Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 20:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Please read this over before commenting and feel free to offer feedback. This is an evolving idea and will need revisions. I will be linking to this regularly and updating it as people voice their feedback. Thank you.
Battle Contract Levels Background In EVE Online there are PVE Mission Contracts which are handed out by NPC Mission Agents. There are different levels of these Contracts ranging from simple Level 1 missions that can be accomplished with a basic frigate, up to complicated Level 5 missions that require fleets of battleships and capital ships to accomplish. The payouts also range from several thousand ISK to hundreds of millions of ISK for very high level missions. This wide range of Mission Contract types in EVE provides challenge, progression and reward as you move from lower level missions to higher ones.
Proposal Every match (Ambush, Skirmish, etc) in DUST is a Battle Contract and should have a corresponding Contract Level similar to EVE Mission Contracts. The higher the Contract Level the higher the payout. Additionally, in EVE, the Mission Contracts often have ship restrictions on them. These restrictions limit you from bringing advanced ships (such as a Battleship) into low level missions (meant for a Frigate) to trivialize them. Since each piece of gear in DUST (Dropsuit, modules, weapons, etc) has a corresponding Meta Level based on its power these limits should be maintained in DUST Battle Contracts as loadout Meta Level (ML) restrictions.
Example: A Militia Assault Rifle has a ML of 0, an Advanced Assault Rifle has a ML of 3, a Prototype Assault Rifle has a ML of 5, and an Officer Assault Rifle has a ML of 7 GÇô 9.
Example: Below is a ML 10 Assault loadout.
Type I Assault Dropsuit (ML 1) - Militia Shield Extender (ML 0) - Advanced Light Damage Module (ML 3) - GEK-38 Assault Rifle (ML 5) - Militia SMG (ML 0) - AV Grenades (ML 1) - Militia Nanohive (ML 0) - Militia Shield Regulator (ML 0) - Militia Shield Regulator (ML 0)
Each Battle Contract has a Loadout Restriction that limit to the combined ML of gear you can have in a loadout and is based on the Battle ContractGÇÖs level. You may fit up to this limit but not exceed it.
Example:
Level 0 - ML of 0 (Militia Only) Level 1 - ML of 1 - 10 Level 2 - ML of 11 - 25 Level 3 - ML of 26 - 45 Level 4 - ML of 46+ (No max limit)
The minimum limits mentioned above exist to ensure that a player doesnGÇÖt bring a cheap fit into a higher level mission for the purpose of leeching off his / her teammates.
Benefits of this System
- Matchmaking Balance: This system will provide better match balance by enticing players to progress into higher level contracts for better rewards. This will pit more experienced players against each other in high payout Level 4 contracts while leaving lower level contracts for progressing players.
- Weapon and Module Balance: This system will provide better gear balancing by keeping higher level gear in higher level contracts. As a player progresses to higher contracts they will encounter more Advanced and Prototype gear. Because of this Advanced and Prototype gear can be far more powerful than Militia and Standard as the higher level gear cannot be fielded in lower level contracts (without sacrificing in other areas).
- Item Pricing: This system will fix issues with item pricing by offering higher rewards for high level contracts. This will allow people to use Prototype vehicles and gear more frequently because a 200K ISK fit is affordable when the contract payout is 2 million.
- New Player Retention: This system will help retain new players by starting them out against players in equal gear. Level 0 missions are for Militia gear. This is where new players would begin to learn the mechanics with minimal to no loss while also making minimal gain (25,000 GÇô 75,000 ISK per match). They would not be facing players in much better gear as they are now. Balance at the beginning will help keep players. As they progress into higher level contracts, the balance can go away.
- Skill Points: This system will make skill points more valuable. Due to ML Restrictions skill points will become more valuable. When two people in equal ML suits are facing each other the +5% or +10% differences offered by skill points will be even more important.
(Continued in next post) |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 20:34:00 -
[2] - Quote
Possible Additions
This system is a GÇ£coreGÇ¥ and can have many other systems added to it. Many are ideas taken from EVE that can be implemented in DUST to merge the games more than just OB. Below are the examples:
- PvE Drone Missions: The contract level system can be used in PvE Drone missions to divide up difficulty. Level 1 Drone mission have weak drones and a minimal ISK payout, while Level 4 Drone missions have highly advanced drones that require teamwork, high level gear, and experience to take down and provide a high ISK payout.
- Standings: Similar to EVE: you would gain standings with specific corporations / empires as you complete Battle Contracts for them. Example: You start out doing Level 1 missions for the Caldari State and as you win battles gain enough standing with them to unlock Level 2 missions. Skills can be introduced to speed up standing gains and standing gains for one entity can result in standing losses for another (Amarr wonGÇÖt like you working with the Minmatar)
- Contract Fees: Similar to EVE: different fees / taxes that can be leveraged on contracts as an ISK sink. Example: A 5% fee on contract payout to cover transport, clone, material and cleanup costs. These fees can be reduced with skills and / or standings (mentioned above).
- Contract Distance: Players can only accept Battle Contracts for the system they are in. A new skill would allow you to expand that by 5 jumps out per level until the entire region is accessible at level 5. This would require you to move around New Eden to accept contracts and not just be able to go everywhere at once.
- Collateral on Contracts: Some high level Battle Contracts require collateral to accept them. The collateral is only returned upon victory and is lost in a defeat. The higher the collateral the higher the payout to make them worth the gamble. This would entice players to fight for victory so they will get their collateral back.
- Unbalanced Contracts: There could be some contracts that are unbalanced. The players accepting the contract would be handicapped in some way. Example: more enemy players, fewer clones, less time, longer respawns, limited cover, no vehicles. These contracts would have a higher payout to make the risk worth it. Combined with collateral could make some fun / lucrative contracts.
- Cross Level Contracts: There could be contracts that fight opponents at a different level. Example: 8 players on a level 3 contract (45 max ML) fighting 16 players on a level 3 contract (25 max ML). Or 4 players on a level 4 contract (No max ML) fighting 20 players on a level 1 contract (10 max ML). Combine with some imbalances and collateral and very fun / lucrative contracts.
- Level 5 Contracts: These would be extremely difficult and require the best gear, teamwork, and high player skill to accomplish. Example: 4 vs 20 Ambush or 6 vs 18 Skirmish. Payout only on victory. Works best with PvE Drone missions rather than PvP.
|
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.21 20:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
(Reserved) |
Krynn 007
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
14
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 02:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
You got my vote
I just got my cousin in this game. He likes it, but is getting super pissed.
He keeps getting owned. I know he is new, but first thing he said to me was, he is getting matched up into games where he can't dmg anyone, and all he does is die. Tonight he was super pissed. He has whatever sniper gun you unlock at lvl 3, and 3 shots in the back of the head and the guy didn't even die, turn around and killed him. (Said he was close range as well) He said he did hit, and saw the dmg indicator, indicate that he did in fact hit the target.
I never had this problem myself, but I assumed he must have been up against someone pretty tough, which tells me matchmaking is not working as intended, if there is even one in place
I thought there was a matchmaking system in place, but he said he didn't think so.
Should definitely be more friendly to new recruits if CCP wants to keep getting new consumers. The more players the better it is for all of us.
Don't match someone who just downloaded the game, and drop them into a game full of organize corps, and/or people who have over 4million SP. That will only lead to frustration, and in the end lose a lot of good players.
After talking to my cousin on the phone tonight, I can tell he is trying to enjoy this game, but at the same time, he is not happy with it so far. Matchmaking would make a huge difference in this one case. If the matchmaking remains the same, it'll only have the same effect on new recruits
I really like your ideas. I hope someone at CCP listens and incorporate them into the game |
Drake435
SVER True Blood Unclaimed.
2
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 02:52:00 -
[5] - Quote
Krynn 007 wrote:You got my vote
I just got my cousin in this game. He likes it, but is getting super pissed.
He keeps getting owned. I know he is new, but first thing he said to me was, he is getting matched up into games where he can't dmg anyone, and all he does is die. Tonight he was super pissed. He has whatever sniper gun you unlock at lvl 3, and 3 shots in the back of the head and the guy didn't even die, turn around and killed him. (Said he was close range as well) He said he did hit, and saw the dmg indicator, indicate that he did in fact hit the target.
I never had this problem myself, but I assumed he must have been up against someone pretty tough, which tells me matchmaking is not working as intended, if there is even one in place
I thought there was a matchmaking system in place, but he said he didn't think so.
Should definitely be more friendly to new recruits if CCP wants to keep getting new consumers. The more players the better it is for all of us.
Don't match someone who just downloaded the game, and drop them into a game full of organize corps, and/or people who have over 4million SP. That will only lead to frustration, and in the end lose a lot of good players.
After talking to my cousin on the phone tonight, I can tell he is trying to enjoy this game, but at the same time, he is not happy with it so far. Matchmaking would make a huge difference in this one case. If the matchmaking remains the same, it'll only have the same effect on new recruits
I really like your ideas. I hope someone at CCP listens and incorporate them into the game
This proposal also gets my vote. As of right now, the average payout for full participation in a game is only 200k ISK. Its not a lot of money when you use a high tier fitting. Also, players that only have standard gear will notice they will die in seconds from almost anything above militia gear. There should be some sort of system in place to help the newer folk play a more balanced match. |
Rasputin La'Gar
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 05:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
I'm generally at a meta level of 2 or 3 and even I say that, that system is nerfed to hell I wouldn't have a problem with it if there were non restricted battles that generally had higher pay, or if there was no bottom cap. A person with meta level 0 can go in level 5 battles and get higher SP/ISK because of it
Instead of nerfing, how about we just give higher rewards to low level players |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 15:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rasputin La'Gar wrote:I'm generally at a meta level of 2 or 3 and even I say that, that system is nerfed to hell I wouldn't have a problem with it if there were non restricted battles that generally had higher pay, or if there was no bottom cap. A person with meta level 0 can go in level 5 battles and get higher SP/ISK because of it
Instead of nerfing, how about we just give higher rewards to low level players I added the ML floor so that a nefarious player didn't queue for a level 4 match and use a free / cheap suit the entire time, dying constantly, then taking the 1-2 million ISK payout and doing it again. That would gimp the level 4 team.
In EVE Missions, if you take a frigate to a level 4 mission it's dead - there is no way you are going to win. And if you tag along with a group then they chose to invite you knowing that you'd bring a lowly frigate. In DUST we don't really have that luxury; if a player running Militia appears on my team I'm stuck with him and in high stakes level 4 I'm essentially down a player on my team. That's not good, and kills the system.
In the end it's about risk vs reward. If you're going to do higher level contracts you need to risk some higher level gear. Hence the mandated floor.
|
Rei Shepard
Spectre II
72
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 15:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
I like the system, but in EVE missions is against NPC's they don't need to log on
In dust if you going put everyone in Mission levels, chances are there's not enough people online to fill each tiered match.
Just wait till PVE is in and the Dust Vets have gone to their 0.0 conquests. |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:05:00 -
[9] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:I like the system, but in EVE missions is against NPC's they don't need to log on
In dust if you going put everyone in Mission levels, chances are there's not enough people online to fill each tiered match.
Just wait till PVE is in and the Dust Vets have gone to their 0.0 conquests. According to http://www.dust514stats.com there are over 1,000,000 mercenaries that have been created thus far in DUST. If only 1% of those were online then that's 10,000 players. More than enough for a matchmaking system without starving it.
Also I think the proposed tiered system would increase how many people were online. I haven't played in a few days because it's gotten boring. I play the same maps, am limited to a 50K ISK fit due to small rewards, and there's no real reason to win. With the proposed I could try new expensive fits in level 4 matches, I could try to hone my gun game in full Militia in level 0, and the teammates I'd be playing with in higher level missions should be more competent as they have enough SP / experience to fit a near Proto loadout.
Also, as I mentioned, the proposal is very much a "core" system. It can have a myriad of things added onto it that would spice up gameplay, make things more uneven (in a fun way) and basically kill the monotony we are facing today. |
Rei Shepard
Spectre II
72
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:14:00 -
[10] - Quote
Severus Smith wrote:Rei Shepard wrote:I like the system, but in EVE missions is against NPC's they don't need to log on
In dust if you going put everyone in Mission levels, chances are there's not enough people online to fill each tiered match.
Just wait till PVE is in and the Dust Vets have gone to their 0.0 conquests. According to http://www.dust514stats.com there are over 1,000,000 mercenaries that have been created thus far in DUST. If only 1% of those were online then that's 10,000 players. More than enough for a matchmaking system without starving it. I think the proposed tiered system would increase how many people were online. I haven't played in a few days because it's gotten boring. I play the same maps, am limited to a 50K ISK fit due to small rewards, and there's no real reason to win. With the proposed I could try new expensive fits in level 4 matches, I could try to hone my gun game in full Militia in level 0, and the teammates I'd be playing with in higher level missions should be more competent as they have enough SP / experience to fit a near Proto loadout. Also, as I mentioned, the proposal is very much a "core" system. It can have a myriad of things added onto it that would spice up gameplay, make things more uneven (in a fun way) and basically kill the monotony we are facing today.
I dunno, Say 10.000 people, over 3 modes, that's 3333 people for each mode, spend over each mode 10 meta levels, thats 333 people per level, this is if its on even levels.
basically that's 10 games going on per meta level, per mode IF everything is smoothed out, most likely it will be people starved beyond meta level 5... That's a very low number of games
Now add in some more game modes, oops not enough people anymore... |
|
Yagihige
Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation
178
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:I like the system, but in EVE missions is against NPC's they don't need to log on
In dust if you going put everyone in Mission levels, chances are there's not enough people online to fill each tiered match.
Just wait till PVE is in and the Dust Vets have gone to their 0.0 conquests.
I've mentioned this kind of system a few times too, maybe not as clearly as this but if done correctly it's not supposed to fracture people into tiers with the chance of not having enough people to fill them.
It would just place limits on which of your fittings/vehicles can be used on a specific battle. It could make for more balanced matches for new people because they knew that if they were on a Lvl 0 battle, many of the other players could be seasoned veterans but yet fighting with the same equipment as them (though not the same skills, granted). It wouldn't stop anyone trying their hand at a Lvl 4 battle, either a completely noob or a veteran could play but it would be a battle with possibly stronger equipment.
I guess what i'm trying to say is that a change to what the OP proposed would be this:
Level 0 - ML of 0 (Militia Only) Level 1 - ML of 0 - 10 Level 2 - ML of 0 - 25 Level 3 - ML of 0 - 45 Level 4 - ML of (No limit)
I thought about this because of an idea i had for a Battle Finder designed specially for Corp Battles that would make corp battles much more easy and almost automatic to happen. With these limits in place, there could be no reason for a new corp not to accept a battle with the Imperfects, Seraphim Initiative, Synergy Gaming, ZionTCD or whatever highly skilled corp you can think of. I'm not an insider but it seems to me that the way things are at present time, it can be a chore for some corps to get good battles going. Some newly established corps, if smart enough, will never accept to fight some battles against some corps because they know they'll be steamrolled. The gap between the top corps and new/small ones is huge and this surely plays a part in an interesting trend that i heard about, that is that there are corps now masking their identity in the Corporation Contracts because it's the only way someone else will take them on.
With this system, it would be different. You could be the CEO of a very small noob corp and still accept a contract against the Imperfects or Seraphim Initiative because the contract was for a Lvl 1 and your guys can handle that difficulty level and you won't have a barrage of Gunnlogis, Madrugars, Sagaris, Suryas and every proto weapon and dropsuit in the book facing you, just equipment like your own. Hell, even throw in an handicap system. You could create a corporation contract, set it to Lvl 1 and allow the opponet to go up to Lvl 2. Or if 2 top corps want a full-flegded battle, go Lvl 4 and don't hold back. Your top corp's new guys want to practice? Get a Lvl 2 battle for them. There a lot of opportunities in this and it doesn't need to limit who gets in which tier, only what you can bring with you to battle.
|
Rei Shepard
Spectre II
72
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:33:00 -
[12] - Quote
Yagihige wrote:Rei Shepard wrote:I like the system, but in EVE missions is against NPC's they don't need to log on
In dust if you going put everyone in Mission levels, chances are there's not enough people online to fill each tiered match.
Just wait till PVE is in and the Dust Vets have gone to their 0.0 conquests. I've mentioned this kind of system a few times too, maybe not as clearly as this but if done correctly it's not supposed to fracture people into tiers with the chance of not having enough people to fill them. It would just place limits on which of your fittings/vehicles can be used on a specific battle. It could make for more balanced matches for new people because they knew that if they were on a Lvl 0 battle, many of the other players could be seasoned veterans but yet fighting with the same equipment as them (though not the same skills, granted). It wouldn't stop anyone trying their hand at a Lvl 4 battle, either a completely noob or a veteran could play but it would be a battle with possibly stronger equipment. I guess what i'm trying to say is that a change to what the OP proposed would be this: Level 0 - ML of 0 (Militia Only) Level 1 - ML of 0 - 10 Level 2 - ML of 0 - 25 Level 3 - ML of 0 - 45 Level 4 - ML of (No limit) I thought about this because of an idea i had for a Battle Finder designed specially for Corp Battles that would make corp battles much more easy and almost automatic to happen. With these limits in place, there could be no reason for a new corp not to accept a battle with the Imperfects, Seraphim Initiative, Synergy Gaming, ZionTCD or whatever highly skilled corp you can think of. I'm not an insider but it seems to me that the way things are at present time, it can be a chore for some corps to get good battles going. Some newly established corps, if smart enough, will never accept to fight some battles against some corps because they know they'll be steamrolled. The gap between the top corps and new/small ones is huge and this surely plays a part in an interesting trend that i heard about, that is that there are corps now masking their identity in the Corporation Contracts because it's the only way someone else will take them on. With this system, it would be different. You could be the CEO of a very small noob corp and still accept a contract against the Imperfects or Seraphim Initiative because the contract was for a Lvl 1 and your guys can handle that difficulty level and you won't have a barrage of Gunnlogis, Madrugars, Sagaris, Suryas and every proto weapon and dropsuit in the book facing you, just equipment like your own. Hell, even throw in an handicap system. You could create a corporation contract, set it to Lvl 1 and allow the opponet to go up to Lvl 2. Or if 2 top corps want a full-flegded battle, go Lvl 4 and don't hold back. Your top corp's new guys want to practice? Get a Lvl 2 battle for them. There a lot of opportunities in this and it doesn't need to limit who gets in which tier, only what you can bring with you to battle.
The thing about Eve PVP = anything goes in 0.0 space, eliminating the need for tiers, and like i said the tiering is only used in NPC missions.
Its all about what you want to risk on the field and knowing your skill limits.
If i fly my 1 billion Fit Tengu into 0.0 space, i am going to explode at some point and noone forced me to fly it in there. I might kill a guy, maybe a few cheap fit ships or i might die at the first gate.
or i could fly my 300m Talos, 3 times into 0.0...
I know the word "its a beta" gets easily thrown around, but supposedly we will get NPC contracts and like i said the Vets will be in 0.0 space with proto-gear and it will be your choice to either fight them or not.
If i can make 3m a contract in 0.0 space + kill bonus, i wont be hanging around in high sec for 300k...
|
TheBLAZZED
VENGEANCE FOR HIRE
62
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:43:00 -
[13] - Quote
Awesome post! Thank you! Ccp, offer the man a job. |
i-get-pubstomped all-day
Kameira Lodge Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
What's to stop squads of corps that are already at the pinnacle of rank and SP from having militia fits and pubstomping ML0s? |
Fox Gaden
DUST University Ivy League
165
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 16:59:00 -
[15] - Quote
You got my vote.
My only concern would be wait times when forming Level 2 or Level 3 matches. There would always be enough new players to fill a Level 0 match, and as soon as someone upgrades they get into Level 1, so probably lots of them too. I am not sure how long people would stay at the Level 2, and Level 3 stages, but maybe some would stay at those stages deliberately so they donGÇÖt have to face full Proto gear.
Maybe your cross level contracts suggestion could solve wait time issues at the mid levels. One side could be at Level 2 with 12 members while the other side is at Level 0 with 16 members (or 24 vs 32). |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 17:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
i-get-pubstomped all-day wrote:What's to stop squads of corps that are already at the pinnacle of rank and SP from having militia fits and pubstomping ML0s? What's to stop them? Nothing. People who want to pubstomp will do it. Imposing a system that stops them outright will just add too many restrictions.
What the proposal will do is cause there to be no real benefit to pubstomping. Yes, players could squad up and join a level 0 match for the lulz, and they are going to decimate everyone there (In equal gear so it won't be a Proto vs Militia slaughter). But for 75,000 ISK a match, when the could be playing level 4's and making 2,000,000+ ISK a match, is it worth it? Maybe for the one off match when they want to pad their epeen. But for the most part they'll stick to higher level matches for the better rewards. |
Seazzar
Seykal Expeditionary Group Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 17:16:00 -
[17] - Quote
i-get-pubstomped all-day wrote:What's to stop squads of corps that are already at the pinnacle of rank and SP from having militia fits and pubstomping ML0s?
I think the overall proposal is pretty solid. However, you would need to calculate the players effective skill points (based on their load out) into the equation. and make the tiers a bit more dynamic rather than static.
Two players with full meta 0 gear. One with 10mil total sp, and 2mil effective sp, will still stomp a new player in all meta 0 gear with 500k total sp, and 100k effective sp. (effective sp being the number of sp actually in use for the gear chosen for that match).
And as the above poster suggested, the isk reward would be a factor. |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 17:23:00 -
[18] - Quote
Fox Gaden wrote:You got my vote.
My only concern would be wait times when forming Level 2 or Level 3 matches. There would always be enough new players to fill a Level 0 match, and as soon as someone upgrades they get into Level 1, so probably lots of them too. I am not sure how long people would stay at the Level 2, and Level 3 stages, but maybe some would stay at those stages deliberately so they donGÇÖt have to face full Proto gear.
Maybe your cross level contracts suggestion could solve wait time issues at the mid levels. One side could be at Level 2 with 12 members while the other side is at Level 0 with 16 members (or 24 vs 32). In the beginning, or during off peak hours, it may be an issue. But I still think it's better than what we have now. A clusterf**** of gear, skill levels, and player types all dumped into Manus Peak - over and over and over and over again.
If item prices are adjusted towards the higher ISK rewards, and they're laid out like EVE mission progression, then it could work well. Fielding a full Proto set should be expensive (500K per fit in my opinion) so the idea of playing a match where I need to risk 500K per death will probably keep me in lower missions until I am skilled in everything I need.
Or implement standings. That will ensure people need to stay in 2 / 3. Make it take awhile to get to 4.
Or, maybe only have 0, 1, 2 and 3 and drop 4. |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 17:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
Seazzar wrote:I think the overall proposal is pretty solid. However, you would need to calculate the players effective skill points (based on their load out) into the equation. and make the tiers a bit more dynamic rather than static.
Two players with full meta 0 gear. One with 10mil total sp, and 2mil effective sp, will still stomp a new player in all meta 0 gear with 500k total sp, and 100k effective sp. (effective sp being the number of sp actually in use for the gear chosen for that match).
And as the above poster suggested, the isk reward would be a factor. Thanks for the feedback. But I disagree on the SP limits. That just gets too restrictive and too complicated.
A 500K SP player vs a 10M SP player is an unfair fight yes, but when both are in the same gear it isn't broken. The experienced player deals 35% more damage, has 25% more shields and health, and maybe a few other bonuses. But in a Militia gear that isn't much. An experienced Assault's HP goes from 300 to 375 which is 2 extra bullets from a unskilled Militia AR. The experienced player will go from 387 DPS to 523 DPS. But against an unskilled Militia Assault that kills them in 0.57 seconds rather than 0.77 seconds with all shots hitting. A 0.2 second difference.
Skills will provide an advantage, but nothing like what gear gives. |
Fluffy Kitty Mittens
Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.22 19:43:00 -
[20] - Quote
+1. Awesome idea. This would fix a lot of problems and help make matches more balanced. CCP do this! |
|
Adaris Manpher
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
21
|
Posted - 2013.02.23 06:24:00 -
[21] - Quote
I love your idea! I mean it might be a trick to do but it would solve alot of problems |
Vaerana Myshtana
ScIdama Endless Renaissance
204
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 02:09:00 -
[22] - Quote
+1 to this Severus!
Heck, +1,000,000!
This is something that I have really hoped to see in NPC (pub) battles, both PVE and PVP.
Of course, player contracts to control territory are a whole other ball of kitten. |
fred orpaul
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
213
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 02:44:00 -
[23] - Quote
hmmm not a big fan of your meta level Idea, with some rework I could see it being useful but it will limit fits. Also a minimum suit requirement is stupid IMO, just have higher level contracts have significantly less to no passive gain so you have to contribute to get any returns, if you can do so in a free fit more power to you, also like you were saying higher level mission payout should be based more on victory then being in match.
now to tie into your travel idea. Realistically the only things that need to move for you is your equipment(you can use the network the pod pilots use for clones to move to where ever you need)=> for pubmatches you are provided(at market costs) with only the gear that the faction you are working for is willing to sacrifice in that fight=>that is the limiting factor for max level gear you can use.
Other then that I really like your ideas OP, here are a few more of my own.
also I propose that WP act like LP and accrue with the faction that you work for. Any thing called in be it orbital strike, an installation, or vehicle will cost you WP. This will minimize the spamming of orbitals by the winning team as they could just save up the WP instead for when they are needed.(this would also necessitate the increase in the cost of OS).
this would also require that when you accept a pub contract you would put a certain amount of WP in escrow so that squad leaders and BCs don't have to carry the cost of instalations and OBs by them selfs as well as prevent the lossing team from abusing this(think nonstop OBs).
in corp matches only WP earned by your corp in corp matches should be spendable.
non faction warfare should not use WP but instead be limited to the support that can be provided eve side. |
Vaerana Myshtana
ScIdama Endless Renaissance
204
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 04:21:00 -
[24] - Quote
fred orpaul wrote:also I propose that WP act like LP and accrue with the faction that you work for. Any thing called in be it orbital strike, an installation, or vehicle will cost you WP. This will minimize the spamming of orbitals by the winning team as they could just save up the WP instead for when they are needed.(this would also necessitate the increase in the cost of OS).
This is a good idea. It really deserves its own thread. |
fred orpaul
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
213
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 07:21:00 -
[25] - Quote
Ive talked about it before vaerana but I thought this would be a good place to add it because the OP seems to want to start a dialog.
TY tho I think so too. Tho my roomate hates it for some reason. |
fred orpaul
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
213
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 07:34:00 -
[26] - Quote
i-get-pubstomped all-day wrote:What's to stop squads of corps that are already at the pinnacle of rank and SP from having militia fits and pubstomping ML0s?
hopefully clone costs will at some point right now nothing, EVE uses the cost of clones to keep people from getting too far out of hand. It would translate well to dust where as you skill higher If you play a low level match your loss in clones will be enough to cost you a significant amount of isk. actually that could be dangerous not sure it would work but its a decent tax on high level players.
EDIT: clones that retain more SP cost more, so every time you die you have to pay for their replacement. |
Rasputin La'Gar
Tritan-Industries Legacy Rising
28
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 07:47:00 -
[27] - Quote
Severus Smith wrote:I added the ML floor so that a nefarious player didn't queue for a level 4 match and use a free / cheap suit the entire time, dying constantly, then taking the 1-2 million ISK payout and doing it again. That would gimp the level 4 team.
In EVE Missions, if you take a frigate to a level 4 mission it's dead - there is no way you are going to win. And if you tag along with a group then they chose to invite you knowing that you'd bring a lowly frigate. In DUST we don't really have that luxury; if a player running Militia appears on my team I'm stuck with him and in high stakes level 4 I'm essentially down a player on my team. That's not good, and kills the system.
In the end it's about risk vs reward. If you're going to do higher level contracts you need to risk some higher level gear. Hence the mandated floor.
Ok, makes sense. You've my +1
But if they're going to do this, then they should have "unranked" style pub matches that reward single player achievements more than out current system (ie a guy who does all of the killing will have ISK to show for it, but not nearly as much as a level 4 contract) and even moreso if that player is using militia gear I just don't like the idea of an impenetrable barrier between high meta gear and low meta. Both because I like a challenge and because I want to stomp on some red berries every now and then |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 19:48:00 -
[28] - Quote
fred orpaul wrote:hmmm not a big fan of your meta level Idea, with some rework I could see it being useful but it will limit fits. Also a minimum suit requirement is stupid IMO, just have higher level contracts have significantly less to no passive gain so you have to contribute to get any returns, if you can do so in a free fit more power to you, also like you were saying higher level mission payout should be based more on victory then being in match. The Meta Level is the best way. Dividing it up by suit levels (Militia, Standard, Advanced, Proto) is to flattened. A Militia suit with Adv / Proto mods will destroy. And limiting players to only equip Militia at 0, Standard at 1, Advanced at 2 and Proto at 3 is even more restricting.
The Meta Level provides a limit, while giving players the ability to customize within that limit. So you can run a full Standard fit for a level 1, or a use all Militia mods and a Proto gun / Complex damage mod. Or any of another myriad of fitting choices. You have the option. |
Telcontar Dunedain
Imperfects Negative-Feedback
328
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 19:56:00 -
[29] - Quote
This is largely impractical.
There population doesn't appear to be big enough to even support the limited skill grouping as it is.
While it seems like there are a lot of people, think of the other thing you expect -
Instant battles that take less then 2 minutes to appear.
Your proposal would end in empty slow battle queues for everyone basically. |
Severus Smith
ZionTCD Legacy Rising
163
|
Posted - 2013.02.24 20:09:00 -
[30] - Quote
Telcontar Dunedain wrote:This is largely impractical.
There population doesn't appear to be big enough to even support the limited skill grouping as it is.
While it seems like there are a lot of people, think of the other thing you expect -
Instant battles that take less then 2 minutes to appear.
Your proposal would end in empty slow battle queues for everyone basically. This isn't an immediate proposal. But an idea to be implemented in the future. The more options we have besides these monotonous Instant Battles, the better.
Do you not want more challenge, ISK payout and diversity?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |