|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 18:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:I can't believe i just read this... Beeing responsible for your own money is part of the game. Proto gear is supposed to be used in matches that you can't afford to loose.
You want maximum performance all the time? Goddam pay for it. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 19:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
ladwar wrote:the highest I went was just under 700k ISK but I kill 12 HAVs 3 ADS 12 protobears and 8 LLAVs and went 38-1 and lost 100k ISK because the HAV I used cost more then what I got in the match. Destroyed value is put into a pool and divided to all mercs according to playtime and wp i believe. That's you didn't get millions of isk.
Again, the payout system is not designed to care for our expenses. It evaluates the damage done, the outcome and and ones general contribution towards that outcome. How expensive this contribution has been for any merc is only ones own problem.
Sounds harsh. Is harsh. Works as intended.
|
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 19:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote: You need to somehow scale payouts to reflect the "quality" of each soldier to some degree.
Think of it this way. If you have a mercenary with a BB gun and a burlap sack for armor and another with state of the art equipment would you pay them the same exact rate for their services?
The way things stand now I believe that every single player on a specific team gets the same exact payout at the end of a match based on the total losses suffered by the enemy. This is how in one match you can AFK and get 180K and in another fight to your best and still make 180K.
You're never going to see the system improve though to the point where prototype armor becomes anything less than a pain to lose because it would mean more work for the developers.
Once people are playing well enough and are able to play regularly in prototype gear what are they going to strive for next? The developers would need to provide another tier for them to aim for next to keep the game interesting. Instead they provide a system where playing in high tier gear is unprofitable meaning it always stays just out of reach for most players providing a goal most people will always strive for and never meet.
First to your suggestion: Why would a contractor care what someone brings to the field? He needs a certain job done and is happy for everything that get's destroyed on top of that. After the battle he looks through the available metrics to discern who did a better job and pays that one more. If doing the better job cost him millions more than what the job pays then this particular merc simply did a miscalculation. So a merc's "quality" is just his contribution, not his expenses.
And your last paragraph suggests that you view proto gear as a "because it's better" choice. The high price is there to make it a "because it's needed" choice. Enemy team sucks kitten? Go to STD and keep the saved ISK for when you need it. Proto squads of a rival corp? "Skrew the ISK and bring out the big toys! This is not about the money anymore!"
The fact that so many people can burn through hundreds of millions of ISK before they run dry is an issue in itself and battles will be much more varied and balanced once that money is finally gone.
|
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 19:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Malkai Inos wrote:ladwar wrote:the highest I went was just under 700k ISK but I kill 12 HAVs 3 ADS 12 protobears and 8 LLAVs and went 38-1 and lost 100k ISK because the HAV I used cost more then what I got in the match. Destroyed value is put into a pool and divided to all mercs according to playtime and wp i believe. That's why you didn't get millions of isk. Again, the payout system is not designed to care for our expenses. It evaluates the damage done, the outcome and ones general contribution towards that outcome. How expensive this contribution has been for any merc is only ones own problem. Sounds harsh. Is harsh. Works as intended. Do you have a link to the explanation of payout? That is pretty old but since i can't find any more current info that's not focused on FW/PC i assume it's still accurate.
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2012/12/11/dust-514-war-and-profit/
Edit:Thor Odinson42 wrote: I'm seriously about to jam my head through some Sheetrock if I read one more post that talks about playing with what you can afford.
I died 5 times in the match that made me start this thread. But I dropped an orbital after getting overrun on A at Manus Peak that took out a squad of Pro Hic dudes in proto gear.
You'd think you'd be able to break even. Hell maybe eve lose a bit.
As landwar posted above he had a 38.0 KDR and lost 100K.
It feels like I'm in the Twilight Zone if you people can't see something wrong with that.
Look at it from this point of view, there is a good change that any single one of those guys went out of that match with a negative just as you. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 19:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Malkai Inos wrote: First to your suggestion: Why would a contractor care what someone brings to the field? He needs a certain job done and is happy for everything that get's destroyed on top of that. After the battle he looks through the available metrics to discern who did a better job and pays that one more. If doing the better job cost him millions more than what the job pays then this particular merc simply did a miscalculation. So a merc's "quality" is just his contribution, not his expenses.
