test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Alternative to FA reward structure
aexrael
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
FAs are about teamwork, about 5, 10 or 20 players working together towards a common goal. The existing Reward Structure is contradictory to that mindset.
Instead of a competition based FA reward structure, players should be rated and tracked individually from each other.
The system should reward points based on performance of the following
* Damage Out.
* Healing Out, on other players, unless target has full Shields or Hull.
* Healing Out, on self, but less valuable than on others.
* Resistances Reduced or Subsystem Power drained.
* Bonus objectives completed.
The amount of points accumulated during a FA should let players reach certain Tiers of rewards.
Bronze, Silver and Gold each more progressively rewarding than the previous.
Reward players with a moderate amount of Energy Credits and 1 item for each Tier in the traditional Uncommon, Rare, Very Rare structure with Mark of items being dependent on the difficulty set for the FA, Easy, Moderate or Elite.
Instead of a competition based FA reward structure, players should be rated and tracked individually from each other.
The system should reward points based on performance of the following
* Damage Out.
* Healing Out, on other players, unless target has full Shields or Hull.
* Healing Out, on self, but less valuable than on others.
* Resistances Reduced or Subsystem Power drained.
* Bonus objectives completed.
The amount of points accumulated during a FA should let players reach certain Tiers of rewards.
Bronze, Silver and Gold each more progressively rewarding than the previous.
Reward players with a moderate amount of Energy Credits and 1 item for each Tier in the traditional Uncommon, Rare, Very Rare structure with Mark of items being dependent on the difficulty set for the FA, Easy, Moderate or Elite.
Post edited by aexrael on
0
Comments
For one thing, people in fleet ships would do more damage (and likely take more) than people who fly standard VA ships.
Also consider gearing -- That can lead to an unbalance in your list of measurements. Say the minimum damage is 100,000 DPS (fo example). The more powerful ships will likely overtake the enemy target before the weaker ships have a chance.
The solution is to "shut up and buy a fleet ship with all the ultra rares," right? Well, SOME of our fleets aren't that big. And not everyone WANTS said ships/gear.
Moral of the story: your idea sucks.
:rolleyes:
You realize top tier DPS setups rule the existing FAs, right? That's rhetorical BTW. Think your thoughts through before you type.
You're thinking too arbitrarily in terms of a direct translation of DPS -> Reward, when instead the backend system should translate the raw numbers to a more fluid scoring system and score "system points" based on a number system more appropriate for this.
A combination of the above listed criteria would reward a players contribution in a FA and total it up at the end. The different criteria would reward more or less system points depending on the importance of the category. That way DPS could be devalued compared to the others, if needed.
With the proposed system of having players tracked independently, you can ensure that with enough contribution, you would see a more diverse selection of players rewarded.
Problem: Most objectives favour damage out by being 'kill x enemies', usually 'before something happens'.
Problem: You're still in competition-to hit those objectives.
Problem: Giving power to 'Resistance Drained' or Power Drained favours Polaron, Disruptor and Tetryon weaponry(Providing the proc hits) and calls for Science builds to build for this specifically over self-proyection and other protection. Also means people would actively go after +Threat and Attack Pattern Delta(The more coming in, the more Delta debuffs going out). A lot of ships could not spec so due to lack of slots and the requirement of Tactical Team/Hazard Emitters for general work.
The system would still potentially be borked, just in a different way.