Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t Orion Empire
400
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 11:21:00 -
[61] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:1. Throwing the match for the side you want to win is a tactic that is going to difficult to deal with.
This is why factional standings are important - if you perform badly in matches for one side you get negative standings but if you perform really badly you get terrible standings and can no longer fight for that faction. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:32:00 -
[62] - Quote
Hey guys,
I just got into the office and want to respond to your feedback and concern.
Rewards Yes, we hear you and we agree. Factional warfare should offer something more in terms of rewards than instant battles. What we have done with Uprising is a major shift in how the FW battles work and we wanted to focus on making sure that the actual mechanics of it work right and work well.
There are a lot of things we can do, and could do really easily, to increase the rewards in FW battles. Having the loot be what people used, just increasing the ISK payout, and other things. However when we look at FW battles we want to make them something more special than that. We are looking at incentivising you to fight for one faction and increasing the rewards you get based on your loyalty to one faction.
What we don't want to do is just increase the rewards for the winners. As soon as people think they are going to lose they would just drop and go to another match where they have a chance to win. That is no fun. In planetary conquest battles we have things like the minimum clone loss, loot rewards, and other mechanics to help incentivise people staying until the end.
TL;DR: Our focus for Uprising with FW was completely redoing the foundation, we will continue to iterate on this and make sure you have a reason to play FW over instant battles.
AFKing This is something that should be looked at when viewing the entire game, not just factional warfare battles. For that reason it is not something that will get much response in this thread.
LP or Loyalty Points This goes back to the rewards thing but to be honest, we have two currencies in the game already and we don't see the need to add a third. There are plenty of rewards we can offer in FW to incentivise it without adding the complexity of LP.
Will you be restricted to specific factions based on your EVE corp affiliation No, as it stands the faction your EVE corporation is in will have no effect on what matches you can join or what faction you fight for in DUST.
I am going to browse some other threads for a bit, but I will be back. :) |
|
Heinrich Jagerblitzen
D3LTA FORC3 Orion Empire
165
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:40:00 -
[63] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: LP or Loyalty Points This goes back to the rewards thing but to be honest, we have two currencies in the game already and we don't see the need to add a third. There are plenty of rewards we can offer in FW to incentivise it without adding the complexity of LP.
Oh c'mon Foxy. LP isn't THAT hard to keep track of. I thought these games were supposed to attract some of the smartest gamers around? You have a reputation to uphold! Don't go getting soft on us now....
In the meantime, I'll be the first to ask what those "plenty of rewards" are that your team has in mind already. I know you've got some good ideas, out with it! Don't be shy! We'll all be happy to tell you if they're worth fighting for or not. |
Cat Merc
BetaMax. CRONOS.
805
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:45:00 -
[64] - Quote
I want mah LP! |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3379
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:47:00 -
[65] - Quote
Heinrich Jagerblitzen wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: LP or Loyalty Points This goes back to the rewards thing but to be honest, we have two currencies in the game already and we don't see the need to add a third. There are plenty of rewards we can offer in FW to incentivise it without adding the complexity of LP.
Oh c'mon Foxy. LP isn't THAT hard to keep track of. I thought these games were supposed to attract some of the smartest gamers around? You have a reputation to uphold! Don't go getting soft on us now.... In the meantime, I'll be the first to ask what those "plenty of rewards" are that your team has in mind already. I know you've got some good ideas, out with it! Don't be shy! We'll all be happy to tell you if they're worth fighting for or not.
Har har har. There is a difference between giving players complex choices and just adding complexity because you can't come up with a better way to do the same thing. We have the chance to possibly come up with something different and that works better for DUST. |
|
Cat Merc
BetaMax. CRONOS.
805
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:50:00 -
[66] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Heinrich Jagerblitzen wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote: LP or Loyalty Points This goes back to the rewards thing but to be honest, we have two currencies in the game already and we don't see the need to add a third. There are plenty of rewards we can offer in FW to incentivise it without adding the complexity of LP.
Oh c'mon Foxy. LP isn't THAT hard to keep track of. I thought these games were supposed to attract some of the smartest gamers around? You have a reputation to uphold! Don't go getting soft on us now.... In the meantime, I'll be the first to ask what those "plenty of rewards" are that your team has in mind already. I know you've got some good ideas, out with it! Don't be shy! We'll all be happy to tell you if they're worth fighting for or not. Har har har. There is a difference between giving players complex choices and just adding complexity because you can't come up with a better way to do the same thing. We have the chance to possibly come up with something different and that works better for DUST. But I love my LP :< |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3380
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 12:52:00 -
[67] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:But I love my LP :<
Serious question. Why? |
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries
258
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 13:01:00 -
[68] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: AFKing This is something that should be looked at when viewing the entire game, not just factional warfare battles. For that reason it is not something that will get much response in this thread.
Or anywhere else for that matter.
Why only 16v16? |
bolsh lee
Ahrendee Mercenaries
54
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 13:40:00 -
[69] - Quote
Thanks for the reply FoxFour, I hope the incentives are on the road map sooner then 3-6 months down the road because lets be honest, when it comes to instant gratification for smaller corps, PC is not where its at ... Like I said in my other post with the right incentives or bragging rights for said faction this could be a way for smalller corps to stay entertained, competitive and in the game..
Couldnt you guys use LP to your advantage like 5000 lp +10000 Aurum could buy an aesthetic faction item of choice or even include isk for a faction weapon thats a lil better then proto, but not better then officer drops... So like 10000Lp + 50 Dovulles gets you 10x federation balacs etc etc
|
Tolen Rosas
Kang Lo Directorate Gallente Federation
146
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 14:55:00 -
[70] - Quote
for a start hopefully u will add penalties for people that leave games. would love to see Deserter occurences on their permanent files along with an Deserter %. expose the rage quitters.
then make it so player contracts have an option and some of the higher npc contracts have a minimum Deserter % threshold on them. provides the perfect incentive for mercs not to desert. |
|
Cat Merc
BetaMax. CRONOS.
808
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 15:03:00 -
[71] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Cat Merc wrote:But I love my LP :< Serious question. Why? Because its named Loyalty Points. That's like putting a monetary value on loyalty. |
Aighun
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
810
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:51:00 -
[72] - Quote
How about allowing EVE players to contribute to the ISK payout at the end of the match?
We are mercenaries. It would be awesome if other players could pay us to fight.
Couple ideas:
Have a base ISK reward that is exactly the same as Instant battle. Give EVE players the option to contribute an additional amount to the total match reward for their faction. Have a set limit on the additional amount. So if the base reward is 2,400,000 ISK for each team for the entire match, give EVE players the chance to contribute up to another 1,000,000 ISK per match. Or any amount that would not be too destabilizing.
Give EVE players the option to contribute to the payout with no limit on how much they can add to the base reward. But tax the transfer at rate that would control the flow of ISK so it did not become destabilizing. EVE pilots are rich. If you tax the "sweetening of the pot" at something like 90% to 95% even 98% then a lot of pilots can throw their billions of ISK in pocket change into a match without causing too much upheaval in the system. This would also give the economics guys a chance to look at a minor and controlled flow of ISK fro EVE to DUST.
Seed battles with enough lead time so that the bonus EVE ISK per match can pile up a little, and let DUST mercs see how much ISK is in the pot.
And it would also be helpful if DUST were more visible to EVE pilots participating in faction warfare. I am not even sure what EVE pilots see when they are fighting in terms of the effect our battles are having on the war. A lot of DUST mercenaries might not care either way about faction warfare but if enough players start to participate and battles begin to have a real effect on the outcomes of the fights in space it seems like EVE pilots at least are going to start to care. Hopefully a lot. We really don't have much to do in DUST so a ton of people are going to try it out from curiosity or boredom. There is enough stuff to do in EVE that I would assume the pilots fighting in faction warfare are there because they care and it is something they are invested in. |
Aighun
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
810
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 16:52:00 -
[73] - Quote
Cat Merc wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Cat Merc wrote:But I love my LP :< Serious question. Why? Because its named Loyalty Points. That's like putting a monetary value on loyalty.
Would that mean that your loyalty is... for sale? |
Aighun
Zumari Force Projection Caldari State
810
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 17:05:00 -
[74] - Quote
GoD-NoVa wrote:Aighun wrote:Bendtner92 wrote:I really think we need to have some penalties of some kind for leaving/not fighting in the match.
I fear that if some corps deploy into the FW matches the other team would just constantly either leave the match or stay in the MCC/somewhere else in the redline the entire match. Instant battles were a closed system and reeky had no consequences. There was no real visible link between EVE and Dust in the old factional warfare system. But now there is a stronger link. I am not sure why Corps would deploy to faction warfare is they did not want to fight. But isn't losing penalty enough? Was also going to say something about, never underestimate the power of a bad reputation. See how it goes. But it seems like the more connections there are between EVE and DUST the more lasting your choices, the more your reputation will matter. Entire culture for Dust might turn out to be different. But it is a persistent world. We haven't really seen that yet. he probably meant that if a team joined a game and show 6-12 imperfects on the other team, got scared and left then there should be a penalty for leaving. Or if they didn't wanna fight /// was beat up soo bad they switched to militia gear and stayed in MCC
That is what I understood the post to mean. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3381
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 18:20:00 -
[75] - Quote
Aighun wrote:How about allowing EVE players to contribute to the ISK payout at the end of the match?
We are mercenaries. It would be awesome if other players could pay us to fight.
Couple ideas:
Have a base ISK reward that is exactly the same as Instant battle. Give EVE players the option to contribute an additional amount to the total match reward for their faction. Have a set limit on the additional amount. So if the base reward is 2,400,000 ISK for each team for the entire match, give EVE players the chance to contribute up to another 1,000,000 ISK per match. Or any amount that would not be too destabilizing.
Give EVE players the option to contribute to the payout with no limit on how much they can add to the base reward. But tax the transfer at rate that would control the flow of ISK so it did not become destabilizing. EVE pilots are rich. If you tax the "sweetening of the pot" at something like 90% to 95% even 98% then a lot of pilots can throw their billions of ISK in pocket change into a match without causing too much upheaval in the system. This would also give the economics guys a chance to look at a minor and controlled flow of ISK fro EVE to DUST.
Seed battles with enough lead time so that the bonus EVE ISK per match can pile up a little, and let DUST mercs see how much ISK is in the pot.
And it would also be helpful if DUST were more visible to EVE pilots participating in faction warfare. I am not even sure what EVE pilots see when they are fighting in terms of the effect our battles are having on the war. A lot of DUST mercenaries might not care either way about faction warfare but if enough players start to participate and battles begin to have a real effect on the outcomes of the fights in space it seems like EVE pilots at least are going to start to care. Hopefully a lot. We really don't have much to do in DUST so a ton of people are going to try it out from curiosity or boredom. There is enough stuff to do in EVE that I would assume the pilots fighting in faction warfare are there because they care and it is something they are invested in.
Edit* You could also make it so that the losing side only got a some of the EVE bonus ISK. And the winners would get all of the bonus ISK put up for their side. That way you weren't punishing the losers so much as rewarding the winners.
Though I agree that we do not want to beat people with sticks and call them names for trying something new, or taking a risk faction warfare and possibly failing miserably.
I like this kind of thing. The only problem is it would only apply to battles that EVE players cared enough about to put the money up for and not all of them. I can see this kind of thing coming even later, after we have something that builds on the foundation and applies across the board we can look at doing this kind of more localized and specialized thing. |
|
The Robot Devil
BetaMax. CRONOS.
180
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:27:00 -
[76] - Quote
Quitting battles, not participating and team killers should get some type of status change or security status that is easily viewable to everyone. I don't want to pull a merc into my squad only to get killed by him. I try to pull in mercs that I know will work hard and will not rage quit.
|
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries
262
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 20:29:00 -
[77] - Quote
Still wondering why it's only 16v16. |
Felix Thunide
Gespenster Kompanie Villore Accords
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 23:30:00 -
[78] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: Will you be restricted to specific factions based on your EVE corp affiliation No, as it stands the faction your EVE corporation is in will have no effect on what matches you can join or what faction you fight for in DUST.
Plexing is tedious enough without the bonuses getting in the way. It would make me go cross-eyed if I found out my dust mercs were working against me on the ground while I was plexing in space. I need some way to track my members' efforts in the name of the Gallente Federation!
Kickass job on dust btw, I can't wait to see what else is to come. Srsly props, thnx CCP.
...now to figure out how I'm gunna slip a purchase of the collectors pack past my wife. She won't notice $150 right!? |
Byozuma Kegawa
The Tritan Industries RISE of LEGION
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 00:49:00 -
[79] - Quote
Tolen Rosas wrote:for a start hopefully u will add penalties for people that leave games. would love to see Deserter occurences on their permanent files along with an Deserter %. expose the rage quitters. then make it so player contracts have an option and some of the higher npc contracts have a minimum Deserter % threshold on them. provides the perfect incentive for mercs not to desert. The Robot Devil wrote:Quitting battles, not participating and team killers should get some type of status change or security status that is easily viewable to everyone. I don't want to pull a merc into my squad only to get killed by him. I try to pull in mercs that I know will work hard and will not rage quit. But what if one of your squad fails to launch with the squad (I've had it happen to me and seen it happen numerous times)? Should the squad stay in the match while the poor sod that got left out sits and waits? If your idea were to bear fruit, if that squad left to launch with their whole squad they'd get a little black mark on their record, all cause they were just being a good squad. |
crazy space 1
Krullefor Organization Minmatar Republic
1092
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 00:59:00 -
[80] - Quote
What if being on the winning team rewarded you Reputation. Since in Factional warfare, there is no reward for winning and you choose your side who you want to win, give a reward to a job well done.
