Ac's Fire Emblem MVP system

[Acanous]

The purpose of this system is to help GMs and players in Fire Emblem games calculate who the MVP (Most Valuable Player) is in any given map.
MVP rating is not important mechanically, but is a good measurement of what units are performing well, and what tactics employed in a map favor a certain unit.

MVP calculations are made at the END of a map, and the formula is intended to gauge not who did the most damage, or tanked the best (Although that does factor in)- that should be self-apparent from merely watching the map play.
The MVP system also measures who improved the most, or was the most useful out-of-combat.

That said, here is the (5th) draft of Ac's MVP system.

Step one: Tally how many times the unit was in combat this map. Include attacks against broken walls, logs, or other terrain features in this number.
Include turns spent healing another character, or any other attack-equivalent action.
Divide this number by the number of turns before map completion.
This number is never fractional. Always round up. Add this number to the unit's MVP score.

Step two: Tally how many relevant tactical out-of-combat actions the character performed. This does not include movement or trading, but does include opening locked doors, chests, rescuing other characters (But not dropping them), healing status conditions such as Berserk, Sleep, and Poison*, a Bard or Dancer using Special abilities, and disarming traps.
Add this number to the unit's MVP score.

Step three: Calculate how much damage the character dealt this map. For priests and other healing classes, count the ammount of HP healed as damage dealt.
Only count actual damage, do not count overkill.
If the unit is tier one (Pre-promotion), divide this number by 10. If the unit is tier two (post-promotion), divide this number by twenty. For games with multiple promotions, add 10 to the dividend each promotion. (30 at tier 3, 40 at tier 4, so on)
This number is never fractional. Always round up.
Add this number to the unit's MVP score.

Step Four: Account for the ammount of XP gained since the beginning of the map. Divide this number by 100. This number is never fractional. Always round up. Add this number to the unit's MVP score.

Step five:, account for the ammount of damage the unit has taken. Divide this number by 10. This number is never fractional. Always round up.
Subtract this number from the unit's MVP score.

But Ac! If the unit is taking damage, doesn't that mean they are contribuiting to combat? Shouldn't we ADD this number?

No. Stats like SPD and DEF decrease the ammount of damage taken, and certain tactical plays can cause a unit to deal damage while recieving none. HP is a cushion, a tactical security blanket. Grinding damage TAKEN should not increase MVP rating.
If a unit is tanking, they already recieve points for 1: Being in a combat, and 2: dealing damage. Characters specced to tank will take less, or none. Thus, if you are playing a Knight, you should have little to fear by playing in your intended role. If you are a Myrmidon, however, you are not getting points for being closer to death.


Finally: If the character was incapacitated or killed during the map, subtract two from the MVP score.
If, in your game, characters can be revived in-map, and a character dies multiple times, subtract two each time.

Tally each character's MVP score seperately, and compare them. The character with the highest score is this map's MVP.

---In case of a Tie, first, examine the actual numbers in reverse order.
-If one player was incapacitated and the other is still standing, the standing unit takes MVP. If both are still up (or both are down), move on to check damage taken.

The player with lower total damage taken would be MVP. If both have same damage taken, move on to check XP gained. If they gained identical XP ammounts, check Damage Dealt.

If damage dealt is ALSO identical, check tactical actions.
If both are tied here, finally, check combat actions.
If you get to this step and both are still identical, the character with the lower total experience at the beginning of the map takes MVP.
If, somehow, both characters are still at identical levels, you've been playing the system and both can share MVP status, you cheater.


*Healing status effects also counts as a combat action and contributes XP. These are also counted seperately in their respective columns. While this could be abuseable to get MVP for a healer, in a map where the enemies are spamming status effects, he was probably going to get it anyway 0.o
------

Thoughts? Suggestions?

[Acanous]

For example, here's a rundown of Map 1 of Sairyu's Fire Emblem: Close Horizons.

Aramel:

Combat Actions: (9/13 round up to nearewst whole) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: (2 visits, 1 seize) 3
Damage Dealt: (91/10, round up to nearest whole) 10
XP gained: (122/100, round up to nearest whole) 2
-Damage Taken: (13/10, round up to nearest whole) 2

Total: 14

Nina:

Combat Actions: (7/13 round up to nearest whole) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: 1
Damage Dealt: (89/10, round up to nearest whole) 9
XP Gained: (111/100, round up to nearest whole) 2
-Damage Taken: 0.

Total: 13

Lloyd

Combat Actions: (9/13, round up to nearest whole) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: 1
Damage Dealt: (43/10, round up to nearest whole) 4
XP Gained: (123/100, round up to nearest whole) 2
-Damage Taken: (36/10, round up to nearest whole) 4
-Defeated: 2

Total: 2

Roland

Combat Actions: (8/13, round up to nearest whole) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: 1
Damage Dealt: (64/10, round up to nearest whole) 7
XP Gained: (111/100, round up to nearest whole) 2
-Damage Taken: (8/10, round up to nearest whole) 1

Total: 10

Nain:

Combat Actions: (10/13 round up) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: 1
Damage Dealt: (48/10 Round up) 5
XP Gained: (123/100 round up) 2
-Damage Taken: (10/10) 1

Total: 8

Imeena:

Combat Actions: (10/13, round up) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: 0
Damage Dealt: (82/10, round up) 9
XP Gained: (199/100 round up) 2
-Damage Taken: (19/10, round up) 2

Total: 10

Callum:

Combat Actions: (2/13, round up) 1
Tactically Relevant actions: 0
Damage Dealt: (8/10, round up) 1
XP Gained: (111/100, round up) 2
-Damage Taken: (16/10, round up) 2

Total: 2

So the MVP of Close Horizons Map 1 would be Aramel. The winning point in his favor was seizing the map objective.

[Illven]

I dis-agree on the subtracting points for hp damage. That can be useful.

For instance if no one ever takes damage, then the healers never get xp.

[Garryl]

Unless you're being fed extra turns by a bard/dancer, combat actions will always be 1 (or 0 if you do absolutely nothing during the map, I suppose) as you can't do more than one combat action per turn.

The current setup seems like a gross oversimplification. It also fails to recognize important tactics such as feeding (reducing enemies to low hp without killing them so weaker allies can kill for the greater xp), buffing a status removal/infliction, jeigan taunting (I don't think there's a proper term for this; no weapon and a very high defense to draw tons of attacks without killing the attackers or breaking weapons, letting weaker allies remain unattacked and later feed off of the distracted enemies), transporting (rescue and carry a unit across a long distance over multiple turns), and pony express (like transporting but with multiple cantoing units to take a unit an even larger distance over a single turn).

Also, remember that a unit at 1 hp at the end of the map is exactly as good as one at full hp. As such, even if you decide that taking damage should apply a penalty, any damage less than the unit's max hp shouldn't count.

[Acanous]

Combat actions include enemies attacking you, so you CAN end up with 2-3 in the "Combat actions" category.
I wanted to devalue how often you act for how much your actions count, though- so doing more in a combat counts for more than just being attacked.

Still, you can get bonus points that way.

As far as "Reducing enemy HP", that's accounted for. "Lower level units gaining XP" is also accounted for, albeit both don't go to the same unit.

I addressed Rescuing in the "Tactical Actions" portion. You do get a point for a rescue. This IS assuming that the rescue has an actual point to it (IE Pony Express, or saving a weak unit from an incap), but can be abused.

Really, most of that is a Tactician thing, this is intended to measure the contributions of each individual unit. The status-effect thing is a good point, though. I'm unsure how much it should count.

[Illven]

Combat actions include enemies attacking you, so you CAN end up with 2-3 in the "Combat actions" category.
I wanted to devalue how often you act for how much your actions count, though- so doing more in a combat counts for more than just being attacked.

Still, you can get bonus points that way.

As far as "Reducing enemy HP", that's accounted for. "Lower level units gaining XP" is also accounted for, albeit both don't go to the same unit.

I addressed Rescuing in the "Tactical Actions" portion. You do get a point for a rescue. This IS assuming that the rescue has an actual point to it (IE Pony Express, or saving a weak unit from an incap), but can be abused.

Really, most of that is a Tactician thing, this is intended to measure the contributions of each individual unit. The status-effect thing is a good point, though. I'm unsure how much it should count.

But wouldn't letting a character get damaged so a healer could heal them benefit the other members of the team?

[Acanous]

Yes, it benefits the OTHER members of the team. They get the points.
You don't get points for the other character healing you, he gets those points.

You lose points for taking damage in direct concert with how much damage you take. A few points in order to feed another character isn't going to kill your rating. Heck, if you deal damage to the thing that hit you, you're gaining twice and losing once (Combat action off-turn, damage dealt -damage taken)
So long as you don't get in a situation where you're taking more than you're dealing.

And if you're using your turns to feed, and not to win the map or claim objectives, you're not really being the most valuable player.

You're taking one for the team at that point.

[Illven]

Yes, it benefits the OTHER members of the team. They get the points.
You don't get points for the other character healing you, he gets those points.

You lose points for taking damage in direct concert with how much damage you take. A few points in order to feed another character isn't going to kill your rating. Heck, if you deal damage to the thing that hit you, you're gaining twice and losing once (Combat action off-turn, damage dealt -damage taken)
So long as you don't get in a situation where you're taking more than you're dealing.

And if you're using your turns to feed, and not to win the map or claim objectives, you're not really being the most valuable player.

You're taking one for the team at that point.

Wouldn't the Most valuable player be the one helping his or her team the most. Like the one getting hit so the healer can heal him or her for xp.

[Sairyu]

Getting hurt so that a staff user can grind for EXP/proficiencies isn't a method of 'helping' your team; it's a way of sandbagging for EXP. It has no effect on the completion of a map, tying up resources (the PC deliberately taking damage, the staff-user in question) and putting the desposal of enemies (the unit being used for the sandbagging) on hold.

In short, it has no merit as a consideration for MVP.



Edit: Doing this doesn't help the team finish the map at all; why would it lead to an MVP? Besides think about it, it's silly - when does 'MVP' ever equate to "got hit the most"? That's more the realm of the 'you tried hard' award.

[Acanous]

So I've decided that removal of status effects should count for a point, much like visiting a house. It equates to 10 HP damage healed, as well, which is roughly standard for the ammount a Poisoned unit would take (in FE games where it's rolled and not a % of total HP, anyhow. May need to be adjusted up in games where it deals more). Sleep/Berserk should be worth about 1 as well. This one's a little more up in the air, though, as both those conditions can REALLY screw you, or just be a minor inconveniance.

I'll have to give it a test run on a map where healing status is a thing. Suggestions on how to handle this are welcome.

Also:

Also, remember that a unit at 1 hp at the end of the map is exactly as good as one at full hp. As such, even if you decide that taking damage should apply a penalty, any damage less than the unit's max hp shouldn't count.

This is a factor, but remember that on any turn prior to completion, any damage a unit takes reduces his tactical value. You are at more risk with less HP in the same situation. Your teammates will have to draw fire and/or heal you in order to make up for your lost combat-effectiveness.
Units intended to tank have high DEF, so take considerably less (even 0) damage.

Your earlier point about bard/dancers has made me think. Changes incoming!

...A Bard or Dancer is going to be hard-pressed to make MVP, much like a healer. The only time it would be easier for them is if they have Gladrir that effect multiple characters.
This, however, is identical to the MVP ranking in the games where MVP appears (Path of Radiance/Radiant Dawn) so while an imbalance against such support characters exists, I am unsure if it should be changed.

[Illven]

Getting hurt so that a staff user can grind for EXP/proficiencies isn't a method of 'helping' your team; it's a way of sandbagging for EXP. It has no effect on the completion of a map, tying up resources (the PC deliberately taking damage, the staff-user in question) and putting the desposal of enemies (the unit being used for the sandbagging) on hold.

In short, it has no merit as a consideration for MVP.



Edit: Doing this doesn't help the team finish the map at all; why would it lead to an MVP? Besides think about it, it's silly - when does 'MVP' ever equate to "got hit the most"? That's more the realm of the 'you tried hard' award.

But it does help the team. If two moves have the same result, but one gives the healer x amount more xp, how is the first one superior to the second one.

The second one gives the healer a part of a level, and enough of it will allow the healer to level up, usually resulting in allowing the healer to heal more, reach further with ranged staffs, and survive slightly better. This helps the team finish maps, as the healer can take slightly less punishment.

[Acanous]

But it does help the team. If two moves have the same result, but one gives the healer x amount more xp, how is the first one superior to the second one.

The second one gives the healer a part of a level, and enough of it will allow the healer to level up, usually resulting in allowing the healer to heal more, reach further with ranged staffs, and survive slightly better. This helps the team finish maps, as the healer can take slightly less punishment.

In that situation, though, the healer is getting MVP points. The character taking the beats gets some, and loses some to damage (Usually a net gain, unless you're putting vulnerable units at risk) while in the second plan, the healer does not progress and thus does not gain MVP points.

The plan in total would, perhaps, make a better tactical play, but that's a tactician rating thing, not a measure of an individual unit's contribution.

[Illven]

In that situation, though, the healer is getting MVP points. The character taking the beats gets some, and loses some to damage (Usually a net gain, unless you're putting vulnerable units at risk) while in the second plan, the healer does not progress and thus does not gain MVP points.

The plan in total would, perhaps, make a better tactical play, but that's a tactician rating thing, not a measure of an individual unit's contribution.

But the person shouldn't be losing any to damage is what I'm saying.

That character is getting penalized for helping out another character. That doesn't scream MVP to me.

[Acanous]

But that tactic does not favor the unit being penalized, it favors the unit being fed.
If units were not penalized for taking damage, then headlong rushes into mass combat would be the only way to get MVP status, which puts the healers further behind the curve.
The Damage Dealt is mitigated by damage recieved, so it rewards intelligent play in combat, instead of just rewarding combat in general.

Further, the Feeding lower level characters is a problem, but one that's already being accounted for. If a lowbie mosquito-bites the last HP of an enemy unit every time, they will get a lot of XP and take no damage. The XP counts (/100) but the actual combat value is only 1 HP each time. This is all added together then /10, so if you have say a lv 1 unit in a lv 6 map who feeds 10 times, he'll get 1 point from combat and 3 from XP.

The person feeding him will be getting the points from attack damage, mitigated by damage returned (Which, if you're playing well, should still favor the PC unit).
If he was getting the Kill XP, he'd be doing slightly better (Showing that "This tactic favors this character") but it's not a huge difference unless you sandbag. If you DO sandbag, you're really not being the MVP.

[Illven]

But that tactic does not favor the unit being penalized, it favors the unit being fed.
If units were not penalized for taking damage, then headlong rushes into mass combat would be the only way to get MVP status, which puts the healers further behind the curve.
The Damage Dealt is mitigated by damage recieved, so it rewards intelligent play in combat, instead of just rewarding combat in general.

Further, the Feeding lower level characters is a problem, but one that's already being accounted for. If a lowbie mosquito-bites the last HP of an enemy unit every time, they will get a lot of XP and take no damage. The XP counts (/100) but the actual combat value is only 1 HP each time. This is all added together then /10, so if you have say a lv 1 unit in a lv 6 map who feeds 10 times, he'll get 1 point from combat and 3 from XP.

The person feeding him will be getting the points from attack damage, mitigated by damage returned (Which, if you're playing well, should still favor the PC unit).
If he was getting the Kill XP, he'd be doing slightly better (Showing that "This tactic favors this character") but it's not a huge difference unless you sandbag. If you DO sandbag, you're really not being the MVP.

Okay, I'm looking at MVP as doing the most for the team. You seem to have a different view.

[Acanous]

Okay, I'm looking at MVP as doing the most for the team. You seem to have a different view.

indeed

MVP rating is not important mechanically, but is a good measurement of what units are performing well, and what tactics employed in a map favor a certain unit.


It's a measurement of unit performance, on the current map only. It does not account for maps to follow, nor does it make allowance for characters who enter part-way through.
The unit that contributes the most *On the current map* is the MVP *for that map*.
It's actually hard to remain MVP for a stretch of maps in sequence, partly because 1: You start Jeiganing, so folks don't want your unit fed, and 2: once you promote, your standard increases. Other units' standards do not.

Does that make more sense?

[Illven]

indeed

It's a measurement of unit performance, on the current map only. It does not account for maps to follow, nor does it make allowance for characters who enter part-way through.
The unit that contributes the most *On the current map* is the MVP *for that map*.
It's actually hard to remain MVP for a stretch of maps in sequence, partly because 1: You start Jeiganing, so folks don't want your unit fed, and 2: once you promote, your standard increases. Other units' standards do not.

Does that make more sense?

Maybe, make a MVP for the entire game :smalltongue:

[Acanous]

Maybe, make a MVP for the entire game :smalltongue:

I'll start working on that once I get the per-map one finished :p

Plus I've got Tactician rating to work on XD

[Sairyu]

I've got tactician ratings for CH in my head. Do you want'em?

[Acanous]

sure. It might help.

[Sairyu]

Rated out of 5 [maximum].

Main Story
Map 1
{table]Category|Target|Actual|Stars
Tactics|11|12|****
Funds|+9000/+1000|+9000/+1000|*****
Survivability|0|0|***
Experience|100|111|*****
Combat|40%|18/52 (34.6%)|****[/table]
Overall: **** (4.2/5)

Notes: Funds are listed as item value/gold value.

Map 2
{table]Category|Target|Actual|Stars
Tactics|- (13)|- (13)|*****
Funds|+4740/0|0/0|-
Survivability|0|1|***
Experience|200|152 (195)|****
Combat|30%|15/40 (37.5%)|*****[/table]
Overall: *** (3.4/5)

Notes: EXP score weighted down by new recruits coming in at M1 party average late in the map; actual value is 195.

Map 3
{table]Category|Target|Actual|Stars
Tactics|15|13|*****
Funds|+1600/+1500|+1600/+1500|*****
Survivability|0|0|*****
Experience|200|200|*****
Combat|30%|19/48 (39.6%)|*****[/table]
Overall: ***** (5)

Notes: EXP was adjusted down (-50) due to two characters leaving the party and to account for the three new recruits that map.

Map 4
{table]Category|Target|Actual|Stars
Tactics|35|47|*
Funds|+~18000/+7000|+~11000/+1000|-
Survivability|0|6|-
Experience|400|395|****
Combat|35%|-|- ~***[/table]
Overall: * (1.6)

Notes: Combat is an estimated value; regardless, the group would have lost a lot of combat rating from all the KO-s taken that map so I believe that 3-stars is a fair value.
Side
Map 3X: Incomplete

Big Trouble in Little Stora!: Failed
{table]Category|Target|Actual|Stars
Tactics|10|failed (2)|-
Funds|+3000/+2000|+500/-|-
Survivability|0|lord KO'd|-
Experience|100|40.5|-
Combat|30%|4/6+3 (44.4%)|***** [/table]
Overall: * (1)

Overall tactician rating (not a cumulative sum): ***

[Acanous]

I can get the money thing, and incaps should always (theoretically) be counted as 0, the Experience can be done as (Enemies on map*Average Level)-(Players on map*Average level) or somesuch, but the tactics/turns to completion will need to be adjusted by the DM on a per-map basis.