DUST Search - In Regards to SP cap

charlesnette dalari wrote:

a cap I think would be fine just don't cap the total. instead cap the Max SP you can get from an individual object so the cheat people are using now of bounce drop ship of a wall land-repair-repeat wouldn't work without adding the step of destroy that drop ship and deploy a new one. so basically cap the amount of SP you can be rewarded from your activities involving a particular instance of an object. this way to get the SP they are farming they would have to spend isk to buy a new dropship when they hit the cap or in the case of prepping a drop suit the other person must die and respawn to lift cap. just a thought but I think this would solve most of the SP boosting if not all. programmatically this shouldn't be that hard since each object on the battlefield somehow now has to be tracked anyway with a unique identifier for that match to determine who loses the asset when it is destroyed. my fix idea is less likely to punish the good players to lessen cheating.


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nyefari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2012.09.25 15:54:00 - [1] - Quote I would do it as an arc-tangent function, not as a hard cap. Doing it this way would allow people to earn CCP to change the "stretch" of the function to find out the sweet spot in terms of work vs reward as well as allow them to set a cap without having the issue of someone who did really well in a game getting equal SP as someone who still did great but not as well.
Nyefari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2012.09.25 20:33:00 - [2] - Quote Yeah, I was trying to figure out a way to kindly put down Lavirac's idea but it just seems... bad. If I go 18 and 10 I should lose SP? I don't think so. I could understand deaths being negative warpoints, but if you make it twice as much then by definition 2/3 of the people in a game would go negative. That's obviously not gonna fly with CCP who has been trying to equal the playing field. Tarn I do like your idea of have the sp be more dependent on the win/loss of the match, and that should be implemented as well. However, I've seen people legitimately get 120k sp, and I suspect that the limit would be somewhere thereabouts. I would like to note that by the way it goes an arc-tangent curve would best support the shift from a negative team player to a positive team player, since that is where the slope of the curve is the greatest. I don't think it should be seemingly infinite possible rewards for a match as it is now because that would reward people who play constantly over people who can only play a few times a week way too much, even if they are the same actual skill level. For example, I am almost constantly in the top three on my team, however I work an hour and a half away from where I play. Often on days that I work I don't get to play at all, so I'm all for catering to the "casual" gamer like me. In terms of additions to my original idea, I would like to point out that CCP could also include the number of games played for the day into the equation for the top asymptote of the arc-tangent curve in order to incorporate the diminishing returns that we see
Nyefari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2012.09.25 20:59:00 - [3] - Quote charlesnette dalari wrote: a cap I think would be fine just don't cap the total. instead cap the Max SP you can get from an individual object so the cheat people are using now of bounce drop ship of a wall land-repair-repeat wouldn't work without adding the step of destroy that drop ship and deploy a new one. so basically cap the amount of SP you can be rewarded from your activities involving a particular instance of an object. this way to get the SP they are farming they would have to spend isk to buy a new dropship when they hit the cap or in the case of prepping a drop suit the other person must die and respawn to lift cap. just a thought but I think this would solve most of the SP boosting if not all. programmatically this shouldn't be that hard since each object on the battlefield somehow now has to be tracked anyway with a unique identifier for that match to determine who loses the asset when it is destroyed. my fix idea is less likely to punish the good players to lessen cheating. This is a brilliant idea, as it rewards flexibility on the field towards team play, and would remove the issue of using an exploit on one thing to max out the total cap.
Nyefari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2012.09.25 21:23:00 - [4] - Quote I'm just gonna put this out there. Camping tactics are valid tactics. If you aren't prepared to deal with the snipers that's not their fault. I rarely see snipers who enjoy the long-range combat come on the forums and argue that assaulters shouldn't be able to come up into their business simply because that's not the range at which they are wishing to play. Snipers are also a support role, and I would personally appreciate it if people began to see that. I personally disagree with the tactic of using a dropship to get on top of the towers, because it limits my mobility and silhouettes me against the sky, but I don't think that going up there is an exploit because any fool with a dropship and a gunner could also fly up there and take them out. If there's a counter-tactic its not an exploit, IMHO. I know I just de-railed my own thread but this sort of thing shouldn't even come up. Its an in-game tactic and does not manipulate any of the in-game mechanics in order to carry itself out. It also does not provide an unfair advantage because it is easily countered by any good sniper, or failing that a dropship with some decent players. I would appreciate it if we could keep future off-topic comments (no matter how subtle they are) out of this discussion since I believe it offers a completely viable mathematical way to implement a feature that has been taken into consideration by the CCP in a fair way.
Nyefari Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2012.09.26 02:53:00 - [5] - Quote Lavirac JR wrote: Was definitely not my best idea now that I look at the arguments against.... I guess caps probably are the most simple way to attempt to curtail an exploit. Just wish there was a less crude way, something more "artistic," heh... We could always use Dalari's idea along with mine to have a mathematically artistic form. BTW, the idea I m referencing is the cap on a specific type of earning sp rather than a cap overall, so that abusing one form of gaining sp will not be as boosting as being an all around team player.