That alone is reason enough to Add LP. But instead of LP call it reputation. Then you can spend that reputation to call in favors on the battlefield from the faction your fighting for.
Whatever happens winning needs to be rewarded, because as a merc, if you win you get the spoils of war. And knowing the other guy didn't get the whole reward, knowing they lost, and you got something they didn't earn, ... well... it feels good CCP. And if you aren't going to cut all isk payout to the losers in FW *you SHOULD btw give it all to the winning team* then LP is a great stand it as a reward you can control by having it only for buying special officer gear you can only run in Factional warfare.
None of that, you pay LP and isk nonsense, just have LP, or reputation in two pools. You can buy suits that only let you deploy in them if you are fighting for the right side. But you can't take them out of factional warfare, yes that would be super fun. |
|
crazy space 1
Krullefor Organization Minmatar Republic
1092
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 01:21:00 -
[81] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Hey guys,
I just got into the office and want to respond to your feedback and concern.
Rewards Yes, we hear you and we agree. Factional warfare should offer something more in terms of rewards than instant battles. What we have done with Uprising is a major shift in how the FW battles work and we wanted to focus on making sure that the actual mechanics of it work right and work well.
There are a lot of things we can do, and could do really easily, to increase the rewards in FW battles. Having the loot be what people used, just increasing the ISK payout, and other things. However when we look at FW battles we want to make them something more special than that. We are looking at incentivising you to fight for one faction and increasing the rewards you get based on your loyalty to one faction.
What we don't want to do is just increase the rewards for the winners. As soon as people think they are going to lose they would just drop and go to another match where they have a chance to win. That is no fun. In planetary conquest battles we have things like the minimum clone loss, loot rewards, and other mechanics to help incentivise people staying until the end.
TL;DR: Our focus for Uprising with FW was completely redoing the foundation, we will continue to iterate on this and make sure you have a reason to play FW over instant battles.
What about just giving out bonus sp +50% to the winners. The only way to get this bonus sp is by winning. But people won't dropout if they win less sp, it's not like losing isk. Everyone advances, but the winners get a nice cherry on top.
I think that would be enough |
Django Quik
R.I.f.t Orion Empire
408
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 07:29:00 -
[82] - Quote
Byozuma Kegawa wrote:Tolen Rosas wrote:for a start hopefully u will add penalties for people that leave games. would love to see Deserter occurences on their permanent files along with an Deserter %. expose the rage quitters. then make it so player contracts have an option and some of the higher npc contracts have a minimum Deserter % threshold on them. provides the perfect incentive for mercs not to desert. The Robot Devil wrote:Quitting battles, not participating and team killers should get some type of status change or security status that is easily viewable to everyone. I don't want to pull a merc into my squad only to get killed by him. I try to pull in mercs that I know will work hard and will not rage quit. But what if one of your squad fails to launch with the squad (I've had it happen to me and seen it happen numerous times)? Should the squad stay in the match while the poor sod that got left out sits and waits? If your idea were to bear fruit, if that squad left to launch with their whole squad they'd get a little black mark on their record, all cause they were just being a good squad. If this happens, the player can just leave squad and deploy into the same battle on the same side and rejoin the squad. There's no problem there. |
Peter Hanther
Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 14:18:00 -
[83] - Quote
The Robot Devil wrote:Quitting battles, not participating and team killers should get some type of status change or security status that is easily viewable to everyone. I don't want to pull a merc into my squad only to get killed by him. I try to pull in mercs that I know will work hard and will not rage quit.
I am all for that except quiting, because disconnects happen. |
Hellsung Deathsong
GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 15:45:00 -
[84] - Quote
i would like to see a heavy negative sp penalty to TK, say double wp and sp loss to that you would get from a kill itself. and auto kick from the game if the persons wp drop below 0. Sure you'd have to be more careful at the start of the match, but that would end all TK greifing without harming the team players very much at all |
Felix Thunide
Gespenster Kompanie Villore Accords
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.05 19:25:00 -
[85] - Quote
Dust Faction combat should be more srs bsnss than random matches and less srs bsnss than planetary conquest. Just like Eve FW is more srs bsnss than highsec and less srs bsnss than Nullsec. To that extent I agree that rewards should be greater than standard matchmaking, and the risks should be greater.
