted - 2015.04.29 11:23:00 - [55] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Varoth Drac wrote: What's wrong with sharing ISK based on warpoints rather than kills? Otherwise it's unfair on people who contribute without focus on killing. Isn't that the whole point of the warpoint system? Otherwise I like the idea. Especially getting back a portion of loss if you win. It seems refunding loss is a much better idea overall, and I agree contribution should be measured in WP. However, it is a shooty killy gamed, and someone who destroys proto suits and tanks, still only gets 50WP. That reminds me of the good idea of boosted WP if using a weaker suit, that would serve a similar purpose. That idea's been around for a while and it would be fantastic.
Drogan Reeth Free Trade Corp 171	Posted - 2015.04.29 16:47:00 - [56] - Quote thor424 wrote: Drogan Reeth wrote: thor424 wrote: I do get your point, I'm just excited. Then use the same payout formula but add a bonus for winning. In the veteran bracket many people never start fighting if they see names that mean they'll have to try or they leave battle. Ya, I am too, and i'll gladly take the extra payout for winning, however it won't have any impact on trying to make the losing side try harder. Which is the point of the proposed change. I'll still run my apex suits when our team has no chance to win, and risk nothing. Why would that change from what's been proposed? There's nothing that'll change the behavior of people like you. But most humans have competitive nature and realize they turned on a video game. People like me? People who want to maximize profit and minimize loss? You mean smart ppl? Just cause it's a video game doesn't mean you can't use your brain with choices offered in that game.
Himiko Kuronaga Fatal Absolution Negative-Feedback 5800	Posted - 2015.04.29 17:23:00 - [57] - Quote -forget it- Usually banned for being too awesome.
Flint Beastgood III GunFall Mobilization 1709	Posted - 2015.04.29 17:28:00 - [58] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: I don't really have a problem with throwing extra money at people, but I'd like to see it done in such a manner that facilitates, enhances and rewards team-play rather than just funding people who are capable of being extra murder-tastic in proto stomp squads.. Winner. +1 It's a squad-based game so let's reward squad/teamplay. 'LR4-Trading' Protester
thor424 Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2015.04.29 17:46:00 - [59] - Quote Drogan Reeth wrote: thor424 wrote: Drogan Reeth wrote: thor424 wrote: I do get your point, I'm just excited. Then use the same payout formula but add a bonus for winning. In the veteran bracket many people never start fighting if they see names that mean they'll have to try or they leave battle. Ya, I am too, and i'll gladly take the extra payout for winning, however it won't have any impact on trying to make the losing side try harder. Which is the point of the proposed change. I'll still run my apex suits when our team has no chance to win, and risk nothing. Why would that change from what's been proposed? There's nothing that'll change the behavior of people like you. But most humans have competitive nature and realize they turned on a video game. People like me? People who want to maximize profit and minimize loss? You mean smart ppl? FYI: That's what the whole point of the game is. Risk vs Reward. If they didn't want ppl to take into account maximizing profits, suits wouldn't cost anything, you'd be able to run proto soon as you skill for it free of cost indefinably. And they have created that mechanic beautifully, now they sit around wondering, why the mechanic they created that's doing exactly what one would expect, making ppl risk less in more dangerous situations.... is working as intended? The discussion at hand is how to increase people's willingness to risk more, when on the losing side instead of giving up. And the way to do that? Reward it! Reward being on the losing side and trying hard. Don't reward the winning side more, because that won't change anything, it will just encourage more of the same. It's not working as intended. The crappy payouts were meant to encourage people to spend AUR. The payouts are so bad that most of the time losing more than 4 ADV suits leads to a net loss. Buffing payouts for both sides is a good idea, but there should still be bonus for winning. Thor's Emporium
Tebu Gan Capital Acquisitions LLC 1397	Posted - 2015.04.29 19:15:00 - [60] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Dear players, we have been thinking long and hard about a way to make winning battles lucrative, and maybe throwing caution to the wind to do so. What do you think of two (or both) ways of increasing your reward. This bonus reward would only be for the winner, loser would get the normal payout Winner reward would be normal current payout + x% of own personal losses + y% of personally inflicted losses x and y to be decided I don't see an easy exploit to this system and it would mean that you would commit proto to claim the battle, instead of hunkering back in starter loadouts. I like it a lot. Being rewarded for winning! OMG no way. Tanks - Balancing Turrets



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.