City of Heroes: Live Forum Archive

Merit Reward Calculation Needs Changing

Anti_Llama

By Anti_Llama,
Posted on: 2009-09-07 05:30 in Suggestions and Ideas

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anti_Llama View Post
There is probably not a good solution to it. But as a whole the merit system needs to be recalculated. I have trouble with how the Dev's had accessed which TF/SF gets how many merits in the first place. Such as the Positron TF gets 64 merits because it is 14 missions long, while the Binder of Beasts SF gets 12 merits for being 6 missions long.
You obviously don't know how the devs calculate merit rewards then. They're not calculated based off of number of mishes or number of AVs or anything else that's just a formula that they just pop the missions into and put out a merit result. It's based off of the average (median) time that players complete the task force in. For every 3 minutes of that median time, the TF gets 1 merit. Positron gets 64 merits because the average (median) time is 3 hours and 20 minutes. The Virgil Tarikoss SF grants 12 merits because the average (median) time is only 36 minutes.

 

Posted

Quote:
Frankly, I think the whole reward scheme has backfired.
Total agreement from me on this.

 

Posted

Personally I like the idea of having some base number of merits (maybe a half to two thirds of what you get now) that you'll get regardless, plus additionally you get merits based on mobs killed, possibly using some variation of the code for end of mission ticket bonuses in AE.

[Admin] Emperor Marcus Cole: STOP!
[Admin] Emperor Marcus Cole: WAIT ONE SECOND!
[Admin] Emperor Marcus Cole: WHAT IS A SEAGULL DOING ON MY THRONE!?!?

 

Posted

Here is how I'd like to see the merit values altered:
Please note that multiplier values are tentative. They could be altered (upward or downward) to balance against the devs' ideals for merit supply.

Challenge Settings:
L1: 1.0x Merit Value
L2: 1.1x Merit Value
L3: 1.2x Merit Value
L4: 1.3x Merit Value
L5: 1.4x Merit Value

Timed Mission:
2 Hours: 1.1x Merit Value
1 Hour: 1.2x Merit Value
30 Minutes: 1.3x Merit Value

Temp Powers:
No Pool Powers: 1.1x
No Travel Powers: 1.1x
No Temp Powers: 1.1x
No Inspirations: 1.1x
No Enhancements: 1.3x

Deaths Settings:
5 or Fewer: 1.1x
3 or Fewer: 1.2x
1 or Fewer: 1.3x
Zero: 1.4x

Buff States:
Debuffed: 1.1x
Enemies Buffed: 1.1x

Effects of multiple difficulty changes are cumulative. All fractional merits round down.

For Instance:

Bare L1 (Heroic) Statesman's TF: 38 Merits
L1 (Heroic) MOSTF: 58
L5 (Invincible) MOSTF: 81


Bare L1 (Heroic) ITF: 28
L5 (Invincible) ITF: 39

Such a system would provide an incentive to players to run task forces at something higher than base settings, while not unduly penalizing players who speed through due to efficient play.


Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
Here is how I'd like to see the merit values altered:
Please note that multiplier values are tentative. They could be altered (upward or downward) to balance against the devs' ideals for merit supply.
I highly doubt that multipliers would be applied for a number of reasons.

1. "Challenge Settings" (normally referred to as Difficulty Settings) are currently done on a player-by-player basis and can be changed mid TF. To institute a system like this, the TF would need to have a difficulty setting assigned to it at the same time as applying all other difficulty settings.

2. What is the penalty for failing a challenge? Is it simply removing that multiplier (or addition) from the end merit rewards (i.e. no penalty) or is it actually a reduction in the end merit rewards (i.e. risk:reward exchange)?

3. Some difficulty settings are more dangerous/risky on some TFs than they are on others (re: buffed enemies on the ITF compared to buffed enemies on a Citadel).

It would be much more likely for the challenges to simply add a specific number of merits (possibly guided by some percent of the base merit award) at the potential loss of a similar quantity if the challenge is failed.

On a side note, the time challenge settings would require a large amount of datamining and testing to determine appropriate challenge times for every TF/SF/Story Arc in the game. The 30/60/120 minute standard isn't really a decent standard to apply to both the Eden Trial and the Citadel TF.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Umbral View Post
1. "Challenge Settings" (normally referred to as Difficulty Settings) are currently done on a player-by-player basis and can be changed mid TF. To institute a system like this, the TF would need to have a difficulty setting assigned to it at the same time as applying all other difficulty settings.
Yeah. This'd be one sticky point. Not sure what'd be the best way to make sure people don't try to get around it.

Quote:
2. What is the penalty for failing a challenge? Is it simply removing that multiplier (or addition) from the end merit rewards (i.e. no penalty) or is it actually a reduction in the end merit rewards (i.e. risk:reward exchange)?
Failing simply would mean you'd lose that multiplier. You wouldn't degrade to the next multiplier down. You'd simply lose it. I don't think that the players should be penalized (other than losing the possibility of extra merits) for failing one of the challenge settings.

Quote:
3. Some difficulty settings are more dangerous/risky on some TFs than they are on others (re: buffed enemies on the ITF compared to buffed enemies on a Citadel).
Again, this was written in a very preliminary format. And there's always room for adjustment. Possibly on a per-TF basis.

Quote:
It would be much more likely for the challenges to simply add a specific number of merits (possibly guided by some percent of the base merit award) at the potential loss of a similar quantity if the challenge is failed.
And what happens if they fail to the point of negative merits? Do they actually LOSE merits? I'm against this.

Quote:
On a side note, the time challenge settings would require a large amount of datamining and testing to determine appropriate challenge times for every TF/SF/Story Arc in the game. The 30/60/120 minute standard isn't really a decent standard to apply to both the Eden Trial and the Citadel TF.
Again, as I said from the outset, these values are simply placeholders as a way to demonstrate what I'm talking about, rather than hard and fast values I'd like to see applied.


Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
And what happens if they fail to the point of negative merits? Do they actually LOSE merits? I'm against this.
I don't think this would every actually be possible. The only challenges you can fail are the time challenges and the defeat challenges. All of the other challenges are simply static. I highly doubt the devs would ever allow the merit rewards to go negative that easily, especially since I'd be more than confident that the penalty would be less than the potential benefit (re: +12 merits from a bronze time challenge on a 48 merit TF would cost you -6 merits if you failed it). It might not even scale with the level of challenge rating you pick (re: lose 6 merits from your end reward no matter if you were running bronze, silver, or gold time challenge; it might also be lose 4 merits no matter which defeat challenge you take), which would encourage players to gauge the potential rewards with the potential risks of running under those specific challenges.

I highly doubt the devs would ever have a system wherein you could increase the potential reward of a TF without having some penalty for failing at that challenge. Otherwise, you'd just get everyone running every TF with defeat and time challenges like they do now without any negative affect though there would be the rather easy potential for a positive effect (re: increased merits).

 

Posted

I believe merits should be based off play statics instead of time. A defence AT that runs with no toggles counts towards reward. Delay use of next power counts toward reward. Buffs count against reward. Debuffs count against reward. Against higher levels counts toward reward. Perma mez counts against reward. Masterminds with no pets counts toward reward. Being Debuffed counts toward reward. The rewards would be based on a sliding scale. When something occurs to go against reward the sliders goes down and as something occurs to go toward reward the slider goes up. Example: Defence AT runs Dam Res toggle gets hit 3 times, reward slider goes down 3. Defence AT turns off toggle gets hit 3 times, reward slider goes up 3. Foe was buffed to Dam at 200% during the attack on the untoggled defence AT, slider goes up 3. Defence AT's toggle doesn't resistant type of damage from foe, reward slider goes up.

If it ain't broke set it on fire, then say it was a fault in the design.

Main:50 Force Encephalon Mind/Kinetic Controller, Protector Server