Except even in this game that ISN'T how it works. Payouts are practically, if not entirely, uniform across all players on a given team. You AFK in the ship and you make 200k, you fight your ass off and lose 100K in equipment you make 200k. As long as the rest of your team is at least messing around and killing people it's more profitable to afk in a starter fit than to actually play this game. As long as you're trying to make an argument in in-game terms then you're entirely leaving out the mercenary's point of view here. In a real situation the mercenary's involved wouldn't put up with this crap. They're putting their own funds on the line and getting paid as much as the guy sitting in the corner spending the entire battle using his rifle to scratch his ass. At that point any mercenary that values his money is going to either slack off like everyone else so they get their same payout for doing the same work or they take their services elsewhere. While i disagree from personal experience (not AFK farming but simply failing, mind you) that isk payouts are the same when you do jack for the match i can see your point. But the issue here is rather the viability of AFKing, not the other way around.
Once a more sensible matchmaking and PVE content are in place i will second your notion that payout should be almost or completely unrelated to time as there's no excuse for beeing constantly useless when you are put in a match with similarily skilled and equipped players at that point. Until then we have to keep in mind that there are large numbers of players who cannot reasonably contribute to match but are still dependant on getting a share of the ISK payouts to be able to progress. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 20:26:00 -
[6] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Cass Barr wrote:Several people have already explained why the system works that way, there's no reason to explain it again. Maybe you should read the thread. I suggested an alternative that works perfectly fine for pub matches, and you get pissy about it.
Payouts are divided among your entire team, so even if you killed an entire proto squad, as long as you lost several proto suits you are going to take a loss. If you can run proto suits in pub matches all day without a care in the world for monetary losses, than ISK ultimately means nothing and the whole risk vs. reward system falls apart. And just to clarify, winning a pointless pub match isn't part of the reward side of the equation, because it accomplishes exactly nothing. I shouldn't have been so harsh. I apologize, no excuse for it. It's just crazy that we should have to grind in basic to medium gear in order to cap out and save up for 3 or 4 matches. If you are lucky enough to be a 5%er who has participated in PC battles you can turn a profit in proto gear if you die 5 times. Are you happy with the system? I proposed a system that lets you team deploy into Merc battles (not this FW crap)with bigger payouts. This clears the pub matches for newbs and allows serious players to battle consistently against teams of players. The disagreement is still that some posters don't expect to constantly use proto gear as they see proto as something you pay the money for when/because the situation demands it, and not because it's the best.
I understand STD => ADV => PRO not as a progression like with traditionall progression systems where you expect to go towards the best stuff and stay there, but as the ability to cope with increasingly difficult situations, should i need to.
That's why i don't see the need for new gamemodes that pay, say, twice the ISK for no good reason. We need more things like PC, where using proto is paid by the advantages of keeping districts, so that using proto is a worthwile investment.
Until that i view proto as not worth the price in most cases and i am perfectly fine with it. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
218
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 20:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote: Well we don't have anything else other than PC and its too difficult and expensive for a majority of the player base. So why not allow them to have more fun?
As much as I want to quit arguing this point as it appears I'm in the minority I just can't help it. It seems so obvious. The game is already a grind in regards to skilling. Why should it also be an endless grind to afford the stuff we are grinding to skill into?
We both really differ in mindset regarding this issue.
The way i see it, there's proto gear. It's freaking expensive and really only makes a difference in edge cases. So i deem it not exactly worth skilling into/paying for right now. Swoosh, my skillplans are down to a third because i focus on advanced so i can try much more stuff out and once i find the perfect combination i can still use the passive bonuses, allowing better STD/ADV fits to further improve cost to benefit ratio.
It's a concious choice based on the framework the game dictates and i'm happy this game allows me to make decisions on this level as barely any other game manages to do this. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
242
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 23:44:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Darth Threatius wrote: Sooooo if your opponent is running milita gear then you should run milita gear. Shouldn't be any need to use proto right?
