Leyvin-Kari Tesio
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
6
   |
Posted - 2012.10.08 12:43:00 -
[1] - Quote
Berserker007 wrote:Wintars Boar wrote:The cost to benefit ratio of one 30 day booster is cheaper than the 3-4 1-3 day boosters. Your saving $ Are you? What if u hit the cap in 4 days every week. That leaves 12 days of booster wasted (on a 30day), which id rather then just get 3 7 day boosters
Then play less and stop crying.
You know I play Battlefield 3 on a daily basis, and yes I still earn fully Experience; but frankly I unlocked all of the weapons and vehicle weaponry within the first 2 months of playing it (and this was at a relatively casual 1hr per night after work with friends)
As such right now while sure, I gain ridiculous amounts of XP still... frankly there is nothing left to unlock so at this point I'm just getting Stars that boost my overall Eagle Rank, that tbh is meaningless.
The reason you're getting mad here is because Skill Points actually have a real meaning past "unlocks" within DUST, but I said this prior to the Beta even went live at FanFest - that providing a system that allows players to grow their Skills at a reasonable speed while not providing a commanding advantage (which is what Players like you gain, esp with the Skill Boosters) will be a tricky if not impossible task.
In my opinion DUST just like EVE the more time you play should focus entirely on the more ISK you can earn, rather than the more Skill Points you can earn. Instead the length of time you have been part of the community should determine your Skill Points.
Instead the War Points (that determin against the deminishing returns Skill Point / ISK earnings) should instead work like this:
GÇó Each Contract should come with a specific ISK values: [1] Participation / Hire Value and [2] Success Bonus
GÇó Players Receive a "Share" of this based upon their Participation, i.e. War Points earnt from Feats...
As such the Contract Payout is determined based against you initial Hire Value + Bonus (if Success is achieved), this is then payed out to those who are present at the end of the Battle. As such those who Quit, Forfeit their Share.
This payout is then determined as a percentage, as such all of the War Points are added together and divided by the number of participants.
It would mean that often participation, such-as Capturing Objectives, Logistics, etc.. would recieve an equal share based on their participation over those who simply happen to be Squad Commanders or getting (often unrealistic) Kill / Death ratios due to some unfair advantage.
Conversely those who simply appear at the end wouldn't be randomly provided with a set amount based upon Win / Loss, instead if they didn't earn any WP then well they don't earn any reward. Frankly why should they? They didn't bloody do anything.
GÇó Salvage should be provided based upon Kills. It isn't a difficult concept, I mean I've somehow been given Tanks as Salvage despite the fact I never captured one the entire match. Just make no damn sense at all, instead have it work like EVE; you can only get Salvage of the items that drop from the person or vehicle you killed.
Sure you can keep it to say 1 Item Per Kill, and in the case of Vehicle Kills it could be literally Salvage / Minerals. Sure the game doesn't have it yet, but eventually it will. So why not add it now, get people used to it being an aspect of what items you can receive.
More over Vehicles you "hack / capture" from the enemy, there should be a means to get them Evac'd from the Battlefield; this would then put them in your inventory (show up as Salvage) including the fittings. I mean having to hack them to use them seems silly to me, you should be able to simply hop in it without hacking it to use it.
If you don't hack it, the vehicle STILL shows as an enemy (so TeamKilling players in unhacked vehicles would be possible and damn funny) ... sure this could give rise to enemies planting a spy in your team to hack a vehicle making it look friendly to go about TeamKilling; but this could be offset by TeamKills resulting in negative War Points, thus it could become costly to do.
GÇó Skill Points are earnt Passively with Active Bonus determined through Battles.
This might be a little more difficult to explain, but bare with me. In EVE you always earn Skill Points passively; while Implants provide a means to increase the number earnt based against certain criteria by increasing your base Stats. Traditional RPG maguffins ... DUST on the other hand currently uses Passive (single character... sorry but if one thing came from EVE THIS should NOT have been it) at a rate of 60 SP / Minute. This is actually slightly less than EVE Online which defaults 72 SP / Minute with a balanced base Atttributes.
This on the whole is fine as most of the Skills in DUST actually require considerably less SP on the whole, so for the most part it is actually quicker to get a large number of skills even passively.
In any case though, what I think should happen is as is the case with EVE Online; the SP you earn should go towards increasing your Passive Boost. The "Active Booster" should still provide 30%, this would make it invaluable for both active and inactive players ... but the total boost should be able to reach 50%. Effectively increasing your Passive SP to 90 SP / Minute.
This Active Boost amount would constantly continue to fall (let's say 1% per Hour for simplicity sake), meaning that to maintain the 50% you must continually keep playing atleast 1 battle per hour.
This would also however use the Standing Mechanic from EVE for determining how much it improves per match against what it is already at. As such it may start at say 2% per Battle (from 0%) then by 40% you're only gaining perhaps 0.5% per battle. Idea is to make it nearly impossible to reach 50% without non-stop play. In this way you will always feel like Battles are helping improve how quickly your skills train, while not making it overly skeued towards certain gamers. |