| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xender17
Intrepidus XI
Omega Commission
192
   |
Posted - 2013.07.02 02:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
A big difference between EVE and Dust is the Isk earned and cost.
The isk cost of most items in the games when compared with each other is obviously correct.
A ship is bound to cost millions in EVE. A dropsuit is bound to cost thousands. / A vehicle hundreds of thousands.
When you apply this difference of EVE vs Dust costs, the reward system is flawed.
Dust is two sided.
infantry/vehicles.
Infantry/Vehicle costs are fine, on average. (Although certain item costs of each type are, of course, imbalanced.)
The reward system is what I think is wrong. You have infantry that cost on average(s) 10,000-60/70,000-100,000/200,000(separated into standard, advanced, and proto)
Then you have vehicles that cost on average(s)
LAV- free(shouldn't exist), 200,000-300,000
HAV- 400,000-700,000/850,000
Dropships- 350,000-500,000
The reward and risk system is big.
You may say, as an infantry, say "We die more than vehicles" True but that's because you cost so much less>can earn isk over time(unlike most vehicle users)
Because of those 2 reasons you voluntarily or involuntarily view your life as less valuable. You are less careful and thoughtful on the field because you have less risk.
Vehicle users feel a lot of fear. Because of their costs (other then free LAVs) they are more careful and thoughtful of risk on the field.
The risk vs reward system for system is imbalanced and needs a change.
People currently see the isk system as two differences... ground and space. There are three. Spaceships, infantry, and vehicles.
Too make sure you don't just discard the latter. Think about the dogfighter game CCP has been working on. If I didn't talk about the, actually, three isk groups you would view the dogfighters as the third group. The dogfighters are vehicles and not much different than Dust vehicles. In that game the costs and rewards will probably in the low millions.
Now I don't know of any magical way to make this problem to go away without ruining other stuff.
You could increase the reward of vehicle users...
Currently EVE and Dust are locked between ISK transfer to dust players. As in, how fair would it be to EVE transferring billions to dust players?
If maybe vehicles/infantry isk was locked from vehicles isk earned on infantry items? |
Xender17
Intrepidus XI
Omega Commission
192
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 02:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
Please be least sarcastic as possible.
Do not post in reply to the player but rather the players post/idea. Don't reply unless you're interest is in the idea. |
N1ck Comeau
Pro Hic Immortalis
555
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 02:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
i think it's fine the way it is. But i'll let CCP fix the economy however they want |
Xender17
Intrepidus XI
Omega Commission
192
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 02:38:00 -
[4] - Quote
What I'm say is that if vehicles are there own class than they you should be able to use it just like infantry classes can be used every match without running out of isk. In this game a class means something you specialize in. AV/Medic/Infiltrator/Basic Assault/ Heavy Anti-infantry... Why can't vehicles be their own role? They can be specialized. |
Grunt Shade
Ahrendee Frontlinez
Omega Commission
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 02:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
It takes 4 to 5 battles to pay for one of my fully fitted(proto or highest available modules) tanks. Thats finishing in the top 5 of good battles. Excluding corp battles here. When more modules and higher performance hav 's arrive it probablu cost 2 million or better per unit. Im thinking a kill separation would work example kills/assist kills/mobile(or something)/deaths at post battle screen. Mobile kills add a bonus to isk. This would also cool the conflict between av'ers and tankers a bit I think......for a day or two atleast. |
Telleth
DUST University
Ivy League
62
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 03:05:00 -
[6] - Quote
I completely agree with vehicles needing a boost in rewards.
I will mention that the numbers on proto HAV's are a bit low. I run a 1.4mil with just a STD Maddy. Enforcers are even more so.
I don't have any personal experience with dropships, but I believe an ADS can easy top 1mil.
On another note, I like the comparison to EVE ships. It did make me realize that my HAV's cost more than many frigates. |
Delenne Arran
Ivory Hounds
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 04:02:00 -
[7] - Quote
I primarily run Assault suits, so you can take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt. I think the problem vehicle users have is that they're mistaken about their role*. Not every battle needs four LAVs, two HAVs and a dropship. They shouldn't be your primary source of kills or income. A HAV should show up to turn the tide of the battle, to make short work of infantry huddled around the objective, or to destroy the enemy CRU and Supply Depots. The decision shouldn't just go "Well, the game started, time to call in my Madrugar." LAVs should be used to get from objective to objective and deal with any resistance encountered on the way. They shouldn't be used to reenact your Grand Theft Auto highlight reel.
I think the current pricing/payout supports this. It's not profitable to run a HAV for 2/3 of the match, five matches straight because you're not supposed to. That's also part of the point of the recall system, a benefit Infantry doesn't have**. Call a vehicle in, do what you need to do, and get it out before it goes up in smoke.
The old EVE saying "Don't fly anything you can't afford to lose" applies to DUST, too. If you can't afford to replace your vehicle, don't bring it to the fight to begin with. I know it must suck to have specced into something and not be able to make money with it, but that's kinda how it goes.
*Oh, would you look at that, another Assault player telling everyone else how to play.
** Yes, we have Supply Depots, but those only exist in certain spots on the map and can easily be destroyed by vehicles or stationary turrets. |
Xocoyol Zaraoul
Zumari Force Projection
Caldari State
446
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 04:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
*Dumps a bucket of salt over the previous post* |
KOBLAKA1
Opus Arcana
Covert Intervention
166
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 04:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
@Delene so whats a guy whose fully specced vehicles supposed to do when his HAV/DS isnt needed? starter fit snipe? |
Delenne Arran
Ivory Hounds
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 04:54:00 -
[10] - Quote
KOBLAKA1 wrote:@Delene so whats a guy whose fully specced vehicles supposed to do when his HAV/DS isnt needed? starter fit snipe?
