Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
Just some quick brainstorming on how to add debuffs to the current scoring system. Some kind of system is basically required before any kind of universal ranking system becomes feasible, and no offense to Cryptic, but the fact that they themselves don't seriously PvP means that any system they come up with on their own will most likely be heavily flawed. So this thread exists to try and help guide them as to how such a system should be designed.

What makes most sense for many skills is a system where we use the equation (and for debuffs that effect many targets this can be used on a per player, with NPCs *not* counting, basis):

(strength of debuff) * (value of specific debuff) * (time that debuff is active) = points

-Strength of debuff is self explanatory. A tyken's rift that drains a small amount of power counts less than one that drains a major amount of power.

-Value of specific debuff is not so self-explanatory. Basically, some debuffs are worse than others and should be counted that way. Jam sensors should give a very small amount of points because it does not make a very big difference in the overall scheme of things for a battle (and is also a very low level skill). Scramble sensors or gravity well on the other hand, can make a huge amount of difference in a battle, and are both higher level skills. They should give more points when used and thus should have a higher value here.

-Time that debuff is active: Also self explanatory. Every second a debuff is active (or in some cases, every 'tick' of the debuff) should give more points. The debuff continues to accumulate points until it is cleared or runs its course.

Now, this method is great for some skills, but is not great for all of them. Here is a list of debuffs and how I think would be best to score them:

Gravity well: Formula above. Given a high value. Could possibly merge strength and duration since the two tend to be related and strength gives a bonus to damage score anyway.

Tyken's Rift: Formula above. Given a high value.

Jam Sensors: Formula above.

Scramble Sensors: Uses formula above with duration and power combined as one value since they are one and the same.

MES: Tricky. Cannot use the formula above. Needs to give points whenever it lets the user go undetected against someone who would normally see them. Cannot give points out of combat or it will be abused. This sounds a bit unfair but is not since effective use of MES will help the user get more points in kill/death/damage/healing anyway.

Energy Siphon: Uses the formula above. Given a higher value when the use of energy siphon contributes to taking a subsystem offline.

Viral Matrix: Uses the formula above (for each of the four specific debuffs). Can merge power and duration since they are the same.

Tractor beam: Uses the formula above without a strength modifier since the strength only effects kinetic damage which is counted in the damage score.

Tractor Repulsors: Uses the formula above, with 'time active' in this instance starting at 0 and incrementing for every successful tick. Strength determined by the distance repulsed and not by kinetic damage done.

Polarize hull/APO: Gives a moderate set amount of points when used to clear a tractor beam and a very small value for every tick that a kinetic knock back is averted.

Tachyon beam: Uses the formula above, given a small value.

APB/APB/FOMM/SS: Any extra damage that is a result of the resistance degradation gets added to the user's debuff score. In the case of sensor scan, revealing cloaked targets gives a bonus.

Charged particle burst: Does not use the above formula. A fraction of the damage done to shields is added to the debuff score. Any cloaked ships revealed give a bonus.

Photonic shockwave: Gives a small bonus for every player successfully stunned. Does not need a large bonus since effective use of this skill will increase kills/death/damage/healing scores anyway. Cloaked ships revealed give a bonus.

Eject warp plasma: Uses the formula above. Any cloaked ships revealed gives a bonus.

EPS: Uses the formula above.

SNB: Uses the formula above as well as a small bonus for every ability that gets cleared from the target.

Beam target susbsystems: This is the most interesting one. You can do it two ways depending on how in depth you want to go:

1. The lazy ass way - Use the formula above. Give a bonus if the skill contributes to taking down a subsystem. Not the best way to count things. Draining aux on a dedicated DD isn't effective. Neither is draining weapons power on a dedicated healer, so they should not give many, if any points.

2. The right way - Actually give score based on what the drain does during it's duration.

For weapons - the difference between the drained damage and regular damage is added to the user. You could either make this just hull damage averted, or a fraction of all damage done out of the muzzle (because of the way STO scores -- or doesn't -- shield damage vs. hull damage)

For shields - the amount of shield regeneration taken away by the drain, perhaps as well as the damage (or a fraction thereof) that is no longer resisted due to the drain.

For engines - In this case the above formula actually works

For Aux - The difference in healing for any skills effected by Aux power is added to the user's debuff skill.

And of course, there is still a bonus for taking any subsystem offline. Perhaps with shields being given a higher bonus for obvious reasons.

So there you have it. Not sure if I missed anything (feel free to add anything that has been missed, or just voice your opinion on what I've come up with), but it feels pretty complete. Also for any Cryptic employee reading this might seem a bit daunting to implement, but a system for counting non-damage/healing skills will eventually be needed for PvP to move forward.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
12-28-2010, 05:01 PM
This isn't as interesting as yet another BoP/Cruiser/FAW thread I guess!

But I do think it's something that needs to be tackled eventually.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 3
12-28-2010, 05:17 PM
I imagine there are enough problems without giving craptic another opportunity to mess stuff up.

However personally i doubt this will go any way at all in imporving game play, you will just get people firing off anything and everything on cooldown just to score points it wont matter a dam to them that holding that skill back for a few seconds might have been better. There will just be a whole new way to crusade for higher numbers at the expense of better play

When it comes to premade v premade i presonally don't think players care so much about damge numbers anyway, unless their job was to bring the DPS, they are interested in winning above all else.

Perhaps that is just me and my perception.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 4
12-28-2010, 06:01 PM
Honestly, it would be nice to see proper recognition of the contributions of the non dps/healing skills. While I can agree that something should be done, and I kind of like what you've laid out here, it's kind of complicated and ardept brings up a good point.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 5
12-28-2010, 06:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardept View Post
However personally i doubt this will go any way at all in imporving game play, you will just get people firing off anything and everything on cooldown just to score points it wont matter a dam to them that holding that skill back for a few seconds might have been better. There will just be a whole new way to crusade for higher numbers at the expense of better play
That's definitely an issue. One that I've tried to address in several points. Eg. only giving points when in combat, or based on the effect that the skill has to other players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardept View Post
When it comes to premade v premade i presonally don't think players care so much about damge numbers anyway, unless their job was to bring the DPS, they are interested in winning above all else.

Perhaps that is just me and my perception.
Definitely agree. But while that is fine for our current 'arena' system, finding some way to count non-combat skills is essential if there's going to be some kind of player/fleet ranking system in the future. It's would also be handy by itself to see who is doing what (I always have the score panel open on a side monitor to see who on the enemy team is doing the most DPS / healing / is the most squishy, etc.). The current system is also not completely fair for those sci spammers who lose out on rewards because of their "low scores"

Really, it goes back to the first issue you brought up. Adding a 'non combat' score haphazardly is going to lead to people spamming skills pointlessly to get points. You pretty much need to add some sort of scoring system prior to implementing a global ranking system. So I think it's only a matter of time before Cryptic tries to add a 'non-combat' score, and personally I would rather not see them screw it up (again, not a knock against Cryptic besides the fact that they need to play PvP more to understand it). Hence this thread.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
12-28-2010, 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurleybird View Post
That's definitely an issue. One that I've tried to address in several points. Eg. only giving points when in combat, or based on the effect that the skill has to other players.

How do you truely measure this in the game? A GW that is used to pull in 4 out of 5 ships in an arena would seem to have been used well yet might not result in the destruction of any ships and so had no real effect on the outcome of the game aside from boosting one players dps slightly while in effect.

however a GW that pulled in two, one of which was the teams main healer who as a result was killed leading to a cascade destroying the remaining 3 ships outside due loss of support resulted in a greater strategic effect yet would be scored lower as the impact cannot be measured in tems of the skill being simply applied at a point in time, the same could be true for an snb used to kill one player or one that resulted in a teams destruction because of the role of that player.




Definitely agree. But while that is fine for our current 'arena' system, finding some way to count non-combat skills is essential if there's going to be some kind of player/fleet ranking system in the future. It's would also be handy by itself to see who is doing what (I always have the score panel open on a side monitor to see who on the enemy team is doing the most DPS / healing / is the most squishy, etc.). The current system is also not completely fair for those sci spammers who lose out on rewards because of their "low scores"

This is more an issue for pve as this is the only place that rewards are given for contribution but thankfully atm this game is not to gear heavy for the lack of topping the scores to become a reason for implimenting a rushed system to adress the problem of biased scoring

Really, it goes back to the first issue you brought up. Adding a 'non combat' score haphazardly is going to lead to people spamming skills pointlessly to get points. You pretty much need to add some sort of scoring system prior to implementing a global ranking system. So I think it's only a matter of time before Cryptic tries to add a 'non-combat' score, and personally I would rather not see them screw it up (again, not a knock against Cryptic besides the fact that they need to play PvP more to understand it). Hence this thread.
non direct damage skills have never lent themselves well to conversion into a points system, throwing a mez on a tank, well that is helpful, throwing a mez on a healer, priceless
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 7
12-28-2010, 07:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardept View Post
How do you truely measure this in the game? A GW that is used to pull in 4 out of 5 ships in an arena would seem to have been used well yet might not result in the destruction of any ships and so had no real effect on the outcome of the game aside from boosting one players dps slightly while in effect.
That's pretty much in line with damage and healing numbers already though. Someone who wastes all of his heals on himself as soon as they are off cooldown (admittedly been guilty of this myself somewhat) is going to have higher healing that someone who saves his healing and uses it to save a team mate when they are needed. Likewise, someone who has great burst but only average DPS might get a lower damage score than someone who is only focused on putting out max damage (queue yet another FAW discussion), but on a point-per-point basis is probably contributing more to the team.

You're never going to get a completely fair scoring system. What we can do is, as the group of people who actually play and understand PvP, do some brainstorming in the hopes that when/if Cryptic does actually decide to add a 'non combat' or 'science' section to the scoreboards (again, seems to be a prerequisite for any kind of global ranking system) that they do so in a way that isn't completely broken and exploitable. I think this is the third time I've said this, yet people aren't catching on yet that I'm less so petitioning Cryptic to add a 'non-combat' score, and more so giving feedback on how to do it correctly in case it's already in the cards. Sorry if I somehow conveyed otherwise, but now that we all hopefully understand the purpose of the thread could we be a little bit more.... constructive?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 8
12-29-2010, 01:01 AM
I think that the current end of match scoring should be updated to include buffs/debuffs/misc effects. While I feel that what you propose is complicated, it at least makes an attempt to limit abuse. That is a huge first step!

I think further evaluation of damage and healing would be of great benefit as well. I share Ardept concerns in these areas.

In arenas, maybe damage/debuffs/effects count triple in the last 10 to 15 seconds of a kill. Give added weight to the spike damage, whatever stopped the healing, or what enhanced the damage.

Not sure about heals/buffs. How do you tell if they saved a life?
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 9
12-29-2010, 02:22 AM
i realise this is to get a decent system for some future ladder system but i dislike ladder systems. Not because i am worried i might not be at the top end or the bottom end but because i have only ever seen these systems produce poor gameplay and we already have posts about players logging out mid fight to avoid a death.

In EQ2 players were more concerned about the kvd ratio, you would have plenty of players who would sit in zones killing players 10 lvls lower just to increase the kvd ratio. Here no matter what you propose people will end up more worried about looking good on the scorecard than playing competitively. I could never pvp unless in a full premade, there would be very few full premades to be cause for concern with the team we run, if we did run into one that might beat us it might be better to log out of the match than suffer a 15-0 defeat to remain high on the ladder unless leaving resulted in an automatic 15-0 defeat applied, but even then the winning team will gain less credit as no score bonus could be applied.

I cannot see that the ladder system will add anything of value to the game, i already know who the good players are for the most part, i am not sure why those same people want a ladder system, particularly as many will not be as high on it as thier egos would have them believe causing more crying about how unfair the system is towards their game style/class

However, negativity aside, the only change i would make to your suggestion would be not to combine the damage/duration of skill as being the same thing but to have a finite value for both, otherwise why use a skill that only offers 2/3 the points of another ability. This will at least prevent the use of certain skills just for the sake of maxing the amount of points scored. You are encouraging cookie cutter builds and punish innovation if you give a value to skills based upon their current forseen usefulness. Even if some skills are not seen as useful atm they should be given compairable values based upon their lvl/duration/effect as you have suggested as they might be buffed, or other skills reduced.

What is difficult is to judge is combinations, one T-Rift is not really an issue for anyone as the drain, even when high, is only around 45/system and not enough to bring a system to zero. Throw in 3 of them from a team and its combined effect is greater than the sum of its parts as it can reduce multiple systems to zero even wpn power leaving player totally vulnerable, perhaps the game could track this sort of combination from teamwork and give a teamwork bonus to the base score, tho identifying that could be difficult outside of pre programming it in, which means newer teamwork combinations would miss out. Additionally someting like VM disbles a system, should it then opperate like T-rift? if so then it scores the full equiv of the current power of the disabled system, so 125 for wpns, 57 engines etc or do you treat it differently and give it a lower value because it is not currently considered to be a good skill?

PVP'er will always seek to find the most efficient means to kill another player, whether this is done solo or in groups. This will change and alter as the game is adjusted and whatever system needs to be able to remain fair and consistant during these changes, not an easy thing to do when you try to incorporate complex abilities outside of damage and healing
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 10
12-29-2010, 06:25 AM
I am in favor of a PvP ladder system, even though I expect to land in the middle field or worse.

I personally don't think that DPS, Healing or "Debuffing" Scores should count for such a ladder. It might be part of the statistics tracked for a player, but I think ultimately only wins and losses can be count. At least that ensures that the goal of a match coincides with the goal for the ladder system.

If you want to score crowd control/debuff powers, I would consider the uptime of powers while the user of the power and its target is on red alert.

There are two things to consider:
Powers have different "uptimes", e.g how long they can affect any targets. This is affected by their duration and their cooldown.
Also, powers can affect one or more targets, but never more then there are players in a match.

To account for uptime, we multiply the base score we want to use with power duration / cooldown. Powers that have no duration would be counted as 1 second. We choose the base score to ensure this value is a whole number for every power we can come up with.

We multiply this base score with the duration the power affects a single target. To account for the differences between multi- and single target powers, we can use an additional factor.
Efficiency Factor = 1 / Potentially affected targets. The second number is 1 for single target powers, and for multiple target powers the number of enemy players in the match at t his time. (Some powers might have hard limits like "randomly affects up to 3 targets at the same time, like Tractor Beam Repulsor, in that case there is also a cap at 3).
Additional limitation is that this is only tracked while you are under red alert.

This will not be perfect. It cannot discriminate whether you actually tractored a guy that was a threat or a target, but the damage score doesn't track whether the 1 gazillion damage was just all resisted and healed by a Cruiser either.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:32 PM.