Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Armatsu
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 03:11:00 -
[31] - Quote
The simple fact that EVE players have billions of disposable income is one of THE BIGGEST reasons why cost should not balance. Sure a Dust player may eventually transfer a few billion isk to their account from EVE and then buy the most expensive tank in the game. What does this do? In a free market system those players purchasing the most expensive tank like its nothing will greatly inflate the cost of the tanks since the supply can't keep up with the demand. Without billions of isk you may not be able to use those tanks frequently due to the inflation. The reason cost shouldn't be a balancing factor is because now that tank is so expensive that nothing should ever destroy it.
If you balance weapons without looking at cost and let the market decide the price point you don't have this problem. I would gladly let rich players buy millions upon millions of the prototype tanks for billions if not trillions of isk because that means that every other version of tank is now dirt cheap because there is a huge supply and low demand. Now i am casually able to buy the second best tank in the game as if it is nothing and with proper skills, fitting, and a bit of luck can still hold my own against the top tier tank with some help. Not to mention you will see people grinding out anti tank weapons as they will be a cheaper alternative to deal with a threat.
Balance every weapon based on its pro's and con's, what it is good against and what its counters are. Let the marketplace decide how expensive said item should be based on availability of the resources and time it takes to pump out the item. Even though in the beginning prices will be inflated outrageously by players selling items for 100x what they cost to make due to buyers buying them, there will be competitors continuously undercutting until the community finally settles on a number that is a reasonable profit without taking a loss. That is how the free market works and that is why you don't let an arbitrary value like cost dictate how good something is.
Example: If cost was the balancing factor in the computer market then Apple would make the most powerful and reliable machines out there. The fact of the matter is, they don't. Price means nothing more to a product than what people are willing to pay for it. If people weren't willing to pay 2k for a mediocre laptop then you would see the prices dropping to the 800 range where they should be because cost means nothing. |
Bones1182
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
86
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 06:34:00 -
[32] - Quote
Ignatius Crumwald wrote:Bones1182 wrote:Ignatius Crumwald wrote:I think cost should be a part of balance but not the deciding factor - because like the OP said, it will fail. That said, I'm sure much of this is connected to the OP tank QQ. Let's not go nerfing them till we see everything in action. AV grenades with limited homing are on the horizon. The advanced AV's do over 2k each, turning three AV fit infantry into tank killers. I don't care what you have, you aren't repping through that, especially if one has a forge gun.
On the subject of transfering ISK directly from EvE to DUST, where has this been said to be confirmed?
Seems rather counter productive to me. Why even have the contract system if I can just mine for a day on Eve and send my Dust character 1 billion ISK? That's just a plain and simple broken gameplay mechanic on the order of ME3's Galaxy At War assets they're fashioning there and if that's what they truly intend they might want to rethink that because it's bad design. Imagine this you are a dust character in an eve corp. The CEO can give you temporary access to a specific corp wallet that has billions of ISK in it. He tells you to clean it out and go kill for the corp. Then he revokes your access. Transfer accomplished. No matter how much you might not like that is only one of at least a half dozen ways to "transfer" money. Others contracts for millions of ISK in return for one assault rifle or something else ridiculous. Preferential payouts on merc contracts. Or just giving them the stupid awesome gear for free. I am not particularly creative when it comes to this stuff. All of that can be done within the corp system no cheats no actual donations to the player. By simply linking the players in the same corp any way to combat transfer of ISK is moot. Just the market being linked is enough to do most of these things. Imagine this... Why the **** would I revoke access to my own ******* wallet? Also, I was under the impression that while could join alliances in Eve from dust, you would have to create a separate corp and/or holding company in Dust. Still begs the question, Why even have contract system? If the game is going to go the way many think it is then the market would be flooded with cheap money within a day locking 99% of the player base out of the market. Something tells me that it's not going to be how you think it's going to be - FYI Something tells me the devs have stated that the markets will one hundred percent integrated. That means anything that can be on the eve market can be done on the dust market as they will be a single entity. They have stated that dust mercs can join EVE Corporations and EVE players will be able to join corporations run by dust players. I would hunt down the devblog for you but I am on a cheap smart phone and its late in my timezone. Go back through the dev stuff and look for where they talk about the markets and interaction between the two sides of this game. Oh and please stop swearing at the other people here it doesn't make you look any smarter or make you right. Also reread my imagine this post I think you missed some important words like CEO of a corp not you yourself. If you happen to a CEO good for you. If not I will ask you if you have ever played EVE and run your own corp in game. Well good night.
Edit corrected spelling |
Kitt 514
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
94
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 11:44:00 -
[33] - Quote
Armatsu wrote:The simple fact that EVE players have billions of disposable income is one of THE BIGGEST reasons why cost should not balance. Sure a Dust player may eventually transfer a few billion isk to their account from EVE and then buy the most expensive tank in the game. What does this do? In a free market system those players purchasing the most expensive tank like its nothing will greatly inflate the cost of the tanks since the supply can't keep up with the demand. Without billions of isk you may not be able to use those tanks frequently due to the inflation. The reason cost shouldn't be a balancing factor is because now that tank is so expensive that nothing should ever destroy it.
If you balance weapons without looking at cost and let the market decide the price point you don't have this problem. I would gladly let rich players buy millions upon millions of the prototype tanks for billions if not trillions of isk because that means that every other version of tank is now dirt cheap because there is a huge supply and low demand. Now i am casually able to buy the second best tank in the game as if it is nothing and with proper skills, fitting, and a bit of luck can still hold my own against the top tier tank with some help. Not to mention you will see people grinding out anti tank weapons as they will be a cheaper alternative to deal with a threat.
Balance every weapon based on its pro's and con's, what it is good against and what its counters are. Let the marketplace decide how expensive said item should be based on availability of the resources and time it takes to pump out the item. Even though in the beginning prices will be inflated outrageously by players selling items for 100x what they cost to make due to buyers buying them, there will be competitors continuously undercutting until the community finally settles on a number that is a reasonable profit without taking a loss. That is how the free market works and that is why you don't let an arbitrary value like cost dictate how good something is.
Example: If cost was the balancing factor in the computer market then Apple would make the most powerful and reliable machines out there. The fact of the matter is, they don't. Price means nothing more to a product than what people are willing to pay for it. If people weren't willing to pay 2k for a mediocre laptop then you would see the prices dropping to the 800 range where they should be because cost means nothing.
This man understands the universe.
A great example in eve is say something that is meta 4 vs meta 3. Perhaps the meta 3 version is 500k isk. The meta 4 version could be 5 mil, because of supply and demand. Same with faction items, deadspace, officer, etc.
|
William HBonney
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
318
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 13:51:00 -
[34] - Quote
Ignatius Crumwald wrote:William HBonney wrote:ISK will eventually....within a month or two not be a stepping stone....a million isk tank that doesn't die will still be fielded because the risk is so low. CCP needs to increase the options for AV, ie mines, better mechanics for AV gernades, make fielding a tank a risk, otherwise, in 2 years it'll be tank wars and anyone in a suit will be 2 shotted by missles. How when I can just "OPEN MY OWN WALLET TO MYSELF" and buy 6000 tanks on day one? Not to jump on you PPH, but just using it to make a point that some people may be planning or counting on eventualities that never materialize. And I want the pain of that realization to sink in.
Your statement doesn't conflict with mine, it actually only supports it. Day one you can buy tanks but won't be able to use them.....not the point...the point is that increases in ISK cost for tanks in the current build (limited AV options) is not a solution for balance. |
Garrett Blacknova
Codex Troopers
1849
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 14:10:00 -
[35] - Quote
Kitt 514 wrote:The rest of your post becomes invalid when you start with the premise that Cost is a balancing factor.
Cost should not be a balancing factor... at all. I'm surprised I've had to say this this many times. It definitely shouldn't be a MAJOR balancing factor.
But it definitely SHOULD be a balancing factor. If it isn't, then money has no value. And if money has no value, there's no use playing.
Expensive gear should be valuable. That means it needs to be worth something. If not, there's no use for it, so nobody will use it.
But expensive gear should ALSO be hard to use for its rewards, or only have an advantage in being easier to use rather than better, or should have some IMMEDIATE cost involved for you to use it as well as the purchase cost, or have some other limiting factor to balance it IN ADDITION TO THE PRICE. |
Armatsu
Osmon Surveillance Caldari State
33
|
Posted - 2012.07.17 23:11:00 -
[36] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Kitt 514 wrote:The rest of your post becomes invalid when you start with the premise that Cost is a balancing factor.
Cost should not be a balancing factor... at all. I'm surprised I've had to say this this many times. It definitely shouldn't be a MAJOR balancing factor. But it definitely SHOULD be a balancing factor. If it isn't, then money has no value. And if money has no value, there's no use playing. Expensive gear should be valuable. That means it needs to be worth something. If not, there's no use for it, so nobody will use it. But expensive gear should ALSO be hard to use for its rewards, or only have an advantage in being easier to use rather than better, or should have some IMMEDIATE cost involved for you to use it as well as the purchase cost, or have some other limiting factor to balance it IN ADDITION TO THE PRICE.
You obviously have no idea how money actually works. Money is completely useless and has no value what so ever. Money is paper or melted metals, nothing more nothing less. What gives money value is the way people barter with it. As soon as something is deemed to be "good" it will automatically inflate in price because the sellers are making a quality product and want more profits.
I don't think you actually understand how EVE's marketplace works. While the Devs may have the ability to sway the market by offering an abundance or shortage of blueprints, they don't actually dictate the market prices. Balance the weapons based on their stats and the cost will figure itself out, it always does. |
Bones1182
Circle of Huskarl Minmatar Republic
86
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 19:14:00 -
[37] - Quote
@Armatsu They do decide the mineral cost build things which always plays a part in the equation. If it takes a million ISK worth of minerals to build it it is not likely to sell for less than that. You correct though once the market goes live and is completely player run the laws of supply and demand will take over and rule everything. |
Aighun
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
666
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 20:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
Good thread. If there is an income generating mechanic in a game, there will be a way to to set up and defend a source of income so that you end up with more money than you know what to do with.
So yes, in general I agree that you cannot make the best ever weapon in the game, OMFGBBQPWN4EVR, I think it is called, take a look at that weapon, realize it just beats everything, then say "Well, heck, just make it cost a trillion trillion whatevers. No one will ever use it." And call it a day.
Well, you could, but that would not be wise, nor elegant game making.
But what you can do with cost is very generally influence player seperation. Keep OP long time pros from picking on new players because there is no money in it. Lure players with cash to burn and weapons out the ears to certain areas of space cause that is where the money is.
In the end though, it is definitely worth it to give as much thought and time as possible to (as has been pointed out) looking at the way certain items work, where and when do they always win, what their counters are, all that kind of thing, completely seperate from the price tag. |
4447
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
649
|
Posted - 2012.07.18 20:37:00 -
[39] - Quote
you lost me at hello |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |