Energy Distribution after Challenges

LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited October 15 in Feature Requests #1 latest comment 19 October, 2020, 10:34 pm.

Different Professions are not necessarily "balanced" when it comes to energy-efficiency. This suggestion is aimed at evening the odds.


The Feature:
  • After a completed Challenge (successful or unsuccessful), the amount of spell-energy of all participating players is summed up and divided by the number of players - resulting in the "average spell energy used".
  • The Players that used more than that average spell energy are then rewarded with the difference between the amount of energy they used and the aforementioned average.
  • The Players that used less than the average spell energy then have their spell-energy reserves drained by the difference between the amount they used and the average. This may result in Players dropping into negative levels of SE - which can be seen as extreme exhaustion.
  • Players that have negative SE are prohibited from interacting with the Knight Bus or Fortresses (including Sponsored Fortresses).


An example:
  • AAPM-Group, successfully clearing the challenge.
  • Auror 1 had a disconnect and spent the entire duration of the challenge trying to reconnect - succeeding only a second before it was actually over.
  • Auror 2 spent 30 SE.
  • Professor spent 14 Spell Energy.
  • Magizoologist spent 16 Spell Energy.
  • Total SE used is 60, average SE used is 15.
  • Professor is drained by 1 SE.
  • Magizoologist has 1 of his SE refunded.
  • Auror 1 has his SE drained by 15 SE.
  • Auror 2 has 15 of his SE refunded.


Reply

Comments

  • Dewin99Dewin99 Posts: 750 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #216 October, 2020, 05:08 pm.

    What if someone used a load of Potent Exstimulo potions? They might have done the majority of the fighting but used less than average Spell Energy.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #316 October, 2020, 05:24 pm.

    @Dewin99

    That's their choice. Solidarity with your team-mates is an important value, only thinking about your own investment into the challenge is egoistic and has no place in a "team".

  • Dewin99Dewin99 Posts: 750 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #417 October, 2020, 11:14 am.

    @Lucoire So let’s take your example above, but look at it from a different perspective:


    Auror 1 has a disconnect. No fault of his/her own. Gets punished -15 SE.

    Auror 2 tackles 1 foe (no spells) spends 30 SE. Gets +15 SE.

    Professor uses 4 Potent Exstimulos tackling 4 foes, spends 14 SE. Gets -1 SE.

    Magizoologist tackles 1 foe (no spells), uses 16 SE. Gets +1 SE.


    Has the Professor not shown solidarity? No place in the team? And as for the poor Auror, no further incentive to fortress in fear of further unjust punishment.

  • CaeleonCaeleon Posts: 260 ✭✭✭
    #517 October, 2020, 12:05 pm.

    The thing is... It's not my team, it's a pug.

    If I would get punished for using my resources during a pug play... Why would I even bother spending any potions and clearing the mobs as fast as possible?

    Why would I, as a professor, go after my pixie? I will be punished for it's low hp. Better to go after the spider. Too bad for the magizoolist. Besides, if I do that... I'll crank up the averages and punish the others players, who are playing properly, even harder.


    Let alone, in the end, people will just min/max the spell energy component instead playing as it's intended.

  • KodokmagKodokmag Posts: 705 ✭✭✭✭
    #617 October, 2020, 12:35 pm.

    auror more likely to get punished? because its critical makes auror the most less in regard spending SE even more so when using extimulo (but its still depend on foe mix too). 🤔

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 17 #717 October, 2020, 02:17 pm.

    Auror 1 has a disconnect. No fault of his/her own. Gets punished -15 SE.

    Auror 1 still gets the Challenge-Reward, therefore it is arguable on whether the -15 SE are actually a punishment or "compensation". Personally, I'm more in favor of saying that it's the price to pay for getting the reward.


    Has the Professor not shown solidarity? No place in the team?

    @Dewin99 If the Professor hadn't used that many potions, the average SE usage would have been higher and they overall would have used more energy.

    To put this into (exemplary) numbers: If the Professor had still tackled 4 Enemies but without using potions, he would probably have used 34 Energy - which would have increased the average from 15 to 20.

    So with potions, the professor used 14 energy and had -1 redistributed - meaning they have -15 energy compared to before starting the challenge.

    Without potions, the professor used 34 Energy and had +14 redistributed - meaning they have -20 energy compared to before starting the challenge.


    So by using Potions, they reduced their individual SE consumption by 5 and ADDITIONALLY saved their team-mates a total of 15 SE.


    Why would I, as a professor, go after my pixie? I will be punished for it's low hp. Better to go after the spider. Too bad for the magizoolist. Besides, if I do that... I'll crank up the averages

    I believe that the Enemy-Distribution is balanced - not individually per Challenge but on average over 100 or 1000 runs.


    Given that each "Enemy Group" has one tanky (Death Eater, Acromantula, Werewolf) and one fragile member (Erkling, Dark Wizard, Pixie), it would be reasonable to argue that the energy-efficiency of the 3 professions should OVERALL also be balanced - assuming that each and every player plays in a balanced way.


    The more players focus on playing efficiently, the less Energy they will consume overall - EVEN with using potions and and SE-redistribution. If a player intentionally plays inefficiently, they will STILL lose more energy with the redistribution than if they played efficiently.

    So even when playing efficiently, players may encounter runs where they lose additional energy - but on average the loss and gain should even itself out. An inefficient (or malicious) player will on average lose more than re-gain and therefore still be discouraged from continuing this path.


    Let alone, in the end, people will just min/max the spell energy component instead playing as it's intended.

    But isn't that the way the game is intended to be played? Making use of:

    • Bravery Charm
    • Proficiency Power
    • Weakening Hex
    • Confusion Hex (vs Erklings, Werewolves, Dark Wizards)
    • Proficiency Power Charm
    • Protection Charm
    • Deterioration Hex

    will all reduce the average AND individual SE usage... which to me sounds like what generally is encouraged.


    And since the loss and gain is based on the average, players are encouraged to reduce the AVERAGE usage... which means they are encouraged to help each other be more efficient.

  • Dewin99Dewin99 Posts: 750 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #817 October, 2020, 03:11 pm.

    @Lucoire Thank you for explaining. Just for clarification, are you advocating that using spells in fortress challenges have a punitive effect on game balance?

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 17 #917 October, 2020, 03:25 pm.

    @Dewin99

    Just for clarification, are you advocating that using spells in fortress challenges have a punitive effect on game balance?

    On the contrary:

    And since the loss and gain is based on the average, players are encouraged to reduce the AVERAGE usage... which means they are encouraged to help each other be more efficient.

    So I advocate players to use strategic spells to help EACH OTHER be more efficient by:

    • Increasing their Proficiency Power (PP-Charm)
    • Increasing their Damage against Elite Enemies (Bravery Charm)
    • Reducing the defensive Buffs of Enemies - Dodge, Defense - and thereby making it easier to defeat them (Confusion Hex)
    • Making the Enemies take additional Damage (Deterioration Hex)
    • Keeping the passive Effects of the other Professions active - >50%health + >5 Focus for Magizoologists, 2 Buffs + 3 Debuffs for Professors - thereby ensuring that they will do more damage and thereby use less energy (Protection Charm, Group-Buffs, Hexes)


    The more efficient the individual players AND the team are, the more energy they will have after the challenge compared to before the challenge.




    So if anything, I advocate that NOT USING strategic spells will have a punitive effect on the players.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1017 October, 2020, 03:46 pm.

    @Dewin99

    And as for Combat Spells:

    I am aware that it is possible to defeat low-level enemies without using any Spell energy at all - simply by combining Bat-Bogey-Hex and Deterioration Hex (and maybe protego while skipping the combat-spells). That strategy will still work with my proposition.


    That said, trying to use that strategy in high-level chambers is out of place in my opinion since it endangers the success of the challenge overall. That's why I advocated the SE-Redistribution even in the case of a failed challenge - to ensure that "slackers" are more mindful of where zero-SE-strategies work and where they are out-of-place.

  • Dewin99Dewin99 Posts: 750 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 17 #1117 October, 2020, 04:16 pm.

    @Lucoire My apologies, I used the word “spells” instead of “potions”. I meant to say:


    Thank you for explaining. Just for clarification, are you advocating that using potions in fortress challenges have a punitive effect on game balance?


    I’m aware of using strategic and combative spells in challenges, and fully advocate best team practices of their use.


    I am curious as to how quickly and effectively teams would gain extra focus by defeating foes without potions. I hardly ever use potions in challenge these days, even at D5, but distinctly remember being a lower level player and depending on potions to get me through.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1217 October, 2020, 06:03 pm.

    @Dewin99

    My response was eaten my "Moderation". That said, my general thought is that it is encouraged for all team-members to put in the same amount of effort. Players that put in less effort will be punished - players that go to extreme levels of effort will also be discouraged by having some of their effort "mitigated".


    A "healthy average" is encouraged.

  • ClairabusGryffClairabusGryff Posts: 963 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1317 October, 2020, 06:34 pm.

    I am personally not a fan of this idea as this will discourage people from playing fortress rounds IMO. I understand what you are trying to accomplish but just don’t think this is the route to go.


    I think the point based system is the way to go giving people a fortress report card if you will and if you are in dark chamber and you see someone that doesn’t have a balanced report card you can decide to pull out of the battle.


    I have played about 50 fortress battles today and have played with the point system in mind and think that more points could be rewarded for a player hexing other foes and passing focus versus focusing only on the foes they are taking on. This would encourage approaching the battle with a team oriented viewpoint.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 17 #1417 October, 2020, 07:47 pm.

    @ClairabusGryff

    I still consider the point-system massively (and unfairly) punishing towards people who - without their fault - can't contribute to a challenge. Managing this via Energy

    1. "rewards" players that actually stay in the challenge and complete it
    2. "doesn't permanently ban players - neither the slackers nor the victims of bugs.


    The Point-System to me is discrimination (especially towards people with bad internet or a bad phone), which is why I propose a solution that doesn't discriminate.


    My suggestion basically says to "slackers": "This is the amount of energy that you would have consumed if you had played properly. Since you didn't do that and instead chose to be lazy, the game will still take that energy from you and distribute it to the people that actually did the work for which you reaped the rewards."




    But thank you for considering this proposition and adding your thoughts to it

    /s

  • ClairabusGryffClairabusGryff Posts: 963 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1517 October, 2020, 08:00 pm.

    If the point system is fabricated properly it wouldn’t discriminate against any players at all. It would just be about awarding points within a battle and display said points for other people to view. I wouldn’t want it to be a system that punishes people at all.


    Truth be told I doubt either idea comes to fruition but it is still nice to talk about different options and hear/read other people’s ideas.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1618 October, 2020, 02:24 pm.

    @Dewin99

    Just for clarification, are you advocating that using potions in fortress challenges have a punitive effect on game balance?

    Yes and no. Using potions (be it one of the exstimulo or Focus-Potions) will still empower you and thereby - if you use them efficiently - will reduce the SE usage of you individually and of the team as a whole. That said, given that the average SE reductions will have a bigger accumulated effect on your team-members than on you alone, potions might feel like you're being punished for using them.


    But I don't see it that way. I'd rather say that using exstimulo potions to defeat "your" enemies even more efficiently will have an even bigger effect on your team-members than on yourself. Ideally, all Team-Members will be on the same page in that regard and therefore the individual and accumulated bonus will even itself out.

  • Dewin99Dewin99 Posts: 750 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #1718 October, 2020, 03:25 pm.

    @Lucoire I see your point of view, and agree that if possible, potions shouldn’t be needed in fortress challenges. I for one, am often lucky enough to find good teams, where no potions were required.


    I am concerned with lower level players, often having to win in their highest chamber. It’d be interesting to see their perspective on this.

  • CaeleonCaeleon Posts: 260 ✭✭✭
    #1818 October, 2020, 06:37 pm.

    While the idea is rather good. I fear that the difference between the gains (balanced on 100 to 1000 runs) vs the losses (instantly) will tick off a lot of players. Especially when dealing with a pug focussed knight bus.

  • enTrainedenTrained Posts: 16 ✭✭
    #1918 October, 2020, 08:11 pm.

    This system still unfairly punishes those that get booted out of the fortress through no fault of their own, or has the fortress freeze up, or encounters the foes that don't exist, and all the other bugs plaguing fortresses. I never had any problems until the last couple of months. I have now experienced multiple problems with fortress battles. And I don't see it as my phone's fault, this is the only area I have problems. From my perspective, the fewer changes to the game, the better. I think the game is at the point all new changes are going to be user unfriendly. Portkey/WB/Niantic hasn't shown themselves to be capable/ interested in incorporating any improvements or bug fixes for months now.

  • AttritionAttrition Posts: 74 ✭✭✭
    #2018 October, 2020, 08:46 pm.

    @enTrained It's not really a punishment. It's contributing some of the energy that you were (hopefully) expecting to expend to the people that actually completed the fortress.

  • 1MasterTaca1MasterTaca Posts: 3 ✭✭
    #2119 October, 2020, 10:27 pm.

    How about leave it as is and just reward points based on the foes you defeat, giving a value to each foe based on your skill level and monster level? Keep this simple.

  • LucoireLucoire Posts: 1,211 ✭✭✭✭✭
    #2219 October, 2020, 10:34 pm.

    @1MasterTaca Thank you for your consideration and for your thoughtful feedback.

Sign In or Register to comment.