I would like to point out that what we have, is what we have, until the next expansion. None of this can be changed until then. We have time to ponder this.
Team Killing While I agree that friendly fire should be turned on for FW fights, losing SP should never be a possibility. Team damage and team killing are all too easy. In Eve FW you lose standings the moment you engage in an aggressive act against that militia. If it's a the same militia you are in you can get kicked out until you improve standings. The thing with Eve is that your targeting systems are flawless in that you know what you are targeting if you get a lock. So it's hard to screw up who you are shooting at. With dust on the other hand I can't tell you how many times I have unloaded my shotgun on some blueberry because I was too close to see what color his name was and I wasn't going to take a chance. OFF MUH TIP BRO!
Team killing should stay off for random matches. For faction matches I think it should be turned on, but I have no idea how to fairly oust awoxers without ousting klutzes, and I have no idea how we could stop factions from passively sabotaging matches without some kind of penalty. Maybe like what World of Tanks does. Make them pay a fine to the player who was shot/killed.
Faction Warfare Matchmaking The idea that any dolt can get into my match and screw it up while I am trying to accomplish an agenda to conquer a specific solar system annoys me, but I see the complication in keeping dolts out while keeping FW accessible to Dust. FW needs to be more accessible than planetary conquering and the fact that you can stack a whole side with 16 of your own guys puts a pretty good weight on your side towards victory, but it's not quite sandbox. The enemy faction could also stack both sides of a match and intentionally throw it.
In the way of risk, maybe we could have people pay a deposit to get into the match. They only earn that deposit back if they win.
In Eve FW if you have positive standing with the faction you want to join you can just join, but no-one will trust you unless you are part of a group that has made a name for itself. The key here is being part of a community. To that extent I think it would benefit dust FW players greatly if they had sort of a faction lobby they could hang out in between matches. Not a chat channel but a 3D space they can walk around in and use voice, oh and we need a shooting range! At some point you could let Eve Faction players into it as well. It would help build a sense of community and encourage people to group up with people they trust and work well with.
Loyalty Points GÇ£LOOK AT MY FACTION DROPSUIT KITTED OUT WITH MY FACTION PISTOL, AND FACTION ASSUALT RIFLE! THAT'S RIGHT FEEL THE ENVY! DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY OF THE BAD GUYS I HAD TO KILL TO GET THIS!?GÇ¥ That about sums up why, and it's pretty good incentive. |
Beren Hurin
OMNI Endeavors
388
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 15:55:00 -
[86] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:
Dynamically created battles FW battles will no longer be created by corporations selecting a district to attack. Instead the server will dynamically generate battles for players to join. Where these battles take place will be based on where complex are being completed in EVE FW.
The system will make sure there is always a battle available to join. So as running battles fill up new ones will be generated.
So is there anything else that goes into these dynamically generated battles? I'm wondering if the contested status of a system will matter? Like if a system is currently uncontested, but the enemy 'owns' a couple districts on a planet can you run some defensive plexes to then try and open up a district to take it back and 'clean up' a system? Also does it matter the size of a complex that is completed? So if there are 60 complexes completed every 10 minutes across all warzones, will mediums and larges be more likely to spawn districts than novices and smalls? |
Dezus 1000
Reaper Galactic
17
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 16:23:00 -
[87] - Quote
Would be nice if consistently picking a certain faction to fight for helped hybrid corps standing in EVE. |
Parson Atreides
Ahrendee Mercenaries
278
|
Posted - 2013.05.06 21:46:00 -
[88] - Quote
I thought there was always supposed to be a battle up if others were full. Maybe the system is still trying to catch up, but as soon as one FW battle filled in the Mercenary Tab, it was a while before another opened. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3391
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 13:18:00 -
[89] - Quote
There are some issues with the battles starting up correctly and the system ensuring there are enough battles. CCp Nullarbor is looking into this, along with a few other issues. Please bare with us as we get to the root of this and fix it as quickly as possible.
Lots of work going on at the office right now and we do apologize for this. :) |
|
steadyhand amarr
The Red Apple
475
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 14:43:00 -
[90] - Quote
Would love a FW lobby area or just an easer way to find players than spamming local :-P |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |