Celus Ivara
DUST University
Ivy League
0
   |
Posted - 2013.05.10 14:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
First off here are the one's people have mentioned before that I'd like to second (and offer my suggestion on the WP awarded):
-Counter hacking a point (25-50 WP)
-Mobil CRU spawning (same as uplink)
-Destruction of enemy equipment
>nano (5-10 WP)
>uplink (15-25 WP)
>mines (5-10 WP)
Now some of the tricky ones:
I think most people agree defending a key point (null cannons being the primary example here) helps the team. And, as something that helps the team, it should be awarded WP.
The question is what system would be representative of the effort & opportunity-cost required in defending? How do you keep it from being exploited? How does an unintelligent algorithm even determine a player took a defensive action?
I can see two different methods, but honestly neither is a system I'd consider completely perfect.
1: A mix of small awards that stack, so to better represent the usefulness and costs of the players actions.
(A sniper who shoots a hacking enemy did help the team, and was cunning enough to position themselves in a way to enable that, so they should get a bonus, but they did not have to sacrifice no longer engaging the rest of playfield in the same way a heavey or shottey did by defensively camping the spot. )
-Killing an enemy near the point (5-10 WP)
-Being near the point when you kill an enemy (5-10 WP)
-Small trickle of WP every few minutes just for continuously being near the point.
None of these are much by themselves, but added to each other and then on top of the 50 WP for the enemy killed, a player could pull a per min WP average comparable to what the guys in the field are getting.
Or,
2: After a certain amount of time spent near an objective, have the game associate the player with that point and have any enemies killed near it deliver a bigger payout (60-80 WP).
Honestly very similar to the first method, but would be a bit more bombastic and higher stakes which players may enjoy.
Now, while I think either of these methods are fine, this whole thing eventually brings us back the elephant in the room regarding this problem:
War Points encourage an activity, but the activity of sitting at a vacant null canon waiting for something to happen is not fun; and honestly no amount of WP will change that.
Now I still think we should do something. It is an action that helps the team. And there will be a narrow subset of players who will really enjoy that whole "lurking spider" mentality. Also, eventually a CO will order a player to guard a key point and them getting some extra WP would be a balm on the dull wait. But I think we need to tread very carefully when we start encouraging players to engage in an activity the majority will find unfun.
...Jesus Kitten, that was an essay...
Damaging vehicles (even if you don't kill them) helps the team, and thus should yield WP.
Vehicles (well, heavy ones at least) are rarely taken down in one go by one lone badass. Usually it's the culmination of a long team effort chiseling away at it's health until it's finally low enough to pop like a War Point pinata. But the last person to get that hit gets all the WP candies.
-Deplete half the vehicle's total HP (shield + armor) get (50-125 WP)
That much damage will set up the vehicle for someone else to finish off, or force the vehicle to retreat. Either is beneficial to the team. |
Celus Ivara
DUST University
Ivy League
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 19:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Draco Cerberus wrote:Celus Ivara wrote:
-Destruction of enemy equipment
>nano (5-10 WP)
>uplink (15-25 WP)
>mines (5-10 WP)
I honestly think that destruction of enemy equipment should be all at a rate of 5 wp per piece destroyed. The value to the enemy notwithstanding of a certain type of equipment, you are paid out in ISK for destroying these things anyways. Other than that I really like your idea of association with an objective.
Your point about the isk payout is a good one; when it comes to deployables that's something I had forgotten.
My reason for placing uplinks higher than the others though, is less about market price difference and more about the fact that, while nanohives can change the arc of a one-on-one encounter, uplinks can change the arc of an entire battle.
Admittedly though, this is partly based on how they behaved before Uprising. Uplinks were tricky to find and required time and talent to find and take down. Now they instantly pop up on everyone's radar and can be trivially dispatched.
Yeah, if CCP doesn't fix that, then I would put uplink destruction at 5 WP. |