Age of Strategy Forums

I think player should know if the other is experienced or not.

i see in many games that all completed task or part of a task can give XP for the player.

so i thought of making these values:
- xp (increases until you reach next level, than starts from 0 again)
- xp sum (it is not visible /or visible value to player, a total sum of XP gained)
- level (some amount of XP needed to reach a next level, all upper levels needs more XP to reach)

xp earned by:
- completing campaign maps
- competing achievements
- winning in multiplayer games
- losing in multiplayer games
- some xp based on the "points" earned in a game
- opening daily gisfts (new)

and so on.

what do u think?
any specific ideas on calculations and what should give how much xp?

sounds good

Personally I feel like there's more important changes to be made such as live chat, but it's your game. I don't tell you what to do.

@Puss_in_Boots
yes, actually i spent a coupleof hours but found it very hard to make, so i think we need to find a free SDK to integrate - if anyone could help to find a free and promising one that would be awesome!
also do we have topic about it?
also are we talking about multiplayer "lobby" chat? or some other too to be online? - i would have put this question into its topic, if there is no topic please make one - thanks!

I disagree with this. Losing in multiplayer is like losing to AI. Most of my lose in multiplayer is because of withdrawal for them not turning. If you can reduce players xp by doing that then isn't that almost useless?

@Stratego (dev)
I hear you there. I spend hours trying to figure out a function in Codewars. It's an online site where you write code to solve problems, equations, perfomance issues and such. I'm trying to learn C++ and Python.

DreJaDe wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 12:14 am I disagree with this. Losing in multiplayer is like losing to AI. Most of my lose in multiplayer is because of withdrawal for them not turning. If you can reduce players xp by doing that then isn't that almost useless?

Actually xp will still increase even for losin, only by lower amountt han winning

Every defeat is an experience. Unless the other players left.

With this in mind

Player profile should be a thing where you can show levels,amount of wins/loses and other details

yes!

If its possible with ranking list, its obviously possible with profile, also it would b nice to make it possible to link forum username with in-game account and allowing u to see the forum avatar

not by linking to forum but an ability to choose an avatar ingame?

Stratego (dev) wrote: ↑Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:45 pm not by linking to forum but an ability to choose an avatar ingame?

OR

All/most of the profile a player has in the forum will be in the "Profile Section"

ok i start thiking more deeply in XP topic and we need to design it a little more

-> we need to define what will give how many XP-s

the list above i will update, but here are my ideas



Levels:
you start with level 1
2. level: 200XP (+200)
3. level: 600XP (+400)
4. level: 1200XP (+600)
5. level: 2000XP (+800)
6. level: 2800XP (+800)
7. level: 3600XP (+700)
8. level: 4300XP (+700)
9. level: 5000XP (+500)
10. level: 5500XP (+500)
11. level: 6000XP (+500)
12. level: 6500XP (+500)
13. level: 7000XP (+500)
...
until reaches 20000, and from that stays on 20000XP / level.

xp earned by:
- completing campaign maps (base 100XP, for each stars +10XP)
- competing achievements (various from 1-500XP)
- winning in multiplayer games (3XP / turn + 50XP for winning)
- losing in multiplayer games (3XP / turn, if got kicked than 0 XP)
- some xp based on the "points" earned in a game (i think we should not do this as many campaign maps/multiplayer skirmish maps give you points in game right on starting it by owning may units)
- opening daily gisfts (there can be a gift on one of the days that gives XP about 100XP)

ideas?

what a big interest in the topic forum wide!

Can't say much yet for now because i do not understand idea.

For what will this exp be used? Just for showing player's level? And what this gives?
Or will it give some bonuses for gaining new levels (like free upgrades, extra gems or additional consumable spells)?

I like the idea Dev, but as has been mentioned, I think should become part of an in game player profile, perhaps along with info like player origin, languages spoken, a proper player rating system (as opposed to a game counter).

Could also lead to xp being used to provide a minimum or maximum limit for game access like badge is currently. (Eg, new players could set a low max limit to let them play with other new players, vets could set a high min limit for "vet only" games).

I have noticed that it is a very friendly minded bunch of people who populate these parts, old hands and green horns alike, would be cool to have a bit more connectivity if possible

yes we can make other functions based on this.
but in this topic lets talk about only XP and how we should calculate it.
all related ideas (eg. profile form, filtering joiners option) are very good but we need to discuss in a parallel new topic, and they are depend on this XP logic - so please open them in new topics - thanks!

thanks!

Cool
OK, looking at your seggestions Dev, I agree with most. I don't think xp should be gained for points scored either though...too much variation possible, for example a 20x20 map with few tcs would give many times less points than a big map with many tcs - one is not necessarily "better" experience than the other.

I think it should be harder to level up the higher your level though. Your examples show you need less xp points to gain a level as we go higher (after the first few levels) - I feel it should be the other way round, for example Lv 11 - 12 should require much much more xp than Lv 5-6.

Is there a way of tweaking multiplayer xp to take into consideration the number of opponents? Playing in a 6 way FFA should be more xp than a 1v1.

I also think the numbers should work out so that it is almost impossible to get max xp, ie only some of the longest and most regular players should be at max.

Is there anyway you can run a test programme of the values and apply it to players to see what levels would be achieved? That way we don't have to debate about exact values, just ideas.

PS - I love your continuous desire for improvement

i have only calulated if someone makes all campaign maps (in aos 350) with 3 stars it will be on about level 14.
making same amount of multiplayer games (about 300) will give you about extra 5-6 levels i think (depends of its length)

but reading this i feel we should give a little more XP per map won. seems too much to gain 20 000 XP for a level that means playing about 150 games. too much.

about 30-50 games should be imho.

so i would raise the XP gain to this:

xp earned by:
- completing campaign maps (1star: 100XP. 2 star:200XP 3star:350XP)
- competing achievements (various from 1-500XP)
- winning in multiplayer games (4XP / turn + 150XP for winning)
- losing in multiplayer games (4XP / turn, if got kicked than 0 XP)
- some xp based on the "points" earned in a game (i think we should not do this as many campaign maps/multiplayer skirmish maps give you points in game right on starting it by owning may units)
- opening daily gisfts (there can be a gift on one of the days that gives XP about 100XP)

update for lost campaign maps too
also maximum XP set (avoid cheating by playing for only xp)

xp earned by:
- completing campaign maps (2XP / turn maximum 200XP, 2 star:+100XP 3star:+250XP)
- losing campaign maps (2XP / turn maximum 200XP)
- competing achievements (various from 1-500XP)
- winning in multiplayer games (4XP / turn maximum 500XP + 150XP for winning)
- losing in multiplayer games (4XP / turn maximum 500XP, if got kicked than 0 XP)
- some xp based on the "points" earned in a game (i think we should not do this as many campaign maps/multiplayer skirmish maps give you points in game right on starting it by owning may units)
- opening daily gisfts (there can be a gift on one of the days that gives XP about 100XP)

with this setting on my AOS account:
Total maps that can give gems: about 360
i have 65 completed campaign maps
i reveived:
- total XP: 16 104 XP
- level: 8
- remaining XP for next level: 1 404 XP

so in average i got 247 XP for a completed campaign map

in AOW the same:
Total maps that can give gems: about 223
i have 31 completed campaign maps
i reveived:
- total XP: 7 600 XP
- level: 6
- remaining XP for next level: 800 XP

so in average i got 245 XP for a completed campaign map

in AOF the same:
Total maps that can give gems: about 366
i have 36 completed campaign maps
i reveived:
- total XP: 8 368 XP
- level: 6
- remaining XP for next level: 1 568 XP

so in average i got 232 XP for a completed campaign map



(remark: as there was a bug - that i have fixe now - that the turns needed was nor recorded with the completed map so i assumed the star limits to give for each map + the 100 or 250 XP bonus for the 2 or 3 stars described above.)

I feel like giving xp for turns played is kinda counterintuitive.
Xp formula probably has to be much more complicated.
To be truthful to skill earned it should account for number of players, number of AI, units destroyed, how fast it was won, units made, how long it took to loose, map size + in case of single player map difficulty and stars.

Starting conditions:
((1 + players enemy) /players allied)^player exp const
* ((1+ AI enemy)/(1+AI allied))^ai exp const
* number of map tiles / nominal map tiles const
It should account for initial position, but I have no idea how.
Player exponent const could be e.g. 1.8-2.0
Ai exponent const could be e.g. 1.2-1.5
Nominal map tiles const should be normalized size of map, e.g. by frequency of plays.
Starting conditions for single player maps could be calculated based on enemy factories, enemy tcs, player factories, player tcs, total tcs on map, starting units total costs (heroes/map editor units would have to be priced correctly then).
Game play :
Costs of units destroyed * destruction mod const
+ (Costs of units destroyed / costs of units produced ) * efficiency exp const
+ costs of unit produced * builder mod const
Ending:
Game won mod const
* (nominal turns/ number of game turns) ^ turns won exp const
+ Game lost mod const
* (Number of game turns / nominal turns) ^ turns lost exp const
+ Alliance won mod const
* (Nominal turns *2 / (number of game turns + average enemy turns to loose)) ^ alliance turns won exp const
+ Alliance lost mod const
* ((number of game turns + average turns to loose)/(2*nominal turns))^alliance turns lost exp const

Of course - to calculate current stats simplified formula could be used.
If data collected has to be reduced single player calcuations could be simplified too.

Thanks!

Actually i planned it to be
a) simple (easy to know how much it will give)
b) basically not measuring the "performance" of the player, but the experience he got (that is why it is ment to be measured in how many turns he played)

the number of opponents would be a good measure but is not so simple - as an opponent AI or human can start in a disadvantage if we talk about eg. multiplayer campaign, or built in cmpaign map.

but yes maybe could discuss it more and maííbe we can put into logic most of it.

Others - any other ideas to compile into the logic?

Even simplified the scale of the map should be counted somehow. One turn on small map with small number of units is not equivalent to one turn in huge map with huge number of units and fronts.
It's actually the same problem as with campaign maps gem rewards - the are too varied.

so eg. some gems per tiles played?

eg. 1 turn in 400 (20x20) map gives 4 XP than 1 turn in a 800 tile map gives 8xp?

so xp per turn is: mapsize/100 * 1 XP?

Sounds good to me Dev. (The idea, at least. For exact values of xp you obviously know in your head what you want to achieve with it so I will leave you to do the number crunching and tweaking in peace )

Is it also possible to apply that idea to number of players too, because similarly I believe a 6 way FFA is more experience worthy than a 1 on 1.

@stratego I think we need to define what level is for before deciding the curve of growth of level

If we want levels to provide some minor effects (some gems, free skins and such), each level should probably be reached after a linear growth (e.g. From 0 to 100 for every level and xp would be brought back to 0 after level up)

If level is gonna affecting game more it should be definitely have an esponential curve.

We might also go for a hybrid system (a linear increase every level up, like 100, 110, 120 and so on)

Xp should never be lost, only increased (any action should give xp but based on successd it should provide more or less)

Stratego (dev) wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2020 5:51 am xp earned by:
- losing campaign maps (2XP / turn maximum 200XP)

Will "losing" include "restart the map" ?