Stop trying to be a smart ass, you're doing a **** poor job of it. People that put enough time into the game to be able to afford/equip proto gear don't do it so they can look at how pretty it looks in the menu and play every game in militia gear. If you're going up against a team that's +90% militia gear that doesn't mean you should be forced into playing in militia gear. No one forces you. It's just stupidly inefficient not to use MLT or STD gear. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
245
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 02:53:00 -
[9] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Malkai Inos wrote:Mike Poole wrote:Darth Threatius wrote: Sooooo if your opponent is running milita gear then you should run milita gear. Shouldn't be any need to use proto right?
Stop trying to be a smart ass, you're doing a **** poor job of it. People that put enough time into the game to be able to afford/equip proto gear don't do it so they can look at how pretty it looks in the menu and play every game in militia gear. If you're going up against a team that's +90% militia gear that doesn't mean you should be forced into playing in militia gear. No one forces you. It's just stupidly inefficient not to use MLT or STD gear. It's stupidly inefficient to play at all if you can AFK farm and get the current payout. Others have said that the payout tends to be quite meager without any WP and i haven't AFKed yet but for the sake of the argument i agree. I still believe that the high AFK payout (should this be the case) is the problem, not that the general payout is too low.
I still stand by my statement that i think proto gear was never supposed to be sustainable by anything but FPS gods and thus see no issue in the fact that it's nigh impossible to turn a profit on the average insta match. But i think both established that already. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
254
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 19:07:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Vell0cet wrote:All of the things you're talking about are what Planetary Conquest is designed for. That's the place where you wear your best gear, because your corp will own planets that generate lots of ISK which will help fund the cost of your high-end suits. Instant battles are meant to be fought in cheaper gear, and accessible to people just out of the academy. Watch the Planetary Conquest Fanfest talk to help you understand it. And everyone that isn't in a big corporation or didn't rush to grab districts and can't actively participate in the deeper Planetary Conquest bits is supposed to sit on their thumb and deal with running inferior fits or falling into the red after games no matter their performance? Yes, because their playstile doesn't involve significant risk if they don't want it to. New Eden and all...
|
|
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
255
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 19:56:00 -
[11] - Quote
Thor Odinson42 wrote:Malkai Inos wrote:Mike Poole wrote:Vell0cet wrote:All of the things you're talking about are what Planetary Conquest is designed for. That's the place where you wear your best gear, because your corp will own planets that generate lots of ISK which will help fund the cost of your high-end suits. Instant battles are meant to be fought in cheaper gear, and accessible to people just out of the academy. Watch the Planetary Conquest Fanfest talk to help you understand it. And everyone that isn't in a big corporation or didn't rush to grab districts and can't actively participate in the deeper Planetary Conquest bits is supposed to sit on their thumb and deal with running inferior fits or falling into the red after games no matter their performance? Yes, because their playstile doesn't involve significant risk if they don't want it to. New Eden and all... So with a straight face. And actual thought put into your response you believe that 95% of the player base should never run expensive gear unless they happen upon a chance to participate in a PC battle? That can't be. you can't really mean that. I already have explained to you that i mean it, why i mean it, why this game is designed around this very concept and why i am perfectly fine with it.
Barring some initial misconceptions in this discussion, pretty much everyone who was critical of your notion understood that this is the mechanic you are objecting to. They were critical because they not only do not see a problem, but value this very mechanic for what it is. |
Malkai Inos
The Vanguardians Orion Empire
257
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 20:01:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mike Poole wrote:Seras Vikutoria wrote:
- There is no such thing as "a fair fight" or "an unfair fight". There's only "a fight". Circumstances are irrelevant.
No such thing as "an unfair fight"? In a game where at any moment the finger of god can be called down to wipe out an entire squad without touching friendly targets? Or where you have redline snipers/tanks taking potshots over hills at people that can't even attempt to counter them? Circumstances are irrelevant. That's the important message here. |
|
|
|