|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
Galactic Skyfleet Empire
36
   |
Posted - 2014.12.04 13:16:44 -
[1] - Quote
Oh. Sad to see the feature go. :-(
I believe that the low usage is not due to the idea not being appealing, but because teams have a very limited scope of usability.
1. the bonuses are not that big (understandable, because there is an easy-to-calculate advantage which is a no-brainer once the team is available).
2. you need to specialize on one item or a very narrow group to see any effect and produce high volume
3. the auction mechanism is total crap. Either you go for a non-interesting team no one competes for OR you have to be online in the very second the auction ends AND type fast (try this with a typical nullsec system and their cryptic names while the competitor only has to spell "JITA" 3 secs before end of auction - caused me some frustration)
4. because specific teams do not spawn all the time, you need to have the specialized production running for a longer time. |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
Galactic Skyfleet Empire
36
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 13:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
I used teams, i like them and I don't want to see the feature go away, although I have to admit the proposed course of action sounds sensible from CCP's point of view.
Different proposal:
1. Scrap the auction mechanism.
2. Spawn teams randomly, but with a bias towards actual industry activity.
3. players can bid ISK incentives to have teams spawn in specific locations. When they do so, they have to select a specific item category (broad or narrow) from a list.
4. optional: you may use teams that are not in your current location, but the salary then goes up drastically with distance.
ad 3: this means if a team is spawned with say specialties for "Capital construction parts" and "Small Ships" then the likelyhood for this team to spawn in a given system is higher if a system has had a high production of that item types in the recent past (those guys are intelligent and seek to work where there is actually work to be done)
Pseudocode:
1. roll team abilities randomly (as before)
2. for all systems determine relevant production of last 30 days per item category
3. for all systems do ISK incentive sum up all ISK incentives for this planet for the given abilities (e.g.: Jita - Small ships - 10m ISK)
4. roll team home system based on (base chance + relevant production bonus + relevant ISK incentive bonus - teams already present malus)
Why is this better than the situation now:
- you don't have the snipering any more
- players still have the ability to affect the dynamic space-scape with their actions
- ISK incentives require a meaningful decision - it's not 0.01 ISK more than the one before or 1 second later than someone else
- the "pull" mechanism has a passive self-organizing component because teams are more likely to spawn where the actual production happens. Which means the spacescape gets bent by your actions anyway. More sandboxy than ever.
OK, this proposal would need some ressources etc to be implemented, but what do you think about the idea? |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
Galactic Skyfleet Empire
36
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:24:05 -
[3] - Quote
Tarpedo wrote:Could you, please, somehow remove the scanning mini-game too? I bet almost nobody would play it if it was optional. 
Also please remove all NPCs from sites - I bet almost nobody would fight them if he could just scoop up the loot instead. |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
Galactic Skyfleet Empire
36
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 14:30:08 -
[4] - Quote
CCP RubberBAND wrote:In summary we can only realistically look at two options here:
- Leave them as is (yes it would be cool to do X or Y, but realistically we cannot)
- Remove them
meh...
Can't you just put the thing on kickstarter?
Other people even manage to sell features for nonexistant games there.
(on a more serious note: I like the feature even as it is, but I would not unsub if it went away and you promise that it makes the rest of the development significantly easier) |
|
|
| |
|