| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Leither Yiltron
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
417
   |
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
Mav posted this in a thread recently. My reply grew too long and a bit off-topic to what he was originally consulting, so here's its own thread.
Mavado V Noriega wrote:
corp battles still a joke atm , u have ppl puttin up 100K contracts yet go full tryhard in full proto gear........like wtf?
no one wants to risk anything but everyone wants to be rewarded i dont get it.
There's a really simple explanation for this one: Anybody playing corp battles at the moment doesn't care about the rewards, and never will.
You mention the collateral cost of full prototype suits; those things cost around 200k ISK apiece fitted correctly. In a game where they're matched, you're probably going to lose on average 5 per player. Long series of explanations short, you have an expected loss every time you pony up for one of these battles. Just using some very loose estimates with prototype gear, it's around 8 million ISK for 8 players. The estimates are conservative; you'll probably suffer more ISK loss as a corp in a closely matched game.
So every time you go into a corp match in Dust, you have the expectation of losing 8 million ISK. You then have an expectation of gaining some back if you win. The following might be a simplified model of how corp battles work, but it can at least provide some insight:
Let's say KEQ has a 60% win rate against the particular corp we're preparing to battle. We're also prepared to go 8 million ISK in the hole just to fight. Under a simplified model, it will take around 11 million ISK collateral for us to EXPECT to break even on the suit cost. The thing to note here, though, is that these kinds of distributions can only model really large data sets. Put more appropriately, is KEQ sitting on enough in-game ISK to stomach the cost of a "really bad day"? Assuming two battles' outcomes don't have an effect on one another (they probably do rather drastically), you get more than a 1/8 chance that in fighting two battles, you'll lose both of them. These numbers start to look imposing. If you lose 2 battles in a row at the expected even point, you lose a "lot" of ISK. (lot is in quotes because Dust/Eve etc.). In this case, more than 1/8 of the time I'll lose not just 16 million from suits in those two battles, but I'll lose an additional 22 million from the collateral, for a rousing total of 38 mil. In the best case, where we win both, I'll make 25.8 million.
The point is that in the short term, these types of contracts are totally impractical. If I don't have the ISK to feasibly continue playing 11 million collateral matches at a 60% win rate for a long effing time, there's a very substantial possibility that I will lose everything and be unable to play profitable matches before I see the long-term profit in the venture. Did I say long-term profit, I meant the long-term drawing even.
And that's the biggest of the kickers. You have to take out an even bigger collateral to expect profit in the long run. These are amounts that are insane to try to reach. Not to mention the fact that there's a huge logistical mess in this entire scenario; the corp gets all the victory earnings, and distributing them to all participants (even with a tax percentage) is annoying. Individual profit in the long run would be less than 1/8th of the total income under this system with a properly high collateral number.
So here's the final point to seal the deal: The amount of profit that you would expect to get from any one match is marginally irrelevant compared to the suit cost under this whole line of logic. Looking at it a different way, the amount of farming time that 8 players would have to put in to give themselves an appreciable nest egg of ISK to run "profitable" battles for long enough to see returns on them is huge. Even calculating at around 1 million per game for all 8 players (profit, remember), you're looking at at least 100 games if not more to get to the desired amount. And I'm desperately low balling the gear costs of each of these battles.
So yes, everybody puts in 100k contracts while simultaneously taking in their best gear. This is because they wanted to play a corp battle. They also don't risk more because the real "risk" of playing in a corp battle is guaranteeing that you're going to lose a chunk of ISK in the way of gear. Adding additional "risk" into the equation by taking a bloated contract collateral doesn't help anything unless you're sitting on more than 100 million as a corp on top of having good gear.
The current collateral system is borked. The simple solution is to sit down and get corp battles to pay out some money to individual players based on what was destroyed in the match, ala the current public match rewards system. Give the winners more, the losers less, and distribute it evenly among corp members. Take some of the lost ISK out of the pot. Leave in the old system to do what it's meant to do: prevent players from scheduling matches they can't attend. With these incentives in place, Dust becomes less about playing a loser's game with every corp battle and more about actually winning. The current "collateral" costs simply don't take into account that the real, constant collateral is gear loss.
======================================
TL;DR by one of the most inspired orators of our times, FreeBeers:
Free Beers wrote:summary? cliffs notes?
corp battles are only content other than ambush/skirmish pub matches. We are tired of the pubs and corp battles are a negative since they are a losing financial prospect no matter what you do.
CCP wants corp battles to be isk sinks for EVE but they seem to have forgotten that dust mercs are getting screwed over in the deal. All together this makes a already ****** game content wise even worse.
there i said all of what you should/could have said in 3 lines |
Free Beers
Internal Error.
Negative-Feedback
1029
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:33:00 -
[2] - Quote
summary? cliffs notes?
corp battles are only content other than ambush/skirmish pub matches. We are tired of the pubs and corp battles are a negative since they are a losing financial prospect no matter what you do.
CCP wants corp battles to be isk sinks for EVE but they seem to have forgotten that dust mercs are getting screwed over in the deal. All together this makes a already ****** game content wise even worse.
Edit
The OP is solid was just trying to emphasis a few more items not be my normal trollishness. Yeah, I'm having an off day. |
Leither Yiltron
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
417
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
Free Beers wrote:summary? cliffs notes?
corp battles are only content other than ambush/skirmish pub matches. We are tired of the pubs and corp battles are a negative since they are a losing financial prospect no matter what you do.
CCP wants corp battles to be isk sinks for EVE but they seem to have forgotten that dust mercs are getting screwed over in the deal. All together this makes a already ****** game content wise even worse.
there i said all of what you should/could have said in 3 lines
Good point, I'll add the TL;DR. |
Aighun
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
666
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:
The current collateral system is borked.
In a nutshell. Hopefully this is just a placeholder system we are seeing. And Faction Warfare will become much more fully realized.
From what I understand of EVE, there is a fairly straightforward risk/ reward scale.
High sec: low risk low reward
Low sec: medium risk medium reward
Null sec: High risk high reward
Of course players have pushed that structure around as much as they have been able to.
But in DUST at the moment you have Instant Battle which is low risk, and all reward.
And then Corporate warfare "gambling" where as described above there is a lot of low stakes betting going on. At the very least It is strange that there aren't even really contracts being offered by the NPC factions.
And yes, there should be some penalty for taking a contract then pulling a no show. Usually for such behavior you just don't get paid. |
Skihids
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
968
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:42:00 -
[5] - Quote
I would say the summary is this:
There's no percentage in gambling on corp battles.
If you think about it, no merc gambles his own money for profit. He charges what he calculates to be a cost plus profit so he wins no matter what the outcome.
The way corp battles are run the only entity guaranteed to win is the house (CCP) who rakes in a cut no matter who wins.
In short, the only way to make money is to have real customers hiring us. |
SILENTSAM 69
Pro Hic Immortalis
RISE of LEGION
421
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
I want DUST to be an ISK sink for EVE as well. They need to start to open that ISK flow soon though if that is going to be the case. That will help with a lot of the issues of taking losses in corp matches.
That said there needs to be a more significant way to notice your impact in FW when it comes to corp matches. My major problem with Corp Contracts is that they are given as a random location and random district. I would love the ability to see on the Star Map, or something like it, where it is we can take a contract.
Without being able to choose where to fight it is hard to coordinate with EVE fleets. It also doesn't feel like you are affecting things on a planet is a certain area of EVE, when you just see strange names in a list. Seeing something on a map of some kind would go a long way toward the immersion into the game. I want to be able to choose to take contracts in a specific constellation. |
Skihids
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
968
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
Corp battles are an ISK sink, only for DUST rather than EVE.
If you set the collateral perfectly one side is breaking even when the other side is taking a double loss.
Set it higher and one side loses additional ISK proportional to the amount gained by the other.
Either way CCP takes a house rake of the destroyed equipment, with an additional rake on the collateral.
Run corp battles for 100k ISK and both sides are out their losses, making it quite clear that the model is unsustainable.
|
Telcontar Dunedain
Imperfects
Negative-Feedback
328
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 23:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
Corp matches are horribly broken.
There should be an automatic win if noone defends.
There should be no visibility as to which corp is attacking.
There should be a minimum ante to even play. We are taking planetary districts that affect Faction Warfare and people are "betting" less than 1/4 the cost of 1 unfit Rifter in Eve. |
Patoman OfallColors
Angels of Darkness
3
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 23:57:00 -
[9] - Quote
Yea I don't get it at all. The isk sink is buying equipment you lose every battle, corp, or company battle should have the same isk as random battles. |
Skihids
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
968
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 00:00:00 -
[10] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:Corp matches are horribly broken.
There should be an automatic win if noone defends.
There should be no visibility as to which corp is attacking.
There should be a minimum ante to even play. We are taking planetary districts that affect Faction Warfare and people are "betting" less than 1/4 the cost of 1 unfit Rifter in Eve.
You want anonymity because the ISK sink doesn't give any incentive for other corps to accept your contracts. It's not their fault, it's just the way the game is rigged right now.
As for the cost of an EVE Rifter, we aren't in EVE and we aren't getting any EVE money for these battles. We are financing the war ourselves. In what other world do mercenaries fund themselves? Why should mercenaries pony up the funds for suits and vehicles to fight somebody else's war?
Yes, corp battles are fun, but there is no economic reason. Not when NPC's are putting up real cash in instant battles. |
|
|
Leither Yiltron
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
417
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 00:17:00 -
[11] - Quote
Hey guys, I borked the original math in a slight way that makes a really significant difference. The amount for an expectation of breaking even is 58 million, not 11 million. |
Thranx1231
CowTek
90
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 00:33:00 -
[12] - Quote
I used to be a consultant and I would never take on the **** CCP thinks a corp battle should look like.
Let them eat cake. Take a walk in the Dust.
You want me in the battle? Some EVE Corp is going to cough up ALL expenses upfront plus a percentage of at least 100%.
Win, lose or draw. This isn't actually a game now. It is business.*
Higher win percentages charge bigger overall bonuses, 200%, 300%, 1000%.
Bonuses for Strategic victories, Tactical victories and obliterating the opposition.
Bonuses for quick, fast or rapid victories.
Bonuses for preserving/destroying infrastructure.
Bonuses for individuals, no charges for N orbital strikes, no charges for transportation.
Any and all expenses will be covered by the EVE Corp or you can kiss your sweet planetary assets good bye.
We don't care about your assets. We are Mercs.
We care about other things. Eventually, our own planet. Then our own planets.
The extra ISK pays for training time, equipment, upgrading trainees, for maintaining the training masters.
So these play matches are useless. Just a way to throw ISK down the drain.
Except when, as much better stated above, playing the match is the goal and burning down the ISK is part of the Corporate Tax players are willing to pay. Either through the Corp or individually to stock their gear. And it can be worth it.
That makes sense. Until it is time for the Business of War. Then it doesn't.
*Funds to be pre-delivered to a maximum amount. Unpaid bonuses will be refunded by the Dust Corp. |
Pink Fluffy Paul
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
140
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 01:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:Hey guys, I borked the original math in a slight way that makes a really significant difference. The amount for an expectation of breaking even is 58 million, not 11 million.
Who sucks that much?
Honestly. |
Pink Fluffy Paul
Tronhadar Free Guard
Minmatar Republic
140
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 01:15:00 -
[14] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:
Let's say KEQ has a 60% win rate against the particular corp we're preparing to battle.
Personally I like using facts when I post.
Helps my arguments along. |
slap26
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
461
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 01:17:00 -
[15] - Quote
Leither Yiltron wrote:Hey guys, I borked the original math in a slight way that makes a really significant difference. The amount for an expectation of breaking even is 58 million, not 11 million.
who is losing 58 mil in a match? look at it from a winning perspective, big contracts you cover the cost of your gear with a little left over in the corp wallet |
Skihids
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
968
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 02:38:00 -
[16] - Quote
You are looking at it from a consistent winner's perspective, and you have to for corp battles to make any economic sense.
Basically you are like a lawyer taking a case on contingency where if you loose you have to cover the opposing attorney's fees.
You would have to be quite sure that you would win big enough to cover your own costs plus the opponent's cost the few times you do lose.
Now imagine you are an average lawyer. Half the time you win and half the time you lose. You would just break even, except that the court skims 10% off the top each time so you still lose. You are out your time and you paid for the privilege of working.
Not very enticing is it?
That's why lawyers charge by the hour win or lose, and if they take a case on contingency they expect a huge payout well beyond their costs. They also don't risk additional costs for losing.
You don't pay your lawyer only if he wins, and you don't pay your doctor only if he cures you. Likewise don't expect to pay your mercenary only if he wins. He is every bit the professional that the lawyer or doctor is. This is business, not a sporting contest where the winner gets a trophy and the loser goes home empty handed. That's the vast difference between DUST and every other FPS, and something every corp has to understand if they want to survive in New Eden.
Right now we pay for the privilege of stepping outside the meaningless grind of public matches, but that is only the case because public matches are so freaking pointless. Corp matches come out of discretionary income. They are a luxury, not a source of income. |
Leither Yiltron
KILL-EM-QUICK
RISE of LEGION
417
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 03:04:00 -
[17] - Quote
slap26 wrote:Leither Yiltron wrote:Hey guys, I borked the original math in a slight way that makes a really significant difference. The amount for an expectation of breaking even is 58 million, not 11 million. who is losing 58 mil in a match? look at it from a winning perspective, big contracts you cover the cost of your gear with a little left over in the corp wallet
Yeah, if you win. 58 million is the required cost to EXPECT to come out even over a large number of matches. |
fred orpaul
Tritan-Industries
Legacy Rising
211
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 03:38:00 -
[18] - Quote
corp matches for now are for nothing other then bragging rights that should change very soon here. |
slap26
Pink Fluffy Bounty Hunterz
RISE of LEGION
461
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 05:29:00 -
[19] - Quote
Corp Battles should be issued Eve side. As it stands dust corps really don't gain much buy winning a corp battle especially with all the measly 100,000 isk contracts going up
Eve corps should be putting up the contracts for the dust mercs to pick up. On top of that dust mercs should get a per diem to buy all of there pre battle gear. Say a eve corp puts up a 20mil isk contract to take a district. Dust mercs take contract and get 10mil isk to buy gear for the battle. If they win they get the other 10 mil but if they lose they don't |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |