Reputation Loss via Item Power

  • Reputation Loss via Item Power

    @Korn @Bercilak Korn I know I talked to you about this previously on @Blackboa stream and I understand your concerns regarding exploits so I'm going to try to address those issues here while I present my idea to the community. I hope you'll consider what I have to say and hopefully I'll address some of the major concerns you might have with the idea. Thank you to everyone who reads this and I'd love to hear any feedback anyone might have. I'll also include a very very brief summary at the end for those that don't want to read forever though I highly encourage you to do so. With that said... Let's get to it.

    The current reputation system is a bit nagging for many players especially those who favor Player vs Player combat interaction within Albion Online. Though I do not personally have much first hand experience with this system in the current Beta in relation to being locked out of the red zones it is my understanding that many players find it too easy to reach the dreaded lock out stage in the reputation system forcing them to take higher risks in black zones. It is also my understanding a player with average reputation that attacks a fellow player of 'Glorious' reputation can expect to lose approximately 1,000 reputation for the action if they successfully kill the 'Glorious' player. At this point in the beta with so many players achieving and easily maintaining the level of 'Glorious' picking fights for many PvP enthusiasts makes fighting in red zones extremely difficult.

    This is where my solution comes into effect. I believe that a reputation loss system based on the item power of PvP players relative to their opponent could resolve many of the current issues. As it stands Item Power is one of the best systems in Albion for determining the effective combat strength of a player in the open world. By calculating reputation lost based on this number we can help gauge how fair the PvP action was for both the aggressor and the victim. For PvP action that was fair, reputation losses should be minimal to the PvP player encouraging more open world PvP in red zones. So how exactly would this work?

    Currently base t4 armor is at an Item Power level of approximately 700-710. Two players fighting each other in tier 4 in a red zone at equal reputation with effective Item Power levels within 50 Power of each other should experience a reputation loss around 100. However, base t4.1 armor is at an Item Power level of approximately 810-820 if one of the two players in the previous example chooses to wear this and the tiered player then is the flagged player then reputation loss for this player should be higher, 200. Thus if the aggressor wears full t7 armor at an Item Power of 1000 or 4.3 armor and attacks a player in t4 gear the players reputation loss should reflect the 300 Item Power difference that the aggressor was given in combat, approximately 600. Not quite the same equivalence of currently killing a 'Glorious' player. Going higher, t8.1 has an Item Power level of approximately 1200-1210 if this player attacks a player of t4 with the Item Power of 700 then the resulting reputation loss should be approximately 1000 preventing players from griefing lower tiered players. For these calculations I estimate an approximate increase of 200 reputation lost per 100 item power difference or 100 for 50 item power difference. This part comes out looking pretty simple in the end and its a great theory..... but.....

    As Korn has pointed out, it has some flaws that could really be exploited... What happens if we want to fight t4's so we wear t7 and we bring t2 alts with us to lower our Item Power so we can break the system to get lower rep loses. Well... This is where HOW you calculate a group of players effective item power becomes important. I'll create an example group with one player in full t7, a second player wearing mostly t7 with a couple t5 items to try to lower his item power and a few t2 alts again to lower item power. If we try to calculate an average item power based on this you can exploit the system very easily. However, if you grab the item power of the t7 then calculate other group members item power relative to that player you can determine a group power level by removing players with an effective item power level greater than 200 below that player. So the t7 player has an item power level of1000, the t7 who wore two t7 items is at 900 and the t2's were at 500. These t2 players do not count in group power level making the group power equivalent to 950 based on the two remaining numbers.

    But what if you try to lower your groups item power by just having a ton of players in t5 and only one in t7? Yes this can become an issue.

    It only takes 3 t5 equivalent players with just 1 t7 player to lower the groups overall item power to just 850. One solution to this problem is just sticking the group as a whole with the item power of the highest player in the group no matter what gear everyone else wears. Many players might outcry over such a simple solution but it might be the best solution for a group of players in this example by punishing players who attempt to abuse the system for cheesy easy kills.

    A better potential solution to this for the example of 3 t5's with 1t7 might be an addition for each additional party member below the highest player based on how high above the highest is, such that with the three extra players at 200 difference you add 20 per player to the groups average count raising the groups average to 910 from 850 because of the three additional players. So for this second example you essentially add 10% of the item power difference for each player below the highest player after calculating the average. So basically the end solution looks like... ( ( (1*(t7)1,000) + (3*(t5)800) ) / 4) + ( (200 * .1) * 3) = 910 Item Power

    If this new group at 910 Item Power engages an average reputation 4 man t4 group they will outpower the t4 group on average by 210 Item Power significantly placing the t4 group at a disadvantage but reducing the reputation of each member in the conquering overpower group by 400 (2:1 or 200 rep per 100 item power) per person in the t4 group so 1600 overall. A fairly large reduction when considering that the reputation level of each member the 4 person t4 group was neutral reputation for the example. This is the point where the current reputation system can come back into play within my solution. For each increased positive reputation level for a non-aggressor I suggest a 25% increase to reputation lost for the opposition. This would mean in our example of a four man group fight with the opposition overpowering a party with all four t4 players at 'Reputable' the fame loss per person for the opposition goes from 1600 to 2000 and for killing a full t4 group of 'Glorious' players the reputation loss could be 3,200.

    Additionally, if our aggressor group were to attack less players there might also be a reputation loss based on how uneven the fight is in favor of the aggressors, in some cases a group that substantially out numbers their opponent might see an increase in reputation lost by up to 100% or more.

    Overall, in terms of balancing red zone PvP with the negative reputation gain, I believe this proposed system can fix both issues and as an end result reduce the number of players who find themselves locked out of red zones. I also believe this encourages more players to keep and utilize lower tier levels of gear and lowers the playing field to newer players who are interested in advancing into the red zones but might otherwise perceive the risk as too great because they are out tiered by opposing players. By effectively encouraging lower gear use by PvPers this reduces the risk to gathering players encouraging more to enter the red zones and open themselves up to PvP. As the red zone blue player population increases eventually so will the number of red on blue kills. Overall this could lead to more gear changing hands across Albion as well as more gear being trashed on death. Creating healthy economic opportunities among all players.

    As a recap for anyone who didn't want to read the above paragraphs;
    • Item Power difference calculates reputation lost, each 50 item power difference you lose 100 reputation (if you're flagged and kill the other guy who isn't)
    • Players in the party more than 200 Item Power below the highest tiered player do not count towards group Power (prevents exploiting by using any alts to lower group power)(all members are still counted in a % addition, meaning having lower gear party members can have reverse effect)
    • All players in the party below the highest tiered player count towards the group average by providing an additional 10% of the difference in Item Power between them and the highest group member (disclaimer: 10% is a theoretical number)
      • Example: 4 t4 players is 700 Item Power (IP) with a t2 alt their IP is still 680.

      • Concerns: Effectively in some cases (such as the example above) running with low IP alts can result in lower IP. However, running with a large group of t2 alts might not be beneficial or useful in a fight. In some cases bringing too many low powered alts can even increase a parties Item Power using this system. Using alts to Increase IP doesn't seem to have a use so it doesn't have negative long term effects in this system.

      • Negative: it appears there is a spot around 4 t2 alts that allows players to reduce their average group power by upwards of 30% however increasing group power based on number of party members could fix this issue as it appears each of those additional alts appears to account for around 25% of the IP difference. So adding a % increase based on party size or flat number such as 50 per additional party member should return the Item Power at this stage close to normal for most tiers