Go Back   Star Trek Online > Feedback > PvP Gameplay
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 51
04-13-2010, 07:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by akumarev
I am not there for heals or DPS i am there for CC and I do that VERY well. No where in that calculation does it account for how many subsystems are knocked offline, how many ships are completely nuetralized in a fight and how many ships were debuffed or buffed.
Hi there,

Once again, I can only point you to the original post again. CC, buffs, and debuffs are fully accounted for. Specifically, look at the DamageAssist and DamageMitigation calculations, which are weighted equally with raw damage (or healing) output/input.

Damage = (DamageDealt / DamageReceived) + DamageAssist

DamageAssist = (coefficient * DamageDealtByAllies) + EnemyPowerDrained
where coefficient is a fraction, most likely (1 / totalNumberOfAllies)

Healing = [(HullRepairGiven + ShieldRepairGiven) / (HullRepairReceived + ShieldRepairReceived)] + DamageMitigation

DamageMitigation = (coefficient * DamageReducedOnAllies) + EnemyDisabledWeaponDamage
where coefficient is a fraction, most likely (1 / totalNumberOfEnemies)


I would recommend you read the original post again. Please let me know if any of the concerns you raised are not already addressed, or if there is any way in which I can make them more clear.

Thanks.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 52
04-13-2010, 07:53 AM
I have slightly changed the wording to make the above elaboration more clear, with a line explicitly stating that DamageAssist and DamageMitigation are weighted equally with the output/input components of Damage and Healing.

Thanks for the feedback. Please keep posting comments. Support especially welcome.

If there is anything unclear, please let me know, and I will endeavour to clarify (and improve the original post).

Thanks
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 53
04-13-2010, 11:04 PM
One more quick suggestion and I'm sorry if it was already covered and I missed it. If a target is under the influence of scramble sensors, a portion of the damage he deals to his own teamates and any healing he uses on your team should be credited to the person who used the scramble.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 54
04-14-2010, 03:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Accordion_Guy
One more quick suggestion and I'm sorry if it was already covered and I missed it. If a target is under the influence of scramble sensors, a portion of the damage he deals to his own teamates and any healing he uses on your team should be credited to the person who used the scramble.
Hi Accordion_Guy,

Good point, Scramble Sensors should fall under both DamageAssist and DamageMitigation. I will add an explicit line for this somewhere in the original post (probably under the summary sections).

Thanks again for your feedback.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 55
05-20-2010, 07:40 AM
Win/ loss with elo would be the only chance this system have to keep a balanced pvp rating imo, and keep Capture and Hold out of the equation because some ppl just go there to blow stuff up(like me) and Devoras(just wanna win the points).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 56
05-21-2010, 03:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zorena
Win/ loss with elo would be the only chance this system have to keep a balanced pvp rating imo, and keep Capture and Hold out of the equation because some ppl just go there to blow stuff up(like me) and Devoras(just wanna win the points).
Win/loss only works with team ratings. It completely ignores individual contribution and therefore discriminates against individual queues (PUGs). My system uses two sets of ratings so that players can excel in either or both environments: individual (PUG) and team (premade).

Inflation is already accounted for -- and compensated against -- with my formula weightings. Everything is relative to all other players in the given match.

It's all accounted for.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 57
06-16-2012, 05:53 AM
STO Community, Cryptic,

I realize this is a very old thread, but I am not bumping for the sake of bumping. Given that Gozer stated that he would be designing and implementing participation-based rewards, I want to ask the PvP community (as well as Cryptic) what you all think of my proposed solution here (for matchmaking as well as rewards).

I am specifically calling on the mathematicians, developers, and game designers out there (and, ideally, if you are all three in one) for direct feedback on my formulae. Is there anything skewed? Anything that would not work? Anything that might work better if formulated differently?

Even if you are not a mathematician, developer, or game designer, I would also appreciate your feedback. Do you agree with the concepts? Is there anything missing, anything that should be accounted for but is not captured somewhere here?

I do not expect Cryptic Devs to comment, but I would ask them to consider 1) what is posted here, and 2) (more conceptually / fundamentally) the cost-benefit of designing systems such that most (if not all) game design formulae are public. Specifically designing against 'gaming the system' while maximizing the benefit of community testing and feedback.

Thanks everyone
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 08:53 AM.