COP/Region Tax Idea for PVP

[fluid island]

Taking COPs generally contributes to your faction making the region safer for tasking and looting. It is generally more costly than beneficial as the player uses time and ammo and risks their life (yes you can sell the enemy PMC gear and the tier 3 COPs have decent loot but it is still better to free ride and loot TB/MS while friendly PMCs help you with taking COPs/fighting enemy players.

My suggestion is for all loot found and perhaps even vendor rep (from tasking and selling) in the region to be subject to a tax. The taxed proceeds would be distributed to players who contribute to their faction's control over that region. Actions that contribute would include engaging and capturing COPs, killing enemy faction players and AI, killing general enemy AI within that region (e.g. Tiger Bay, Ban Pa, Sawmill etc). This system would encourage players to work together more and rewards engaging in combat instead of just sneaking.

[marsh mantle]

Since factions have different populations, there is no way this could be balanced and one faction would always be at a distinct disadvantage.

[simple sedge]

For Honor have this kind of faction war (Knights vs Vikings vs Samurais) and work well in my opinion.
There was (or is) mechanic that adjust impact that players of specific faction have on a region.
fe.
Knights have 50% of players, Vikings have 30% and Samurais have 20%
If 3 players (each from diferenf faction) win one game each, then Samurais have the most teritory taken.
This is balanced by fact that Knights can finish more games in the same periods of time.

[tall sparrow]

This doesn't mean that each lobby will have an imbalance of factions. But some lobbies will do indeed, but most lobbies will be fine. However that's a separate issue, where devs should implement some faction balancing solutions, like allow changing factions and provide rewards for it, or whatever. It should not prevent ideas like the one OP suggested.

[marsh mantle]

Most people aren't going to swap factions because they play where their friends are or the faction they've always played. There's only so much you can "influence".

And there's already a "signing bonus" for joining the least populous faction upon account creation.

[tall sparrow]

Also you still have an imbalance of people who still do starter quests, who will never bother with cops outside their starter town

The signing bonus is not nearly enough of a reward

Some group of squads may switch together. If there's a future with no wipes, then faction changing should be an option imo. It was already hinted before systems like rogue players, maybe there will be an RP element where people betray factions and join other ones.

[cobalt owl]

Honestly, this will result in more players not actually participating in anything other than loot runs.

Why? Because that tax is an arbitary reduction in anything you personally gain, which is then distributed to every member of your faction in this concept.

The big winners here will be those who sit at the FOB and do nothing, reaping the rewards of others.

[marsh mantle]

And it feels more likely that you see players switch to the highest population faction if they have no faction affinity to gain those benefits vs trying to naturally balance out faction population.

[fluid island]

What? I wrote specifically the tax is distributed to those who contribute to their factions presence in the region where that loot is gained

[cobalt owl]

Which means those who do little to nothing in that region also benefit - go to a region, shoot 3 guys, return to FOB and gain from everyone else's work. That's what this would end up being.

[fluid island]

That's just a matter of balancing, obviously you won't get a lot just from shooting three guys

[cobalt owl]

The point you're missing is you have now "contributed" to your faction in your concept. That means you are eligible for the rewards of 15 other potential players operating in your faction instance.

That's potentially up to 15 times whatever those mooks you killed were worth, be it in cash or rep (why even rep is beyond me).

If you set a hard limit on how much you need to do to become eligible, then you deter people from participating - if they have a bad run, they can be out of pocket and losing out faction wide. If you don't have a hard limit, then you encourage the aforementioned "sit back and do nothing" mentality. For those who participate and do actually gain, then they are now sharing their hard earned efforts with others for no reason, so even they are out of pocket.

All three scenarios are bad for the game health overall.

[vague storm]

This "could" work in a community server, where you can join on the same players.
The does not really work in a public server enironment, where you have no say on your teamates, and the that pool of money will have to be randomly allocated.

The Map is really big for only 16 players to get the allocation from .
There are generally only a small amount of players in a region with you at any given time. Most of the time, it is you, a squad mate, and one random on the other side of the region.

So this would end up just making you make less.
In public random instanced servers, you are not likely to get any sort of participation from people, as they are doing thier own thing.

With the state of the AI, you can solo any area, at any time.