Bravery + XP + Rankings

[-Blue Moon-]

Bare in mind I haven't played 'properley' since r16 or so, that I am a big noob (despite playing since round 1), my comments here are usually ill-received, and that I just ate a really bad ham sandwich which may or may not have made me a little delirious.....
...but...

SECTION 1 : Introduction

How about completely overhawling the way in which XP works, to a point where even Galaxies or Alliances are ranked by XP, or new fields of ranking are opened for contention?

SECTION 2 : The proposed XP changes:

1 Cap overall potential ATTACK XP gained per 24hr period at 6,000
1.1 Cap XP gained from a single attack at 3,000

2 Keep the current XP attack formulae the same but remove value and include XP to the calculations (plus above).

3 Cap overall potential DEFENCE XP gained per 24hr period at 2,000
3.1 Keep the maximum potential for OOA-OOC Defence XP at 50
3.2 Increase the maximum potential for Alliance/Cluster Defence XP to 700
3.3 Increase the maximum potential for In-galaxy Defence XP to 500
3.4 Keep the maximum potential for self-gained Defence XP at 100

4 Increase the scope of current XP research/construction formulae to illustrate more accurately the impact actions have on a planet.


SECTION 2 - Explanation of proposed changes

1 Cap overall potential ATTACK XP gained per 24hr period at 6,000
--- This is aimed to discourage XP farming, solo-attacking purely for XP, and combined with 1.1 aims to discourage 3 fleet attacking. The number 6,000 was picked because even the greatest attack-minded players will likely struggle to gain this much experience per attack (despite the proposed XP formulae changes which will increase the xp per roid from 30 to 45) . The idea of the cap is to discourage Alliances (and XP-whore players) planning attacks and picking targets purely on potential XP gain.

1.1 Cap XP gained from a single attack at 3,000
--- This is aimed to discourage 3 fleet attacking for the maximum potential XP gain described above. It also encourages teamed-attacking for hitting larger planets for XP (who could potentially give more than 3,000 XP) but does not remove the obvious advantages gained from receiving the full cap yourself (except a potential lessening of available XP to gain). It also encourages higher-level players to carefully pick a perceived maximum of two attacks per 24hr period, rendering a 3rd attack (for purely XP related purposes) a waste of time, or as a way to pick up the remaining potential not added to their planet yet from their previous two attacks (but does not affect the obvious advantages of capping more roids).

2 Keep the current attack formulae the same, plus above & below.
--- The introduction of XP based scoring will definately make some players and alliances change their tactics - more specifically to lower their value to make themselves less of a potential target (as they will be worth less XP). The proposed solution is to take the existing Bravery Factor formula (based upon score and value), and change it:

Bravery Factor (current) = min(2,their value/your value)+min(2,their score/your score)-1
Bravery Factor (new) = min(2,their value/your value)+min(2,their score/your score)+min(2,their xp/your xp)-1.5

The new bravery factor lessens the importance of value by making the potential XP per roid increase from (old bravery factor maximum=3) times 10 = 30xp per roid -- to -- (new bravery factor maximum=4.5) times 10 = 45xp per roid.

example:
Attacker: 700,000 value 3,500,000 score 46,000 xp
Defender: 1,100,000 value 2,900,000 score 26,750 xp

Old = min(2, 1 100 000 / 700 000) + min(2, 2 900 000 / 3 500 000) - 1
= 1.57 + 0.82 - 1
= 1.39 (*10 = maximum 13.9xp per roid)

New = min(2, 1 100 000 / 700 000) + min(2, 2 900 000 / 3 500 000) + min(2, 26 750 / 46 000) - 1
= 1.57 + 0.82 + 0.58 - 1.5
= 1.47 (*10 = maximum 14.7xp per roid)

After discussing this with multiple people we decided that:

Those players who would keep low value would aim for high XP gains, meaning high gains for part 1, score bash limits on part 2, but low gains for part 3. This may discourage them, and stop XP whores from appearing (combined with the total XP attack increase cap)

Those who have high value gain less XP, and generally have a lot less XP (e.g. Ziks), meaning a low gain for part 1, score bash limits on part 2, and higher gains for part 3 (if they are attacking planets which have 'larger' xp).

This dual symbiotic relationship will allow Ziks to gain a little more XP over the course of the round (which will make losing their fleet less of a problem as XP cannot be lost), and will discourage XP whores who aim to gain more XP per roid by keeping their value low, as they will receive less XP related XP in comparison

3 Cap overall potential DEFENCE XP gained per 24hr period at 2,000
This is mainly described below in more detail with each potential change. It is suggested to keep DEFENCE XP farmers out of the game - at a limit of 2,000 potential and (theoretically) uncapped amount per 'defence land', it makes the maximum XP scored only achieveable after a 100% owned value via 6 in-galaxy or 3 alliance/cluster fleets per 24hr period.


3.1 Keep the maximum potential for OOA-OOC Defence XP at 50
--- OOA-Out of Alliance (your alliance) OOC-Out of cluster (your cluster)
There should potentially be very little reason for defending someone outside of your alliance or cluster except for personal friends. This feature will stop alliances using planets outside their tag to farm XP, and will lessen the XP advantages of defending your friends (although let's face it, you would do it to be nice, not for XP right?) ;-) . This maximum of 50 XP is worked out via the original 'value sent' formula.

3.5 Uncap the overall potential of a single Defence XP
--- Explained below, this is very hard to abuse as defenders are classed and capped individually as either In-gal & In-Cluster, In-Alliance, Self and Out-of-Cluster. The total amount of defence XP is (theoretically) capped at 700+700+500+100+100, although value limitations make this absolutely impossible. A maximum of 700 is observed.

3.4 Keep the maximum potential for self-gained Defence XP at 100
--- As per usual, the maximum amount of XP you can gain by leaving one ship home by itself is 100 per tick. If there are external OOA/OOC defenders (irregardless of where from) you get your value's share of the 100 per tick. If there is more than one OOA/OOC defender, each defender is calculated seperately but on the same principles.
e.g. 1 self-defender (50k value) 3 OOA/OOC defenders (18k, 22k, 80k)
self-defender max = 100
Self-Defender = 50k of 170k * 100 = 29xp
OOA/OOC max = 50
OOA/OOC #1 = 18k of 170k * 50 = 5xp
OOA/OOC #2 = 22k of 170k * 50 = 6xp
OOA/OOC #3 = 80k of 170k * 50 = 24xp
=== Total XP = 29+5+6+24 = 64

3.3/2/6 Increase the maximum potential for Alliance Defence (700), Cluster Defence (700) and In-Gal Defence (500) XP
--- Increasing the maximum potential for 'acceptable' Defence to the overall caps above means that a planet could potentially prioritise sending alliance/cluster/in-galaxy defence and FINALLY makes it worthwhile. This should encourage the rise of cluster-naps again as people send more defence in-g, in-c, in-a. The XP amounts are (per tick) all identical in that cluster and alliance are both eta-1 (minimum of eta7, so 100 xp per tick sent to get there if you wanna average it) and galaxy defence is always eta5 (also 100 xp per tick, averaging). This also serves to identify and reward good defenders.

e.g. Alliance Defenders = 2 (30k, 70k), Self-Defender (100k), Cluster-Defence (20k), OOAOOC Defence (100k), Galaxy Defence (30k, 120k)
Total value = 30+70+100+20+100+30+120 = 470k
Self-defender maximum = 100
Self-defender = (100k of 470k) * 100 = 21xp
Alliance/Cluster-defender maximum = 700
Alliance Member 1 (30k of 470k) * 700 = 45xp
Alliance Member 2 (70k of 470k) * 700 = 104xp
Cluster Member (20k of 470k) * 700 = 30xp
In-Galaxy Defender maximum = 500
Galaxy Member 1 (30k of 470k) * 500 = 32xp
Galaxy Member 2 (120k of 470k) * 500 = 128xp
OOAOOC Defender Maximum = 50
OOAOOC (100k of 470k) * 50 = 11xp
---- total gained = 21+45+104+30+32+128+11=371xp

I've worked this formula in Excel and have yet to find an example of when it hasn't worked or has given an answer over 700 with alliance members and self-defenders. Worst case is if:

Home planet runs, and alliance defence sends 1 ship. that makes it 100% of the value and a 700xp gain to the defender. This could potentially be three times done every 7 ticks = approx 10 launches a day @ 700 each = 7k XP. or three galaxy-defences every 5 ticks = 500xp per def = 7.2k XP.

THIS IS WHY THE XP GAINED FROM DEFENCE MUST BE CAPPED, my suggestion is at 2,000 per day (which is 3 fleet defending once a day ~ish).

SECTION 4 : POTENTIAL IMPACTS

On players
Should lessen the reliance on value
Should make XP more important
Should discourage bashing
Should encourage hitting high XP individuals
Should stop XP farming

On galaxy
This is where it an get as fun as you want it to...
These changes should encourage people to start defending their galaxies more and rebuild the community from there... a bit of fun i'd like to consider suggesting is this:
Everytime someone gains XP from in-gal fleets only, the XP is tallied to a total on the galaxy screen, possibly even as a new 'rankings' section - Under something along the lines of 'most cooperative galaxies'... everyone keeps going on about trying to find ways of bringing galaxies closer together, could this be it?

On Cluster
Again, as fun as you want it to be...
These changes should encourage the formation of working decent cluster alliances and the re-introduction of cluster wars. this is basically because the reward for defending in-cluster is far higher and the eta-1 bonus should finally help recreate these 'good old days'.... hopefully... :-)

On Alliance
Could we rank alliances by XP? That's an interesting question...
XP, from this new formula encompasses a players ability to attack well, and defend well - now isn't an alliance's ability to do this (attack and defend) which is what we should really be rewarding, not the individual efforts of... individuals (which is surely what the player rankings at the end of the round, with their alliance names next to them is for?)

I'm sorry, but my head has started to hurt (perhaps it was the ham sandwich), I'll have to continue writing this Saturday, but any feedback would be welcomed....


lots of love
x
tuxed0

[-Blue Moon-]

I guess it was a long thread but I did expect at least one person to call me a noob by now *sniffles* ... guess i'll complete it this afternoon, and plug it on some alliance channels later tonight :-)

-tuxeh

[Ultimate Newbie]

I must admit, i'm short on time right at the moment but i've only read your introduction and early stages, however i will make this comment;

Bringing the focus of attacking to purely XP related detracts from the value that maintaining a fleet has on the game; further, some races are better at collecting XP (Cathaar, Terran) than others who are more value related (Zikonian, Xandathrii), so these disparities need to be 'fixed'. Additionally, i am typically in favour of moving the game in a direction where there are "multiple paths to victory", whereby a player could choose to play for XP or Value or other things (trade, combat, exploration or whatever), and through these activities, linked by a nexus of score and primarily XP, players would gain rank.

Thus, as a general principle i'm not a massive fan of reducing options to players for "just" value or "just" XP to win.

Having said all that, i'll need to read everything to comment properly. Sorry

[-Blue Moon-]

I understand what you're saying but if you were to read the whole thread (which i understand you have not) you'd see that I too want to reduce the dependancies on one specific path to sucess --

this proposition gives someone aiming for xp/value a similar playing field, but reduces the high impact of players who are 'out of the bash limits' making them bad XP (to attack).

currently you'd get 1/2 the XP for attacking a low value high score person, as half of the current XP formula comes from difference in VALUE (the other half from score).

If then, we change the XP formula (specifically the bravery factor) to incoporate the XP field into its calculations it will give you (potentially) a 2/3 XP gain from doing this (as the formula will focus on VALUE, SCORE and XP)

This proposition should even the playing ground for the races also, as Terrans and Ziks are very attuned to getting value (as you rightly pointed out) they'll now get a greater XP reward for 'attacking well' (well in the context meaning hitting those who have high value/score/xp/high cap)

Anyways, further comments would be appreciated

tuxy

[-Blue Moon-]

This is usually a no-no, i'm aware, but I'm bumping this thread for the second time as I've just gone into #subh #furious-angels #planetarion and #strategy to ask if anyone could comment on this idea, hopefully when I check back in later I'll have a host of questions to answer and a few people to justify these changes to :-)

- tuxehhhh