Printable View
What is a reasonable level though? 10 seems reasonable as thats how much you are given at the start, 100 seems excessive as its the maximum amount you can get. If anything this thread should be discussing the difficulty of hacking belts at different levels of sl if 100 sl is really the only reasonable amount to have. We should not instead be making it so everybody can get 100sl with almost no effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by Load_HeavyLoad
This thread isnt about belt hacking, pvp, ideal SL status or OP zone gamerules :
It's about the SL gain mechanics through missions.
Right now the mechanics is anything but linear an predictable. If I were a new player, I wouldn't know what to make of it.
The fact that the SL gain per mission changes depending on SL is not a likable feature to me, and obviously to a lot of people on the forums.
At this point I can only hope someone in the DEV team took notice and react accordingly.
Please make it a 1:1 ratio.
The idea of it changing is suppose to be so that people with low sl can get out of low sl without doing 100s of missions but so that you can't get 100sl very easily.
This seems like a perfectly reasonable and good feature to me, you don't want people being stuck at low sl forever for a mistake but you don't want them getting to top sl incredibly easily. Its sort of like somebody making a post about how when you get higher levels you need more exp to get a level so they should change it to 1 constant amount for every level so people don't get confused.
It is nothing like that. It is pretty simple actually. Every time I complete a mission I want a soullight point.Quote:
Originally Posted by DIABLO666
And everytime I kill somebody I want a them to drop a 5 slot all arti rare gun I need in a open belt, we can't always get what we want because it unbalances the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Antrim
getting 1sl per mission does not in anyway unbalance the game, holster these long words until you understand what they mean - it would maybe mean that people wouldnt mind so much about going into yellow sl thats abot it
it would also make people more willing to kill their allies or neutrals which would make the whole system a bit more pointless, sl is suppose to make people not want to kill their allies and neutrals as you will be punished, if its easy to get sl you make the whole sl system a but more redundant.
You can't just suggest such sweeping changes without considering how it affects the gameplay
Measures have already been taken to fix the ally/neutral killing (so-called) issue.
I did consider how it affects gameplay, and choosed to propose my idea.
Some random forum guy cannot tell me what I can or cannot propose on forums.
Tell william atrium and heavy porker that they've been trying to shut down anybody from posting things they don't agree with for a while =p. And of course I'm not trying to tell you what you can and cannot propose I mearly said you need to think through how it affects things which was actually aimed at heavy porker as he suggested he wont unbalance it at all while in fact it will change the balance of people killing their allies or neutrals. It might not do it by much but if you can get 1sl a mission all the time people will have 100sl very easily as people farm tl150 missions right now and it will be even easier to get out of having bad sl.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kame
The whole point of the sl system was that it makes you think twice about killing an ally or a neutral, this change would make people not need to think unless they are to poor to buy tl150s in which case they wouldn't care about sl again. Also I can't help but notice you always have yellow sl in-game so it could be you are biased in this matter towards wanting it to be easier to kill allies.
Current game mechanics allow for SL gain from any type of missions though.
Rats, Aggressors, Cyclops, Ressearch etc it's all the same SL gain.
I spend a lot of time doing recycle missions, and I had a lot of time to consider the mechanics of the Missions System, which makes my points based on observations due to many, many hours of running missions.
I also spend a lot of time in PP1 fighting lately, for various reasons, and sometimes everyone fights everyone and we all lose SL and no one seems to care much about it.
It looks to me as if people seem to want to fight to have fun and are ready to cope with the fact of having to run missions to restore SL in the future.
This is where this change would come in and impact, it doesn't change anything to the fact you're gonna have to run missions, it simply smooths out the "Time Running Missions" vs "Time Fighting Neutral/Allies" balance.
The PP1 fights arn't about ganking. To me it seems to be simply about enjoying PVP.
Makes things more simple, I like it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kame
However I do get the concern about increase ally killing. So how about only kill missions reward SL?
That way you cant simply run a bunch of recycle or research missions in your HQ, but you might be killed while trying to fix your SL. Especially for -SL chars this would be a handicap.
You can team up for fun fights, thats what I do if I'm having a fun fight with allies or neutrals, as for missions just buy tl150 cubes and you will have more sl than you know what to do with, it takes about 5 seconds to finish a tl150 mission and you even make money doing it, 1 stack gives you about 33 sl, this change would mean 1 stack would pretty much give 100sl.
That would pretty much make sl worthless and the whole point of sl is to make you have to question if you truly want to kill an ally. And of course they have already said they are altering the sl mission system and I think bringing out anarchy breed as a faction who hates everybody so if you like to kill everybody you can join them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J@ck on Cr@ck
This I could go for, it means its a pain in the ass to regain sl but you know how much you get getting AND its a risk so it means people still need to worry about killing friends.
[Edited]Quote:
Originally Posted by DIABLO666
On topic.
The soullight bonuses should be scaled according to difficulty of the mission completed. IMO.
The exception to this rule that would need to be discussed and considered is that of the Research Missions. Given the fact you can buy them easily and they give a lot of cash and xp, would it be too much that they ALSO granted 1 sl per mission as this would overinflate the cash economy?
Thoughts on that?
Kill missions should totally give you 1 sl per kill or even 1.5 every mission if chained together. This could also be done with a mission revamp where you kill for example 10 aggressors for 1 sl or 20 cyclops for 2. This would also need to be scaled accordingly.
Indeed that could work, maybe we will get lucky and part of the continued sl changes they said they are working on are new sl specific missions so instead of money or exp you earn just a large amount of sl. Perhaps it could be something like kill an enemy player of your faction to gain 10sl or something (though even as I type this I realise it could sadly be exploited).
We just need to wait and see what they do really as they have already said sl and missions are still being worked on and the last change is just part of something bigger they are working on.
Aint gonna happen for this exact reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by DIABLO666
Make some missions like "Kill 10 ( or 20 or 30) WBs/Grims/Hoverbots (or send them to DOY to kill mobs there) and get xx SL"
It could be possible if you would get a specific kill mission. Meaning: Kill Runner Deus. Of course there would have to be a fix that sets the target in place for quite a while so you can't switch such a mission until the right runner is the target. Or maybe you lose SL whenever you cancel such a mission or it runs out, things like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DIABLO666
I am not sure if the idea with the mission is good, or if I like it, but I guess that way it might be made to work if someone thinks it is a good idea.
opens up to exploiting though you know 'stats padding' or killing each other one at a timeQuote:
Originally Posted by Deus Ex Machina
The Whole concept of forcing people to do PVE to continue PVP'ing is just wrong IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by J@ck on Cr@ck
You should make Money and SL from PVP - Yes, I know how badly this would be exploited. But that is still how it should be, in a perfect World..
Don't know what you mean with stats padding. And I don't see how "killing each other" would work in that context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Load_HeavyLoad
The idea is you go to a terminal and request a PvP mission. The terminal then gives you a mission against an enemy runner at random (taking into account LE, possibly taking into account that the target is online a good part of a time, ...) Then you have a name. And you do not get rid of the name, you really must hunt THAT one. You have no choice, you can abort, but if you take a new one you get the same runner. That way you cannot simply "kill each other" maybe sometimes you are lucky, but most of the times you are not.
The mission would not run out of time, and best would be a system that once in a while checks if its okay that it lets you hunt the target anymore (e.g. someone who wasn't online for a week is a bad target) and if no gives you a free abort. Also ideally, while on the hunt you would be informed, via chat or so, if the target is online or has gone offline (nothing more) so that you do not need a terminal to check the online status.
I repeat: You have no choice who to kill and cannot switch target, or maybe if you try switching by aborting, lose further SL.
I propose that the runners chosen to be the target should be online atm and have -sl.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deus Ex Machina
That would make it hard to find a target a lot of the time, often you would end up killing the same person over and over
What about awarding sl for killing enemy runners with a comparable combat rank to your own. Like the old epic kills. This prevents symp bitching. Say within ten levels of your own cr to gain a point or two. This would encourage PvP also.
the difference between a /50 and a /60 is quite high though - maybe work it like it was in WoW when capped (/60+ is one tier) then /50-59 and downwards otherwise a capped player could just camp levelling spots - also killing an SI'd player would need to be negated or punished
With these criteria I like the idea of sl gain in PvP. It goes right along with sl loss ideally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Load_HeavyLoad
They could make it so you gain sl for kills of people within say 5 ranks of you as by the end people are generally 60/65. BUT make it so people need to have GRd before you get the sl, otherwise people will just rez kill for some sl which brings us right back to sl being worthless.
So that you get rewarded for GR ganking instead? Please no. I am not sure I follow your drift.Quote:
Originally Posted by DIABLO666
Well if you make it so people need to be within 5 ranks you can only get it for killing high ranking people (does GRing lower your rank for a short while? honestly never checked) as such this would mean people couldn't just make a new char to be killed. If you also make it so they need to GR before you get the sl (after they die) they can't just be rezzed then killed again as people would still find a way to exploit it with friends in enemy factions and the such.Quote:
Originally Posted by William Antrim
If combined with the idea that you get given a random person to kill it would make it even harder to exploit (albeit more complex)
Too complicated.
I will make it simpler.
If you make it so that people have to gr to get the kill people will gr camp. It doesn't matter about combat ranks and all that other stuff. You would need to add a 0% si thing to gain the bonus too.
Then to get rid of the rez kill you would have to limit the bonus to once per runner per x time.
What if due to faction, I find little or no enemy runners ?
We still need a way to regain SL that is no dependant on other runners, as we have now.