|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
404
   |
Posted - 2013.01.28 02:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
BobThe843CakeMan wrote:Zekain Kade wrote:Is fu*cking re*tarded. Realize that. If we all had infinite funds, cost would not matter, and it shouldn't now. But the balance of things would still be the same. The cost of a fitting, item, or vehicle is only directly related on how you can manage your funds. Using it to justify a Godly tank, or a super heavy, or a UBer rifle is pure retardation.
The cost of something is irrelevant. why shouldn't cost be considered. you tell me why? All you told me here is that is stupid but why?
It's a bad idea because it doesn't address the underlying imbalance, just tries to compensate for it by changing the price. It's like trying to hold lousy architecture together with glue: the stresses and the shears are still there in the structure, and the thing wants to come apart at the first opportunity.
We're gonna have a lot of people with a lot of isk in this game, and also a lot of peeps flat broke. The amount of ISK availiable to DUST mercs and corps will escalate wildly when nullsec warfare gets going. I guarantee you corps will be taking contracts for billions of ISKies.
But balancing with cost is a bad idea in any game. In some, where the devs control the economy, they can maybe get away with it. But nobody, CCP included, controls the economy in New Eden(that's why they had to hire a Ph.D. research economist), and any ISK-based balancing of unbalanced weapons will go bad fast. |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.28 11:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
BobThe843CakeMan wrote:Vrain Matari wrote:BobThe843CakeMan wrote:Zekain Kade wrote:Is fu*cking re*tarded. Realize that. If we all had infinite funds, cost would not matter, and it shouldn't now. But the balance of things would still be the same. The cost of a fitting, item, or vehicle is only directly related on how you can manage your funds. Using it to justify a Godly tank, or a super heavy, or a UBer rifle is pure retardation.
The cost of something is irrelevant. why shouldn't cost be considered. you tell me why? All you told me here is that is stupid but why? It's a bad idea because it doesn't address the underlying imbalance, just tries to compensate for it by changing the price. It's like trying to hold lousy architecture together with glue: the stresses and the shears are still there in the structure, and the thing wants to come apart at the first opportunity. We're gonna have a lot of people with a lot of isk in this game, and also a lot of peeps flat broke. The amount of ISK availiable to DUST mercs and corps will escalate wildly when nullsec warfare gets going. I guarantee you corps will be taking contracts for billions of ISKies. But balancing with cost is a bad idea in any game. In some, where the devs control the economy, they can maybe get away with it. But nobody, CCP included, controls the economy in New Eden(that's why they had to hire a Ph.D. research economist), and any ISK-based balancing of unbalanced weapons will go bad fast. Then what's the point of it being more expensive if it isn't better? How is it imbalanced. The more expensive and item is the better it is. This has nothing to do with balancing. Now if there was a weapon that got some overwhelming bonus for being proto maybe. But ever since they nerfed the differences between the 3 gears it should be better.
In New Eden, those better, higher-tier weapons will be more expensive because the minerals and blueprints that go into them for manufacturing are more expensive. The market does the rest on its own. |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.28 14:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
Garrett Blacknova wrote:Should ISK be the only point of balance for a powerful item? No way. Should it be considered a limiting factor on an item, and thus part of how said item is balanced? DEFINITELY YES.
You're right ofc Garrett.
The way CCP will implement this minimum cost is through the value of the manufacturing inputs required to produce the item.
Nobody will sell below cost(well, except for the hard-up-for-cash and market noobs/loball buy orders), and free market suppy/demand will set the price. In New eden that means market pvp, freighter gankings at a Jita gate because some idiot jumps his freighter with 30 billion isk of cargo through without scouting first, distance-to-market, risk-to-market, and much more underhanded shenanigans etc.
But underneath that market Are the intrinsic performance characteristics of the item, e.g. an assault rifle.
The characteristics of that item(dps, accuracy, range falloff, fitting requirements, clip size, etc.) are what should be tweaked to achieve balance, not the ISK cost of the item. If this is done right we will se a healthy mix of weapon types and tiers on the battlefield, if it is done poorly we will start to see a less rich and diverse set of choices being made.
So the situation I am worrying about is when the item's inherent minerals cost is lower than its performance level. In a well-supplied market competition will drive the price down to a sliver above cost of production and *poof* everybody and their dog is running around with protoman's Creodron breach AR's, for example. |
Vrain Matari
ZionTCD
Legacy Rising
404
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 03:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
R F Gyro wrote:Hopefully CCP have learned by now that balancing primarily on ISK is a bad idea (google for "Eve Titan Blobs"). Over the timescales that CCP are talking about for Dust, huge number of players will accumulate vast amounts of resources.
The only truly limited resource in online games is players.
All game balance should be based on all players being of roughly equal value, with other issues (ISK, in-game skills, etc.) being secondary "tweaking".
This is why HAVs are the cause of so much bitterness; CCP are trying to balance on ISK (a tank costs 5 times as much as a dropsuit) not players (one player in a tank is much more effective than one player in a dropsuit). They could solve this in an instant by making HAVs need 3 players to operate effectively; they can then be three times as effective and cost three times as much as a dropsuit, and no-one would complain (much).
Call me an idealistic fool, but in my heart of hearts i KNOW CCP is too smart to balance on ISK. Right CCP? |
|
|
| |
|