Battle Pay Changes Need A Cooldown Timer To Prevent Accidental (Or Intentional) Fraud

[Retrikaethan]

You're missing the point.

 

The point is the Alliances that own the rails at this time have no way of making sure everyone gets a payout. If they could ensure that everyone gets their payout, I'm sure the would.

 

I have an extremely hard time believing that any clan set up a low ticket count on a high battlepay for the intent of getting free runs. It was most likely because they didn't have the credits in their vault to afford more tickets.

 

Despite what you may believe, most people don't strive to be A******s.

let me start with what you finished, people strive to be A******s when they can get away with it. the anonymity of the internet does this to a loooooooooot of people.

 

that said, if someone in charge was on and willing, they could see how the fight was faring and knowing they could make a difference by offering large payouts in smaller bursts (as apposed to small payouts in longer bursts) they probably would. even if this isn't the case and it wasn't done with the intent of getting free runs, in the case of this alliance they did replace the battle pay multiple times in a similar fashion. so i can only assume it was their intent to get people to zergrush the mission in the attempt to obtain the short offered credit reward.

 

the point you're missing is they they know they don't have to pay everyone out. you are far too optimistic to assume people are incapable of this level of deceit offhandedly.

[LobsterFiend]

let me start with what you finished, people strive to be A******s when they can get away with it. the anonymity of the internet does this to a loooooooooot of people.

 

that said, if someone in charge was on and willing, they could see how the fight was faring and knowing they could make a difference by offering large payouts in smaller bursts (as apposed to small payouts in longer bursts) they probably would. even if this isn't the case and it wasn't done with the intent of getting free runs, in the case of the alliance they did replace the battle pay multiple times in a similar fashion. so i can only assume it was their intent to get people to zergrush the mission in the attempt to obtain the short offered credit reward.

 

the point you're missing is they they know they don't have to pay everyone out. you are far too optimistic to assume people are incapable of this level of deceit offhandedly.

You're a very cynical Joe aren't you?  Although what you are proposing is definitely within the realm of possibilities, it is only pure speculations at best.

[Yurilica]

 

I have an extremely hard time believing that any clan set up a low ticket count on a high battlepay for the intent of getting free runs. It was most likely because they didn't have the credits in their vault to afford more tickets.

 

Despite what you may believe, most people don't strive to be A******s.

 

A week ago before Armistice periods were introduced and rails were constantly contested, the alliance in question had over 27 million credits invested in rail defenses as battle pay over all their rails at one point(tracked over deathsnacks.com)

 

The "they don't have credits for it" excuse kinda falls there.

 

In any case, the system needs a change. Either a hard cooldown timer and/or the amount of payments that are available, as is visible on the deathsnacks.com tracker.

 

The maker of the tracker is pulling that data from DE's API, but ironically it isn't displayed in the game so a lot of low/mid level players that hang around Jupiter and other such planets get scammed - they don't know about deathsnacks.

 

Players will see 50k battle pay ingame, but what they can't see in game is for how many missions it is. Clans/Alliances can set something like a 20*50k run, goad a lot of people into rushing the mission quickly and end up paying a fraction of them. It's a system exploit.

 

Alternatively, DE needs to set up a clan/alliance battle pay vault. That would also eliminate battle pay scam. If an alliance owns multiple rails, they'd use a shared pool of battle pay for all those systems, all coming from one vault.

They could still adjust battle pay amounts for each individual conflict, but it would pull those credits from one place.

 

That way clans would have to think harder about battle pay distribution and whether or not they want to set something as high as 50k because there would be no way to scam the system anymore. If you tried scamming the system like it's possible now, you'd also lose funding for all other rails at the same time.

[fatpig84]

A week ago before Armistice periods were introduced and rails were constantly contested, the alliance in question had over 27 million credits invested in rail defenses as battle pay over all their rails at one point(tracked over deathsnacks.com)

 

The "they don't have credits for it" excuse kinda falls there.

 

In any case, the system needs a change. Either a hard cooldown timer and/or the amount of payments that are available, as is visible on the deathsnacks.com tracker.

 

The maker of the tracker is pulling that data from DE's API, but ironically it isn't displayed in the game so a lot of low/mid level players that hang around Jupiter and other such planets get scammed - they don't know about deathsnacks.

 

Players will see 50k battle pay ingame, but what they can't see in game is for how many missions it is. Clans/Alliances can set something like a 20*50k run, goad a lot of people into rushing the mission quickly and end up paying a fraction of them.

 

Or DE can simply set a ticket display and reward ticker.

And minimum games per battle pay setup.

[LazyTheGypsy]

let me start with what you finished, people strive to be A******s when they can get away with it. the anonymity of the internet does this to a loooooooooot of people.

 

that said, if someone in charge was on and willing, they could see how the fight was faring and knowing they could make a difference by offering large payouts in smaller bursts (as apposed to small payouts in longer bursts) they probably would. even if this isn't the case and it wasn't done with the intent of getting free runs, in the case of this alliance they did replace the battle pay multiple times in a similar fashion. so i can only assume it was their intent to get people to zergrush the mission in the attempt to obtain the short offered credit reward.

 

the point you're missing is they they know they don't have to pay everyone out. you are far too optimistic to assume people are incapable of this level of deceit offhandedly.

 

I'm pretty sure the alliance wants to keep their rails. Since they want to keep these rails, they most likely understand that if they were to be total $&*^s and try to screw everyone, they'd most likely lose their rails. Even if they had THOUGHT about doing it, they probably had the rational thought immediately after thinking "If it did work, it'd probably only work once or twice. No one would forgive us, and make sure we lose our hold."

 

I'm pretty sure they know not everyone will receive the payout, but you still missed the point of that is out of their control and they have no possible way of fixing that. If the alliances that owned the rails had a way of making sure everyone that ran their rails got paid, they'd use it, to avoid getting a bad reputation.

 

While anonymity does present the increased amount of douchebaggery, there are still more people who don't aid in that. Even so, the alliances are not anonymous, for the sole fact that their name is plastered on their solar rails. They may be anonymous from their real life scenarios on the internet, however their virtual world escapes from reality are not anonymous.

[Retrikaethan]

You're a very cynical Joe aren't you?  Although what you are proposing is definitely within the realm of possibilities, it is only pure speculations at best.

oh sure if i hadn't been trying to run for the money and seeing what the pair of them were doing for myself, i too would not give F*** and dismiss the crazy guy as only having a speculative opinion. they set large battle pays to small amounts of runs. they did this multiple times. this is what i know to be fact, my assumption stems from this observation because they could have set the 70k per run at a stupidly large number of runs but did not. therefore, either they're inadvertent A******s or intentional A******s. i don't care which.

 

as for being cynical, you don't survive by being optimistic.

[TheBlueMagician]

I like how this entire thread is 90% bickering with Retrikaethan about absolutely irrelevant accusations, and then 10% commentary on the actual system in place.

[Retrikaethan]

I like how this entire thread is 90% bickering with Retrikaethan about absolutely irrelevant accusations, and then 10% commentary on the actual system in place.

i literally live so i can do this. but your percentages are a bit off, i think its closer to 60 40 for the most part.

[LazyTheGypsy]

The "they don't have credits for it" excuse kinda falls there.

I wasn't directing that statement at the alliance. I was directing that to every rail-owner in general, seeing as most set 0% taxes across the board in the very beginning.

[TheBlueMagician]

Also, didn't the devs say, specifically, in Dev Speak 27 they were looking into how the system worked to try to address concerns like this?

[fatpig84]

Also, didn't the devs say, specifically, in Dev Speak 27 they were looking into how the system worked to try to address concerns like this?

 

But players like to remind them. 

Like how DE promised a polarity switcher and everyone hounded them for months.

[Retrikaethan]

I'm pretty sure the alliance wants to keep their rails. Since they want to keep these rails, they most likely understand that if they were to be total $&*^s and try to screw everyone, they'd most likely lose their rails. Even if they had THOUGHT about doing it, they probably had the rational thought immediately after thinking "If it did work, it'd probably only work once or twice. No one would forgive us, and make sure we lose our hold."

 

I'm pretty sure they know not everyone will receive the payout, but you still missed the point of that is out of their control and they have no possible way of fixing that. If the alliances that owned the rails had a way of making sure everyone that ran their rails got paid, they'd use it, to avoid getting a bad reputation.

 

While anonymity does present the increased amount of douchebaggery, there are still more people who don't aid in that. Even so, the alliances are not anonymous, for the sole fact that their name is plastered on their solar rails. They may be anonymous from their real life scenarios on the internet, however their virtual world escapes from reality are not anonymous.

and guessing by the mount of people who have come to their aid in this discussion, they have in fact gotten away with it, once or twice. intentional or not.

 

they could fix it by actually offering a larger number of payouts. how did you miss this so much in my ramblings?

 

their name is not their name, not like my name. their name in this one game community is the only place it exists for the most part and most people dont care to find out about people who change theirs. for example, i changed my name once. does my profile display my name history correctly? (i'm asking because it doesn't for me and to prove a point if it doesn't) as for my name, its random gobbledegook but its mine. google it and youll find pretty much everywhere i have used it, except for maybe WoW. (also it wasn't on google before me, so everything you find ought to be me unless i have a fanclub already)

[Yazyflame]

That way clans would have to think harder about battle pay distribution and whether or not they want to set something as high as 50k because there would be no way to scam the system anymore. If you tried scamming the system like it's possible now, you'd also lose funding for all other rails at the same time.

Agreed all the way! Stop those who scam us! Specially you TW Alliance and your 200k on 5 missions scam!

[LobsterFiend]

oh sure if i hadn't been trying to run for the money and seeing what the pair of them were doing for myself, i too would not give F*** and dismiss the crazy guy as only having a speculative opinion. they set large battle pays to small amounts of runs. they did this multiple times. this is what i know to be fact, my assumption stems from this observation because they could have set the 70k per run at a stupidly large number of runs but did not. therefore, either they're inadvertent A******s or intentional A******s. i don't care which.

 

as for being cynical, you don't survive by being optimistic.

70k for a large number of runs would be terrible budgeting.  Why the hell would they shell a crap ton of money just to overkill an opponent that they'll probably already win against?  I can't blame them for taking the more business-like approach.

 

Oh and more cynicism=more paranoia=more stress=death.  Cynicism is just pseudo-intelligence.

[notlamprey]

ITT: the battle pay system needs some meat on its bones.

[LazyTheGypsy]

and guessing by the mount of people who have come to their aid in this discussion, they have in fact gotten away with it, once or twice. intentional or not.

 

they could fix it by actually offering a larger number of payouts. how did you miss this so much in my ramblings?

 

their name is not their name, not like my name. their name in this one game community is the only place it exists for the most part and most people dont care to find out about people who change theirs. for example, i changed my name once. does my profile display my name history correctly? (i'm asking because it doesn't for me and to prove a point if it doesn't) as for my name, its random gobbledegook but its mine. google it and youll find pretty much everywhere i have used it, except for maybe WoW. (also it wasn't on google before me, so everything you find ought to be me unless i have a fanclub already)

 

And since it was most likely unintentional, they shouldn't be held accountable for it, since they weren't taking advantage of it in a scumbag way with intent.

 

If they offered larger payouts, they hinder themselves in being able to put up a higher battlepay than they're opposition, provided the opposing rail outbids them. Until all of the tickets they put up disappear, they'd be unable to out bid the enemy. They'd lose the mercenary's appeal, thus drastically increasing the time before they can put up a new bid since the tickets would rain significantly slower.

 

And as for display history:

[Aercascade]

Sarcasm must be hard to read on paper.

 

The things I've seen sir. Sarcasm is hard because a good majority of people are actually the kind to do exactly that! 

Shocking, really.

[Retrikaethan]

70k for a large number of runs would be terrible budgeting.  Why the hell would they shell a crap ton of money just to overkill an opponent that they'll probably already win against?  I can't blame them for taking the more business-like approach.

 

Oh and more cynicism=more paranoia=more stress=death.  Cynicism is just pseudo-intelligence.

the approach i observed was in no way business like. join mission for money, finish mission, no money for services rendered.  also, at the time, "business" as it were, was booming and they could have offered a large number runs worth of cash and people would have run them. but they didnt. small chunks and lots of unpaid employees so long as we're sticking to them being a business. assuming you accept this and still think it is a poor choice as a business strategy then what you are basically saying is you're perfectly fine if you don't get paid for any "work" you do.

 

optimisim= misplaced trust = backstabbing occurs = death. financially or more literally. optimism is a child's game.

[RavensNight]

What i'm finding surprising is how long this circus is allowed to go on,in other games mentioning all this and other posts and threads i seen on general forums about anyone , may it be one single person or a guild , it's considered harassment and gets the thread or posts closed/deleted.

This is not healthy for the game or its community in any way you look at it.

This would have been and is an actually good suggestion and should have gone in the suggestions thread without that extra "hint" in the title , as far as i know DE is in charge of developing this game not some x or y regular players. 

If you have proof of someone breaking the rules in any way then you go with that information and report that  party to people that can take action via tickets and actually make them pay for it.

[LazyTheGypsy]

What i'm finding surprising is how long this circus is allowed to go on,in other games mentioning all this and other posts and threads i seen on general forums about anyone , may it be one single person or a guild , it's considered harassment and gets the thread or posts closed/deleted.

This is not healthy for the game or its community in any way you look at it.

This would have been and is an actually good suggestion and should have gone in the suggestions thread without that extra "hint" in the title , as far as i know DE is in charge of developing this game not some x or y regular players. 

If you have proof of someone breaking the rules in any way then you go with that information and report that  party to people that can take action via tickets and actually make them pay for it.

I whole-heartedly agree with everything this gentlemen said.

Edited April 30, 2014 by LazyTheGypsy

[Aercascade]

Was that sarcasm? I'm not sure anymore :(

 

You see man! You see; this is the harsh world we live in now! 

[Retrikaethan]

ITT: the battle pay system needs some meat on its bones.

this^

 

also for those of you who hate me pointlessly, rejoice! i need to go to sleep in order to wake up for class at an appropriate time. ta ta~

[Hadronox]

slander my fat &#!. regardless of how many runs they were paying out on, it was not paying out for a lot of people, and then was promptly being put back up and then not paying out again, meaning the people in charge were there designing payouts to get the results they want while spending as little as possible total-wise.

 

yep. they send it out and got a lot of extra free runs for the pay they were insufficiently offering. that's what they wanted, and thats what they got. probably still getting too.

 

the abuse is that they set the number of runs low KNOWING that it will be depleted in a matter of minutes, which all of the players know because the pay keeps disappearing, who then all rush the hell in to try to get a piece of that tiny pie.

 

the point you're missing is they they know they don't have to pay everyone out. you are far too optimistic to assume people are incapable of this level of deceit offhandedly.

 

 

 

Plz zip it already. The system was explained to you, how it works, how the credit is dispensed and no one is actually abusing anything or doing any fraud. Just stop with your hate-mongering campaign please. All you are doing is repeatedly slandering and hating for no reason other than the fact that you are angry.

 

If you truly want the system fixed, then direct all your rage at DE. Their system is faulty and needs to be fixed. Send them a support ticket.

[LobsterFiend]

the approach i observed was in no way business like. join mission for money, finish mission, no money for services rendered.  also, at the time, "business" as it were, was booming and they could have offered a large number runs worth of cash and people would have run them. but they didnt. small chunks and lots of unpaid employees so long as we're sticking to them being a business. assuming you accept this and still think it is a poor choice as a business strategy then what you are basically saying is you're perfectly fine if you don't get paid for any "work" you do.

 

optimisim= misplaced trust = backstabbing occurs = death. financially or more literally. optimism is a child's game.

My point still stands about the budgeting and the amount of runs.  There is a thing in a faraway land that people do called saving.  Ooohhh ahhhh.  Of course they have way more than enough money to sustain high battle pay but even you can't argue that it's stupid to waste money no matter how rich you are.  Oh and sustaining high battle pay is not even a perfect solution because

Even if they did not set it low, the game is still hard capped at 7500 tickets.

Once it reach 7500, there can be another 2000 guys still running and they get zilch.

 

That is the bigger issue which has being plaguing potato invasions.

And DE has no solution for those yet.

This.

[Retrikaethan]

And since it was most likely unintentional, they shouldn't be held accountable for it, since they weren't taking advantage of it in a scumbag way with intent.

 

If they offered larger payouts, they hinder themselves in being able to put up a higher battlepay than they're opposition, provided the opposing rail outbids them. Until all of the tickets they put up disappear, they'd be unable to out bid the enemy. They'd lose the mercenary's appeal, thus drastically increasing the time before they can put up a new bid since the tickets would rain significantly slower.

 

And as for display history:

oh that is neat. so there's a bug if someone takes your usedtobename it doesnt show up in history. good to know. (also means for right now people can change their name and be someone entirely new to this games community)

 

theres no point to bidding if one of the parties isn't actually paying.

 

it strikes me as intentional due to the nature of the way they handled those battlepays. i could be wrong though. i'm not in contact with anyone of that alliance or that russian clan that someone should find the name of.

 

ok seriously, im going to sleep. ciao.