XP for defence

[SpaceLegend]

we had this discussion already, but i wanna throw in a new idea

since lot of def missions don't end in a battle and the outcome of those
theoretical battles is undefined, xp for defense should be given for moving def fleets

you should get xp for every tick your defense fleet is moving for a matching attack fleet

sample:
eta 8 incs, i send def fleet eta 7, eta 4 the attacker recalls
i should get xp for 3 ticks cause my def matches an attack fleet for 3 ticks
(eta 6, eta 5 and eta 4)

since nobody can recall a fleet during tick, its possible to add such a calc
at the end of the tick before players are able again to change missions.

i think xp per tick could be:
3 XP in ally
7 XP in cluster (non-ally only)
10 XP in galaxy

a hardcore defender who defends in ally 200 times per round, would get
totally ~2400 xp (going by an average of 4 ticks def )
this is still "nothing" compared to xp by attacks but something :-)

comments ?

[The_Fish]

Its very open to abuse, thats my initial thinking.

[Ultimate Newbie]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Its very open to abuse, thats my initial thinking.

How so? if it had to match an attacking fleet, then you would only be getting XP if you are sending defence to someone who is being attacked. Not only does that make sense, in what way is it abusable? Additionally, the XP doesnt sound high enough to warrant three fleet defending solely to farm XP - it would be more beneficial to attack by a significant margin.

However, i think the values that you are placing should be altered - 10 in galaxy is rather alot, and i know there is less time due to the shorter ETA, but i think something where your buddypacks are considered; in-gal def to a BP member gives half the XP than a non-buddypack member. Thus, you have 3 for alliance, 5 for in-gal BP, 7 for in-cluster (non alliance), 10 for in-gal non BP per tick of defence.

I think the idea is excellent, however it means that races with low ETA defence ships (Xans, Caths) are at more of a disadvantage to races with higher ETA def ships (Terrans, Ziks) as they will have one additional tick of XP per defence than hte others.

It would be worth pursuing at least. Well done .

[The Real Arfy]

Personally I think a reward for launches should be given - not a huge one, but something at least.

For example 3 xp given for any launch (launch, not tick in flight). In a 1500 tick round, this will give a maximum of 2250 launches (3 fleets, 750 launchable ticks). Thats 6750 xp, or 405000 score. Bearing in mind that if someone were to launch 3 fleets every other tick and recall them one hour into their missions, they wouldn't really grow much, would they? So the whole "abuse" factor there is abolished.

On the other hand, xp for defence promotes defending, and thus harms attacking. So the pro's and cons are debatable.

[Shyne]

IMO an XP for defence system would work perhaps in tandem with a you cant attack people smaller than you style game, but its still gonna need a lot of thought.

[Appocomaster]

Originally Posted by The Real Arfy

Personally I think a reward for launches should be given - not a huge one, but something at least.

For example 3 xp given for any launch (launch, not tick in flight). In a 1500 tick round, this will give a maximum of 2250 launches (3 fleets, 750 launchable ticks). Thats 6750 xp, or 405000 score. Bearing in mind that if someone were to launch 3 fleets every other tick and recall them one hour into their missions, they wouldn't really grow much, would they? So the whole "abuse" factor there is abolished.

On the other hand, xp for defence promotes defending, and thus harms attacking. So the pro's and cons are debatable.

XP for defending wouldn't hurt that much if it was a set amount. It might make people defend slightly more, but the idea would really to be to reward defenders to some extent without making people want to defend a whole lot more just because they can get score out of it.
I don't see that we need a huge amount of variation, but something like this should work quite well (100k per landing fleet-type idea was the other option)

[Ron7684]

It is actually exploitable by sending fake def. But with a maximum of 7*14 =98 XP for 28 ticks of a wasted fleet slot (there and back). Its obviously better to go roid someone. So it sounds like a nice system, id like to see it implemented as it WOULD increase defence missions in some cases. Now when you ask yourself "But what do i get out of a defence mission?" you have an answer. Plus its also a bonus to caths, who gain ABSOLOUTLY nothing on defence missions and EMP salvage has been shot down more times than it got up

[furball]

I quite like this

[Shyne]

Why not run defence by roids saved:

XP = roids saved by you * value ratio

instead of xp = roids capped * value ratio

[Appocomaster]

Originally Posted by Shyne

Why not run defence by roids saved:

XP = roids saved by you * value ratio

instead of xp = roids capped * value ratio

No.
we've moved on from that
That is probably more abuseable than set XP, and it also changes game dynamics too much.

[Shyne]

Ok I see the abuse point - a player of huge value sends 1 ship and u save all the roids.

How about by fleet values, of those fleets involved in the combat?

[Doorsdown]

definatly a good idea

for the XP ratio i would do

XP for alliance/gal def 4 per tick
XP for cluster(nonallied) def 6 per tick

[cypher]

I don't see why you would want xp for defenders at all? it's hard enough to kill a planet as it is.. you need to fully kill someone's fleet 5 times over before it's actually usefull unless it's stolen, and that's quite hard to do.

[Doorsdown]

we don't want people to be totaly wiped off the map any more esp with the size of the current player base. with xp it makes it possible to still have a shot at some rank even if you screw up once or twice

[Appocomaster]

Originally Posted by Doorsdown

we don't want people to be totaly wiped off the map any more esp with the size of the current player base. with xp it makes it possible to still have a shot at some rank even if you screw up once or twice

The best way to do this would be to increase salvage, tbh

[cypher]

lol increase? that almost means you can let your fleet die fully and stay same size :/

[Appocomaster]

from 20% to 30-40%? not really.

[cypher]

no offence mate... but we've had that in a certain round and it's basically all farming salvage then. it's NOT good for pa because you can't fight wars between alliances anymore if you always get the resources back to prod what you lost

[Doorsdown]

by no means if 20 to 40% make up for losses. if you lose a mil of value u can get 400k back most and just because they get the res doesn't mean it will replace the same thing that got destroyed. 40 is too much though 30 would be a cap. maybe rather than XP for def have a variable ammount of salavage.

[Ultimate Newbie]

Indeed, 40% is too much. 30% sounds good to me .

[Lοki]

About the original idea:

I think this can be abused... you could send a fleet with 1 ship to a galmate that is under attack, then recall after the tick, if you don't need your fleet for one tick. People who'd do that as often as they can would get pretty much xp from it.

[Smudge]

The only way XP should be given for defence is when defence lands at the planet.

If there is a policy of fleets landing for more than 1 tick next round, then XP should be given for amount of time in orbit of a planet.

[Ultimate Newbie]

Originally Posted by Dark Link

About the original idea:

I think this can be abused... you could send a fleet with 1 ship to a galmate that is under attack, then recall after the tick, if you don't need your fleet for one tick. People who'd do that as often as they can would get pretty much xp from it.

Ok, say a player did that once a night, and sent a fleet to defend hostile incoming to a non-BP galaxymate (in my part of the suggestion), for the entire round. That means they would get 10 XP * 70 days (7 days of 10 weeks), which is 700 XP. *60 is 42k score. At the end of the round, 42k score is pittance.

However, for a more active defender, they would get far more 'legimate' score through using their fleets to defend with.

Obviously, the values in the suggestion can be tweaked in order to make them 'balanced', but it is a good starting point i think.

[Goatsemaster]

Originally Posted by Ultimate Newbie

Indeed, 40% is too much. 30% sounds good to me .

Let's be honest. The current salvage percentages are some of the longest standing percentages for a reason. Because whoever is behind them is a genius!

[higginz]

would you still get get xp for simply moving your fleet when your being attacked, even without the intention of defending a galmate etc? (in a gal raid for example)

[Envious]

don't see much use for it. everyone who is supporting this feature seems to stress the score that could possibly be gained through defence is too small to make any significant change in ranks.. in that case, what would it be good for anyway?

we already have enough benefits for active defenders.. they should get higher defense priority from their galaxy and their alliance. in a proper alliance/galaxy that is. and (a very important point imo!) if they are worth being defended that is. means it implicitely balances attack/defense, in the sense that def whores can't take much advantage, but an active attacker AND defender will be able to gain a lot from defending.

to sum it up: no, thanks, don't need xp for defense

[Lοki]

Ok, say a player did that once a night, and sent a fleet to defend hostile incoming to a non-BP galaxymate (in my part of the suggestion), for the entire round. That means they would get 10 XP * 70 days (7 days of 10 weeks), which is 700 XP. *60 is 42k score. At the end of the round, 42k score is pittance.

Then why do we even BOTHER to think of this? 42 k score in a round for someone defending alot won't help. Most attackers WILL recall when they are defended against.

[Ron7684]

Originally Posted by Dark Link

Then why do we even BOTHER to think of this? 42 k score in a round for someone defending alot won't help. Most attackers WILL recall when they are defended against.

this is what happens if you defend for 1 tick per nite. Hes saying that sending a 7 tick mission once a week will be the equivalent to this. People who defend 3-4 times a week LEGITIMATELY will gain ~135k score.

[MrLobster]

I know that PA does not use Eonium to launch fleets anymore, but you could reintroduce this (or an extra resource type) so that any player using the defence XP will still have to spend Fuel, and also base it [XP] on quantity of ships sent compared to their total fleet [Precentage].

The fuel idea (plus other people ideas) would stop players getting something for nothing.

[Legator]

i dont like xp for defending at all.

what is with people without an alliance ? they are limited to ingal-defense which is alot rare than alliance-def.

Def for xp would mean that you would HAVE to be in an alliance to play this game a bit successful - and that sux.

[Envious]

Originally Posted by Legator

Def for xp would mean that you would HAVE to be in an alliance to play this game a bit successful - and that sux.

So you think atm you don't need one to be "a bit" successful? Depends on definition of "a bit" maybe...

[Brug]

I like the idea of XP for def a lot.

Organizing def is harder then organizing an attack, in-gal or in alliance. It should be rewarded in a way, doesn't have to be much, but not nothing.

I' ve ordered def missions 40 times so far, and i get nothing out of it. If i was a selfish player, i would only attack and never def. As some do.

Attack = personal benefiet, Defend= (mostly idle) hope you get some def in return.

As for salvage, Ron7684 is right, no salvage for Cathaar players if no ships are killed. Same when def makes an attacker recall, the simple fact of avoiding an attacker to land should be rewarded.

[Legator]

Originally Posted by Envious

So you think atm you don't need one to be "a bit" successful? Depends on definition of "a bit" maybe...

you can be top 100 without alliance.

[jupp]

Originally Posted by Legator

you can be top 100 without alliance.

you have an alliance Legator ... without Reunion you would be nothing!


:eek:

[Shyne]

Originally Posted by Shyne

Ok I see the abuse point - a player of huge value sends 1 ship and u save all the roids.

How about by fleet values, of those fleets involved in the combat?

I'm quoting my own post as none of the replies seem to be related.

Has anyone considered this?

I think it cuts off most points of abuse -

XP is (all_def_fleet_values / attacker_fleet_value % 20)* (your_def_fleet_value/all_def_fleet_values)


perhaps multiplied by another fractional modifier to make it smaller than attack xp gains.

If someone tried to abuse it by defending on easily covered incs, they're still a small ratio of the defending fleets.

[paolo]

I like the idea and especially the 'Ingal defence is the most profitable' part. It would support ingal defence, so a better cooperation ingal. People will help their galmembers in stead of just their alliance and this will (well in my mind anyway) create a better atmosphere in the galaxies.

But most importantly it will give players in the smallest gals, who are constantly under attack, another chance to grow. It would return a bit of joy to those players who have it rough. 10 to 20 hostile fleets every day when you get above 100 roids, no chance whatsoever to grow normally.

[Appocomaster]

Originally Posted by Shyne

I'm quoting my own post as none of the replies seem to be related.

Has anyone considered this?

Sorry, I was going to reply but never got around to it. I favoured similar approaches last time it was discussed, but was shown the light by Jester of how constant XP doesn't take away from the attacking game dynamics.

I'd prefer the defence XP to reward defending without shifting the balance of the game too much.

I think it cuts off most points of abuse -

XP is (all_def_fleet_values / attacker_fleet_value % 20)* (your_def_fleet_value/all_def_fleet_values)

If someone tried to abuse it by defending on easily covered incs, they're still a small ratio of the defending fleets.

not sure what the % is for.
Anyway, you get a really really small planet with a tiny fleet to attack the top valued players. The bigger the difference bweteen the attacker and defender values, the more XP they'd get. This rewards people who have people suciding on them.

[Shyne]

Sorry % meaning mod 20 (max 20) as per attack.

I think its meant to be attacker_fleet_value / all_def_fleet_values rather than the other way around -

The idea is that lots of def vs. a small attacker gives little xp, and that xp given is dependent on how much you contributed to the entire defence.

[Ron7684]

i dont agree with your idea that much shyne, it leaves much room for problems/annoyances.

Im assuming you're formula applies on combat, what happens when an attacker recalls eta 1 and the defender just used up 14 tix of a fleetslot (there + back). Not really fulfilling the point. Plus the fact that 90% of attacks that are defended against dont land unless the defence is small (in which case your formula would award minimal xp).

And you cannot alter your formula to be used on a per tick inflight basis as it could be exploited. A planet sends defence -> finds their xp gain -> finds the attackers fleet value -> creates 100% accurate calc based on fleet value + unit scan + amt of attacking ships -> perfect defence each time, xan cloaking is essentially eliminated/useless

[Knight Theamion]

This must be the best idea since King Knut II ordered 80,000 viking warhelmets with the horns on the inside.

[Appocomaster]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

This must be the best idea since King Knut II ordered 80,000 viking warhelmets with the horns on the inside.

They come in a catalog?

Which idea did you mean btw? or just the general "XP for defence" idea?

[rop1964]

i am for xp for defense, as the way i see the opposition, they would rather see no defense at all.. which in turn would lead to bashing.. and you know.. i hate bashing with a passion!
let s reward those who put their fleet on the line to protect those in need! the amount should not to be huge.. but reflect the action of helping ppls. i like the idea of xp per tick travel and the xp according to who and where you protect.. both should be combine so to provide a good incentive.. after all the point in defending is to have the attacker recall. and increasing the salvage would avoid small planet be blast to nothing if battle happen.

[Knight Theamion]

Originally Posted by Appocomaster

They come in a catalog?

Which idea did you mean btw? or just the general "XP for defence" idea?

almost complete XP for def.

maybe only xp for def ingal, but otherwise, no-no.