These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] Dynamic bounty adjustment algorithm based on NPC kills per faction.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Courthouse
Perkone
Caldari State
#1 - 2012-03-27 06:48:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Courthouse
I watched the TenTonHammer.com interview with stoffer here http://www.tentonhammer.com/eve-online/interviews/inferno-part-one and he mentioned CCP possibly taking action to stem the input of ISK into the game by possible actions like reduction of bounties and mission payouts across the board and increasing the transaction tax. All great things.

That said, it still doesn't address some of the core issues of bounties and pirate factions when viewed as an incentive for mission runners to seek missions for and nullsec alliances to use to catalyze conflict.

What I'd like to suggest is that with the focus on the NPC corporations identities becoming more significant with the V3 project, look at designating opposing factions per corporation such that their agents give a higher percentage of missions that target said faction. (Caldari Navy vs. Guriastas, Ishukone vs. whoever in the books, Amarr whatevers vs. Minmatar - okay, truth be told I don't know what the **** about these, but it's irrelevant to the pitch.)

Now that each corporation has a nemesis faction(s) that their agents favor missions against and the pirate corporations have opposing NPC factions, you look at total NPC kills of each faction relative to each other. From there it's easy to rank which factions are most popular and which are least popular.

Now the kicker is that you take the least popular factions and increase their bounty/mission/LP payouts, while the most popular factions get a coorelating reduction in bounty/mission/LP payouts using one of those fancy distribution curves that math guys like.

This provides incentive for people to leave Caldari Navy/Guristas for some of the more exotic factions. It makes pirate faction missions interesting beyond the couple epic questlines that people run. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it can act as a catalyst for null alliances to seek to uproot and move to more profitable vistas.
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2012-03-27 06:50:27 UTC
I'm for anything that will make those pirate tags worth looting.

+1 from me.

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement
Kaleb Rysode
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2012-03-27 07:15:40 UTC
+1.

Great and very far reaching idea. It needs a bit of fleshing out, but hopefully the CSM can put something like this on their agenda.

"The reality is that the sandbox is amoral. You don't have to like it, but...reality owns."
Wusti
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-03-27 07:17:09 UTC
+1 from me too.

Anything that spurs action and content is worth a shot
Grenray
Eve Ship Building Inc.
#5 - 2012-03-28 02:06:15 UTC
Courthouse wrote:
I watched the TenTonHammer.com interview with stoffer here http://www.tentonhammer.com/eve-online/interviews/inferno-part-one and he mentioned CCP possibly taking action to stem the input of ISK into the game by possible actions like reduction of bounties and mission payouts across the board and increasing the transaction tax. All great things.

That said, it still doesn't address some of the core issues of bounties and pirate factions when viewed as an incentive for mission runners to seek missions for and nullsec alliances to use to catalyze conflict.

What I'd like to suggest is that with the focus on the NPC corporations identities becoming more significant with the V3 project, look at designating opposing factions per corporation such that their agents give a higher percentage of missions that target said faction. (Caldari Navy vs. Guriastas, Ishukone vs. whoever in the books, Amarr whatevers vs. Minmatar - okay, truth be told I don't know what the **** about these, but it's irrelevant to the pitch.)

Now that each corporation has a nemesis faction(s) that their agents favor missions against and the pirate corporations have opposing NPC factions, you look at total NPC kills of each faction relative to each other. From there it's easy to rank which factions are most popular and which are least popular.

Now the kicker is that you take the least popular factions and increase their bounty/mission/LP payouts, while the most popular factions get a coorelating reduction in bounty/mission/LP payouts using one of those fancy distribution curves that math guys like.

This provides incentive for people to leave Caldari Navy/Guristas for some of the more exotic factions. It makes pirate faction missions interesting beyond the couple epic questlines that people run. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it can act as a catalyst for null alliances to seek to uproot and move to more profitable vistas.


I Like these ideas. Streamlining was mentioned in this interveiw and caught my attention. While I love the complexity of this game the little things like ammo types having one name per type was deeply appreciated. Anything in this direction makes my game time more enjoyable.

Thanks for all the hard work.
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#6 - 2012-03-28 07:11:44 UTC
What? You mean a reason to not refine tags?

Where will all my minerals come from then? Lol

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2012-03-28 08:02:19 UTC
I've had an idea along these lines in my head for a long time, but could not find the right words to express it.
I think the whole PVE system should be more dynamic like what Courthouse here is suggesting, so that the EVE universe will more like an ecosystem in constant flux and less likely to reach a point of stasis where nothing evolves and meaningful content ceases to emerge.
Temo Pher
#8 - 2012-03-28 08:37:35 UTC
I like this idea but... this is going to create a situation that CCP have already taken action to remove.

Dynamic payouts sounds like an idea that will encorage people to move around but will that actualy happen? Or will other factors that goven where players chose to run their missions take precidence putting us back to where we were with agent quality?

Not so long ago agents all had a quality rating that effected rewards, and most of the highest rating agents where not in high sec, people still stuck where they were safe despite the finantual incentive. So to get people out of high sec is going to require a prity servear profit curve.

Access to trade hubs to sell salvage and buy supplies, proximity to players established hording stations, and corperate obligations are all factors that goven where people chose to run their missions as well. All of those are going to limit player willingness to follow the profit as well, so even within safe space I think people may just stick to where they are.

So if people stubbenly stick to their haunts, as i suspect they will, this will reduce the isk constantly injected into the system but not realy get people mooving so much.

As people wont be mooving we will be prity much back to where we were with agent quality though. As CCP already got rid of that are they going to want to bring it back?
Courthouse
Perkone
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-03-28 10:00:48 UTC
Temo Pher wrote:
I like this idea but... this is going to create a situation that CCP have already taken action to remove.

Dynamic payouts sounds like an idea that will encorage people to move around but will that actualy happen? Or will other factors that goven where players chose to run their missions take precidence putting us back to where we were with agent quality?

Not so long ago agents all had a quality rating that effected rewards, and most of the highest rating agents where not in high sec, people still stuck where they were safe despite the finantual incentive. So to get people out of high sec is going to require a prity servear profit curve.


I had wanted to stay away from posting numbers in the OP as I'm not a game designer and people who are smarter at maths than me can do that better, but a decent example would be to use a +/-20% distribution. So, let's say for example that Guristas are the #1 most botted popular faction to shoot. They would pay out at 80% of a "normal" bounty/mission reward/LP. Let's also say that Mordu's Legion is the least popular option. Their stuff would pay out at 120% of "normal."

That would mean that Mordu's agent was 50% more profitable to run than a Caldari Navy (Guristas faction nemesis) agent.

That would be a pretty significant difference and when you're looking at things that may disincentivise botting, having rats worth a lot less than moving elsewhere, potentially to a place that players can potentially police better than Motsu/Sobaseki is good for everyone.