Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wakey
Losing XP defeats much of the object of it. The point of XP is to reward you for good actions no matter what happens later and its eastreamly liberating for new players because it makes losing ships and roids a little less damaging. If it was to degrade then any time you decide to defend someone or you go on the run of bad luck that we all experiance at some point your damaging them.
|
A slow timeout won't hurt much for a honest player that doesn't rely on the so-called XP-whoring we have seen earlier. It is not like you loose it all of a sudden, but I see no rreason that someone who does a great strike in an early tick ten goes inactive should be able to win the game.
Currently this is solved by capping the bravery factor, after Gerbie showed it can be 'abused' in r10. This part is solved by capping, XP-whoring is not.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wakey
Ss for neg XP i have always said I believe there should be a score punishment for attacking too small, the problem is with your formula it seems like your actually removing the reward somewhat for attacking larger planets. Atm for example I am attacking with a Bravery Factor of 18, this more than covers any ships i might lose and makes an attck profitable. Under your sytsem though the xp gains would fall to 8 thus leaving my attack struggling to break even, I would hence be forced to take smaller targets than i am because the acceptable ship loss level shifts dramatically
|
See the formula as suggestion. What makes up for the ship loss is what you gain from the XP. E.g. gain 120*XP instead of 60*XP score. Ofc this punishes bashers more, too. I can live with that.
Regards,
_are_