Pretty much, yeah. That's kind of why you shouldn't put yourself into such a specialty role without at least some skillpoints set aside for when your specialty isn't needed. Just like I wouldn't recommend going into just sniping if half the maps made that useless, I wouldn't recommend going into just vehicles if you're planning on playing game types where they aren't necessary or useful. Of course, the difference between someone who just snipes and someone who just uses vehicles is about 8 million SP. |
|
|
DUST Fiend
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
4249
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 04:57:00 -
[11] - Quote
They could start by letting people insure their vehicles....while they're at it they can give you a class on how to remove your keys from the ignition when you exit the vehicle.... |
Vyzion Eyri
The Southern Legion
RISE of LEGION
778
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 05:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
The problem is balancing the freedom of choice on the battlefield with separating players into certain categories based on what they did in-game and dispensing rewards based on that.
The person who calls in a vehicle currently doesn't have to pilot it. The vehicle can be recalled. The enemy can hack it. So many factors which could easily undermine a system which rewards vehicle pilots more than infantry.
But a good question to ask is "how much more advanced is a tank, technology-wise, to a dropsuit?" Surely the technology that allows a clone body to have enhanced biotic movement, increased shielding and armour protection which can be upgraded through skill books, provide electronic and engineering capabilities which can sustain weapons of mass destruction, surely this technology is on par, if not even more advanced, than that of a rolling hunk of steel which moves as slow as tanks do today?
So where is that extra cost coming from? The sheer volume of materials? If so, with tanks being destroyed in their dozens every day, surely that resource is going to become a rare commodity soon? How are we going to sustain constantly pumping out tanks, dropships and LAVs for the mercenaries across the universe?
Unless it's extremely sustainable and there are vast quantities of it in New Eden. Doesn't that mean it should be cheap?
So I'd say reduce the cost of vehicles. Modules can be expensive, sure, but the hulls should, based on the (fairly speculative) reasons above, be merely a little more expensive than dropsuits. |
Grunt Shade
Ahrendee Frontlinez
Omega Commission
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 05:18:00 -
[13] - Quote
Delenne Arran wrote:KOBLAKA1 wrote:@Delene so whats a guy whose fully specced vehicles supposed to do when his HAV/DS isnt needed? starter fit snipe? Pretty much, yeah. That's kind of why you shouldn't put yourself into such a specialty role without at least some skillpoints set aside for when your specialty isn't needed. Just like I wouldn't recommend going into just sniping if half the maps made that useless, I wouldn't recommend going into just vehicles if you're planning on playing game types where they aren't necessary or useful. Of course, the difference between someone who just snipes and someone who just uses vehicles is about 8 million SP.
I agree there It is wise to have a separate role which I do. My overall out look and it maybe just me, but with out everything this game would just be another fps. For me and im just speaking for myself right now. Its more fun to see infantry, tanks, light vehicles, dropshits everything going in a battle not just every now and then or when needed. A constant presence. I understand your view point. Be as it may. A slight change to the money system will benafit not only tankers but av'ers. People who like tanks can keep rolling and av'ers can keep doing what they do. Assault is still the best asset
in the game. |
Xender17
Intrepidus XI
Omega Commission
192
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 07:33:00 -
[14] - Quote
Vyzion Eyri wrote:The problem is balancing the freedom of choice on the battlefield with separating players into certain categories based on what they did in-game and dispensing rewards based on that.
The person who calls in a vehicle currently doesn't have to pilot it. The vehicle can be recalled. The enemy can hack it. So many factors which could easily undermine a system which rewards vehicle pilots more than infantry.
What are you smoking? |
Delenne Arran
Ivory Hounds
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 10:13:00 -
[15] - Quote
Xender17 wrote:Vyzion Eyri wrote:The problem is balancing the freedom of choice on the battlefield with separating players into certain categories based on what they did in-game and dispensing rewards based on that.
The person who calls in a vehicle currently doesn't have to pilot it. The vehicle can be recalled. The enemy can hack it. So many factors which could easily undermine a system which rewards vehicle pilots more than infantry. What are you smoking? People mistake reward as WP too much. Most tankers have to go at least 3 matches to gain restock a good HAV, 3 on average for DS's. The reward we get at the end is also just the same as yours.
I believe they meant any hypothetical system that rewarded more based on whether you were using a vehicle or not, not that the current one does so.
Say we're on the same team. You call in a HAV, but before you hop into the driver's seat, I take it on a joyride. Should I get paid more for kills in your vehicle? I'm not the one risking it, but you're not driving it, so you shouldn't get anything out of it either. Or what if it gets hacked by the enemy team? Do they get the bonus ISK, or not? What about when you get 10 kills and recall it when the AV guys show up?
If there has to be any kind of mitigation for vehicle costs, the most fair way I could see doing it is either allowing pilots to insure their vehicles up to a maximum of 33% coverage. That said, as much fun as it is to have HAVs, LAVS, and Dropships all flying around, much like Prototype suits, I don't think they should be sustainable to use in every single instant battle a person does. |
Grunt Shade
Ahrendee Frontlinez
Omega Commission
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 17:29:00 -
[16] - Quote
You got a point. I guess reality is that the prices will not change until dust player have an economy like eve. |
GManKilla 2898
FallenGods
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.06 17:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
I'm a dropship pilot and one of the great ones of. The game and yea my dropships if in my best outfit cost 1.4 mill and no dropship don't tend to last long unless they are flying around like **** tards if ur in the battle in eny way there is going to be swarms if proto not already out and forge guns and mass drivers are..... no leave it at 3 barrel rolls but I don't only fly I tank 1.6 mill and drive scout and logi lavs the **** is not cheap and all u get is people guning for me all day only way to do it is stay far away from battle and hope railgun tank under their mcc doesn't hit me while I'm under mine
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |