Ranks instead of Tiers

Suggestions Levelling and Economy
#1

Please do not merge or lock this thread due to the other thread dealing with tier-less progression. I did not wish to hijack the other thread, so I began a separate one.

 

I could be completely off my rocker, so feel free to disagree. Rather than matching ships up via the current tier system, I would like to suggest that ships be ranked according to their survivability rating.

 

First , the difference in survivability rating between Interceptors, Fighters, and Frigates would have to be mathematically evened out so super powerful Intys wouldn’t be matched up against weak Frigates because their scores differed based on size.

 

Second , as modules are installed on a ship and improve its survivability, the ship gains rank. As the ship gains rank and synergy, it is able to make use of more implants. Due to natural limitations on hardware hardpoints, ships would have a maximum range of +2/3 ranks above their stock variation as their survivability would not be able to be increased further.

 

I say +2/3* ranks because if a ship has all Experimental items, it should be able to gain an additional rank.

 

Pros : Transition between “tiers” would be more natural and gradual as a player upgrades their ship. The number of matches featuring a few powerful upper-end tier ships vs. more generic ships would be reduced. It would remove the “power-ceiling” that tiers create.

 

Cons : It would be a major change from what most players are used to. It would require some tweaking of the survivability rating system. It could cause players to feel like their upgrades are less powerful as their immediate effect would be much more subdued. New players who pay GS for a premium T1 ship and gear would instantly be out of their league.

 

*Any and all numerical values are purely theoretical

 

UPDATE:

 

Clearly I didn’t do the best job explaining. Survivability was more or less just an example (partly because I wasn’t sure exactly what all it measured). What I’m suggesting is that the current ship tier system_ be scrapped for an “overall rating” system_.

 

This number would take into account the base value of the ship, plus whichever upgrades are applied, plus synergy rank, to ultimately determine the final rank of the ship. Again, theoretically (Base Value + Synergy Level x 10) x (Module Quality) = Overall Value

 

Let’s assign a value to different quality parts and upgrades that multiply your ship’s score as follows: Mk1=x1; Mk2=x1.5; Military=x2; Mk3=x2.5; Experimental=x3

 

The Math Part:

Your generic T1 Fighter has a primary and secondary weapon slot, a weapon ammunition slot, and two active modules.

If the fighters base rank is set at 100, then the lowest its overall ranking can be is 100 with Mk1 gear and no synergy.

(100+0x10)x(1^5)=100

The maximum overall rating the fighter could achieve would be with all Experimental and Mk3 gear (since ammunition only reaches Mk3 now) and full synergy.

(100+4x10)x[(3^3)+(2.5^2)]=4655

So your typical basic T1 fighter could range between an overall score of 100 to 4655

 

If Ranks 1-3 required ships to possess an overall minimum score of 100, 2250, and 4000 respectively, then it would be possible for our starter ship to reach Rank 3 and use Rank 3 implant abilities before its potential was maxed out and buying a new ship was required.

 

As fighters get more complex, this overall range increases due to more module slots and more synergy levels; thus more overlap between ship ranks. It would be possible to see a fully synergized and experimental module Tier 3 ship in a fight with slightly modified T4 ships and stock T5 ships. Thus blurring the lines between tiers.

 

You might say, but that is already a terrible idea to put T3 and T5 ships together. Well, that’s why as a ship gains rank it would also gain access to the abilities from the implants at each rank. Not a fix-all, but it’s a start.

 

Also, if the tier system were removed, modules and weapons would become universal between all ships of a given role. So your T2 Experimental Hull Reinforcement would become a universal Experimental Fighter Hull Reinforcement.

#2

 But then some one picks up a Federation gunship, make s glassies canon out of it, artificially dropping survivability with light weight and (damn whats the name for that shield module counterpart of a lightweight) and then follow a standard procedure of getinmurdereveryonegetfearmewithmillionsofkills.

 In the same time we have Adaptive Shield module that does not directly affect survivability rating.

 

 And after all survivability rating only scales on frigates with tiers, if you look at interceptors and half of the fighters t3-t5 have very close survivability ratings.

 Or are you proposing to divide ships by rating within respected tiers?

#3

HP is only one element in combat

 

consider an extreme hypothetical scenario where all ships have exactly 10,000 survivability

 

would the game still be balanced? ofcourse not. speed, spread, optimal range, regen rates etc all these come into play

 

considering the idea at foundation level: would limiting choice or options add fun into the game?

  • I would say no

 

again consider a hypothetical scenario where the majority of players choosing to fly 2 roles, Engineer and ECM

  • Even if that balanced the game in a twisted sense, it wouldn’t necessarily add to the fun. If anything you want to increase diversity not limit it.
#4

[…] (damn whats the name for that shield module counterpart of a lightweight) […]

Submatter Shield

#5

Submatter Shield

Yes, yes. Thank you, again :slight_smile:

#6

Clearly I didn’t do the best job explaining. Survivability was more or less just an example (partly because I wasn’t sure exactly what all it measured). What I’m suggesting is that the current ship tier system_ be scrapped for an “overall rating” system_.

 

This number would take into account the base value of the ship, plus whichever upgrades are applied, plus synergy rank, to ultimately determine the final rank of the ship. Again, theoretically (Base Value + Synergy Level x 10) x (Module Quality) = Overall Value

 

Let’s assign a value to different quality parts and upgrades that multiply your ship’s score as follows: Mk1=x1; Mk2=x1.5; Military=x2; Mk3=x2.5; Experimental=x3

 

The Math Part:

Your generic T1 Fighter has a primary and secondary weapon slot, a weapon ammunition slot, and two active modules.

If the fighters base rank is set at 100, then the lowest its overall ranking can be is 100 with Mk1 gear and no synergy.

(100+0x10)x(1^5)=100

The maximum overall rating the fighter could achieve would be with all Experimental and Mk3 gear (since ammunition only reaches Mk3 now) and full synergy.

(100+4x10)x[(3^3)+(2.5^2)]=4655

So your typical basic T1 fighter could range between an overall score of 100 to 4655

 

If Ranks 1-3 required ships to possess an overall minimum score of 100, 2250, and 4000 respectively, then it would be possible for our starter ship to reach Rank 3 and use Rank 3 implant abilities before its potential was maxed out and buying a new ship was required.

 

As fighters get more complex, this overall range increases due to more module slots and more synergy levels; thus more overlap between ship ranks. It would be possible to see a fully synergized and experimental module Tier 3 ship in a fight with slightly modified T4 ships and stock T5 ships. Thus blurring the lines between tiers.

 

You might say, but that is already a terrible idea to put T3 and T5 ships together. Well, that’s why as a ship gains rank it would also gain access to the abilities from the implants at each rank. Not a fix-all, but it’s a start.

 

Also, if the tier system were removed, modules and weapons would become universal between all ships of a given role. So your T2 Experimental Hull Reinforcement would become a universal Experimental Fighter Hull Reinforcement.

 

Does this even begin to make sense?

Where’s betatrash when you need him?

 

*Updated OP with this post at the end so newcomers will actually read it.

#7

I think I see what you are getting at here

 

So instead of always being at a disadvantage when being at the lower part of a tier, you are matched with players with similar stats to you, ultimately preventing someone in low/mid being paired with T5. I think the system tries to behave this way with the tier overlap in the matchmaking process. But with the poor numbers it obviously fails miserably, plus it does not consider stats, equipment, etc whatsoever. 

 

I think this is an interesting concept that would make matchmaking more equal. But I wonder because of the small playerbase, if such a system would struggle even more?

#8

Oh, I forgot one very important detail. Matchmaking would be based on Rank, but with more overlap games in the upper rankings would be more populated while beginner ranks would be sparser. With maybe the exception of the highest level of T5 ships. Not sure how that would play out.

 

The other big draw for something like this is unique ships such as the Bear, Dragonfly, Deagle, and Pirate ships. This would allow them much broader use instead of keeping them stuck in T3.

 

@Dagget: Exactly. Helping even the playing field but keeping the sense of progression while broadening player choice.

#9

(100+0x10)x(1^5)=100 Your math is wrong. 100+0x10=1000 not 100

 

But I think we get the idea anyways. As SF said before me here that with the small player base MM would struggle with any more added calculations. It already has a hard time. Maybe when/if we get back to the 4k online at a time like it once was then something like this might work.

 

:lol:

#10

(100+0x10)x(1^5)=100 Your math is wrong. 100+0x10=1000 not 100

 

No, I’m pretty sure I followed the Algebraic order of mathematical operations correctly. Multiplication is always completed before addition. Thus, you solve 0x10 first which is 0. Then you add that to 100. Now if I had written [(100+0)x10]x(1^5), then yes, the answer would have been 1000.

 

The calculations of a ship’s overall rank would be determined in the customizer, not during matchmaking. The matchmaker would simply take ships of the same rank and put them in a match together. As I said before, this would actually increase the player population per match due to increased overlap.

 

I highly doubt we will ever see 4K players online again. At least not until launch. And even then, I doubt it. The game’s already been announced and launched on Steam. There’s really not much else they can do for publicity other than word-of-mouth. And that hasn’t been going so well.

#11

This has been bugging me, don’t write 0x10!!!  To me that looks like 16 so 100 + 0x10 = 116.

#12

This has been bugging me, don’t write 0x10!!!  To me that looks like 16 so 100 + 0x10 = 116.

I see I’m not the only one with hex issues.