| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Card Drunook
DoC Deck of Contractors
79
   |
Posted - 2013.03.21 23:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think it might be good to spend some time discussing in detail the ideas about how voting for the DUST 514 CSM equivalent will work outside the topic that announces more or less that there will be one. So I'm going to make a separate topic for each idea that has been brought up so we can discuss them in detail. I'll try to link to the other topics in the first post of each new one.
Before discussing a few ground rules to hopefully cut down on confusion and potential chaos:
1) Please discuss only the idea this thread is for. If you don't think an idea is good, say WHY. Don't simply say another idea is better.
2) Try to be specific when pointing out flaws. Saying that something is too complicated to work is less helpful then explaining what those complications will be
3) This is a discussion about VOTING for the council, not about what it will do.If you think the council should be a paid body of elected for life members that all have veto power, please discuss it somewhere else. Not here.
4) If you think an idea there isn't a thread for should be discussed either ask for a new one or make it yourself. Place "[Voting Discussion]" at the start of the topic so we can keep them sorted. I will TRY to link to ALL such threads.
Topic on hand: Using a system in which each account gets a vote that is weighted so that people more invested in the game have a stronger vote than brand new accounts.
My post where I first bring this up.
Having spent a lot of time thinking about how to do voting in a Free-to-play game this is the idea I personally favor. I think the best idea is a weight based on time since character creation and total assets (including non-physical things like SP). The specifics would need to be tweaked, particularly what ration time should apply to assets (and should Corp assets come into play). I'll start with the one significant potential downside that I see(depending on your opinion).
The downside: Not everyone would be equal, and it particularly favors long term dedicated players that focus on gaining power and material. This means the majority of people voted in will probably be representing existing power blocs, with only a few possibly being from newer players. If not handled VERY carefully it could easily become basically permanent positions because it would naturally favor the existing players. I personally think that if people have even a little sense the downsides can be avoided, but it is a potential problem.
The upsides:
1) CCP already has everything they need to use this. All they need to do is use the system they already have, on the computer they already have, to sort data they already have (or can easily get, from themselves). This means less startup costs (in both time and money), less overhead, easier monitoring or changing of the system, and any problems with it they can fix without having to deal with outside companies (and their lawyers potentially). I think ANY serious idea for voting in DUST 514 needs to have this attribute.
2) Dummy accounts become useless. Example, if the time multiplier were 1 : 3 months (meaning your vote only gets multiplied by 1 after three months) than a billion brand new dummy accounts would be useless. And a little basic housekeeping by CCP to clear out unused accounts that have no real assets would keep them from ever reaching the point of having an effect.
3) This favors players that actually PLAY the game. By making assets a consideration this keeps groups that only occasionally hop on and mess around from being able to get a large chunk of votes simply through numbers.
4) It has a built in competency filter. It requires a certain amount of intelligence (or organised support) to gain assets. This means that the people with the strongest votes are likely to be smart enough to vote intelligently.
5) CCP is in an excellent position to spot and deal with any cheating. This uses data from the game they completely control. Meaning that players can't use some third party advantage to gain voting power. Even if someone uses something like an exploit to gain a lot of assets CCP can fix that if they think it needs to be fixed.
I've got some other ideas about this but I'll leave it at this for now. |
Card Drunook
DoC Deck of Contractors
79
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 23:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved for linking to the other topics |
Kai Molan
Procella Tempus
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 00:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
I like it, even if the dummy accounts do hit the 3 month mark, they only have a vote power of 1. Of course a problem would likely form if a particularly hardcore player had 3 accounts and played all 3 in equal amounts of time through out the week. They would likely end up tripling their vote power. |
Card Drunook
DoC Deck of Contractors
79
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 00:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
A person could have three accounts and vote on all three, but the idea of the weighting system is it wouldn't matter as much. And a little tweaking can greatly minimize the effect.
For example:
Person A has one account that is 90 days old and has acquired X amount of assets.
Person B has three accounts that are all 90 days old and has acquired 1/3 X amount of assets on each.
Now if the time ration is 1v : (d/30)(X) (v=weighted vote, d=days since character creation) then Person B does get three times the weighted votes as person A.
Change the math a little though and it's easily mitigated. Instead of using a straight 1:30 use 1v : (d-30)/30 (X) and have the computer ignore votes with a negative weight.
Now Person B gets the same weighted vote as Person A and brand new accounts don't get a vote.
This assumes that someone playing three different accounts is equally efficient at gaining resources as someone playing only one account. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |