|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
24
   |
Posted - 2012.08.27 21:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
So, I am an avid FPS player. Halo, COD, BF3. Usually pretty solid at those games.
Right away I can see an "issue" with DUST. Its not a problem, but it is an "issue."
Eventually high level play will be about protecting your expensive **** while destroying theirs. Expensive tanks will battle expensive tanks, while logistic vehicles attempt to drain energy and stop repairs or lock down these tanks. AV infantry will attempt to take out said vehicles while infantry attempt to kill them.
Its a good dynamic, and can be a lot of fun. But the current FPS mentality will ruin that. Folks worrying about their k/d ratio will absolutely hate this game. And the leader boards do not do much to counter that.
A quick way to begin facilitiating a change in this mentaility is to record damage done in ISK. And show that versus ISK lost in the post game screens and the leader boards.
The focus of DUST can not be typical FPS kill to death. We need a way to make infantry units feel they are contributing at a high level. Otherwise it will devolve to tank v tank. Because nobody wants to go 1-30 against a tank. However, if a tank cost 30X as much as basic gear they SHOULD go 1-30 against it.
But also, the basic skirmish mode where clones get depleted needs to go away. Otherwise it will become "who spends the most". If I want to throw 20 bodies at a tank and take it out, i should be able to without hurting the success of the mission.
Point is, this game can appeal to a lot of people, but to do so, the game itself needs to take focus off K/D and put it on what makes this game unique, the economy and the global scheme of things.
|
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.27 23:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
First off, im not saying dont show K/D. Im saying take that away as the focus, and focus on isk damaged versus isk lost. Instead of default listing players by kill, list them by isk damage. Add that ratio as a search on the leader boards and make it a focus. Keep other stats for players to see, but put an emphasis on what matters.
The point is to make new comers and typical FPS players relax on worrying about their k/d and make them feel useful even if they died 8 times to that tank. If they damaged it 40% when it got destroyed, they should get 40% of its value towards their isk damage score.
Secondly, worrying about losing a 300K proto suit to a single rail gun shot is valid. But it throws the same concerns. However, you have to remember, folks can res that 300K suit and bring that player back in the game. You cant do that with a tank.
Eventually, I assume the game will play with new players fighting new players in more typical FPS style quick matches. Spending money to win these battles wont make a ton of sense. But its possible. A focus on ISK as a driving stat of success/failure will help mitigate new players from being upset about a tank owning them. (not solve, but help mitigate).
While organized corporations will fight using the vast array of equipment that the game will have. You will have that 300K proto suit defended by some cheaper infantry, and some medics to keep it alive, supplied and resed. But in each scenario, players will want to be able to see how effective they are. And just because you lost 4 25K suits while fighting 1 200K tank doesnt mean you werent effective. The resulting stats should show that rather then show the guy who lost hsi 200K tank going 4-1 against the guy who lost 100K in suits.
If Im a coorp looking for new members I want to be able to see their stats and value their play. In most games k/d is a pretty good indicator. Here it simply isnt. An ISK ratio would be. |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 02:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
FatalFlaw V1 wrote:The scores are NOT sorted by K:D ratio, they are sorted by the number of kills, with the tie breaker going to the one with fewer deaths. I have no objection to showing isk loss on the board, but it should continue to be sorted by the number of kills by default. Good for you to anyone who wants to run in nothing but militia gear, but if others on your team are offering a greater contribution to the match, they should be recognized.
Your deaths have the potential of leading your team to losing the match, while a person losing expensive gear is only at their own personal cost. Assets are personal only in dust right now, so there's nothing but imaginary bragging rights gained from running in nothing but militia, racking up a 5:10 ratio and having 100% isk efficiency.
Killing 40 militia gear folks in an objective game type isnt offering a greater contribution than killing one 400k tank. I really have two points in my posts.
1) Isk damage ratio should be more of a focus than k/d or kills.
2) The team deathmatch, whats it called, skimrish? mode does not work well in the context of this game. Spending 30X someones else should allow you to kill 30X of them. But you dont want a game where spending 30X someone automatically means you win. In objective gametypes this is fine, because a tank can kill 30 crappy infantry units without it being pretty much an auto win. They will make an impact on the battlefield and likely tilt the war effort to their side, but its not as unbalanced as it would be in a match where the only point is to kill.
With 2) in mind. Killing 30 milita gear soldiers is not more helpful to the team then helping to kill 1 300k tank. So their 30 kills is not more useful then the opposing 1 kill. The leaderboard should not reflect it as such. (yes in matches where the clones are depleted it IS more useful, but as i stated in 2, I dont think those games work well in the current version or likely future versions of DUST).
However im hoping said gametype is limited to high sec. Which would be ok, as it would let new players enjoy a basic FPS style game, and big corps wouldnt be spending tons of money in these matches anyway.
Quote:without any real idea of how player contracts can work, or how taking over a player planet might play out, i think that all this is conjecture.
Agreed. But there is still no reason not to include an isk damage score and/or a isk ratio score for leaderboards and results. It would be a fun way to judge performance and quite possibly far more accurate. |
Bones McGavins
TacoCat Industries
24
|
Posted - 2012.08.28 02:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
xprotoman23 wrote:K/D is only the focus of the game if people make it out to be.
Kills are how leader boards are sorted, with an option for k/d. Kills are also how the result of a battle is sorted. The focus is there. If you want to look at who the top performer on the team is, you really only have the option to look at kills and k/d. We arent even allowed to look at an economic indicator.
And regardless, a LOT of people will have this as their focus. It behooves nobody to simple feel "they shouldnt feel that way, dont play this game." Thats not a beneficial attitude.
The natural FPS focus on K:D does not mesh with the economy driven battles where a tank can and SHOULD kill plenty of infantry and be difficult to take out. So DUST can help its own cause by making its own menus and leaderboards provide a different focus.
BF3 was brought up and its a solid exmaple. Score, SPM is more of an indicator of how you performed than kills or k/d. Both have a role. Similar metrics can be used here. ISK is obviously a good one since its what sets DUST apart from other games.
Lets face it, DUST doesnt do killing and kill to death as well as the big console shooters. So why make that your focus? Make a focus on the teamwork, the sratetgy and the economy. Help the player focus on your strong points, and help them realize why they should be playing and what they should be focusng on while doing so. |
|
|
| |
|