Quote Originally Posted by Gelesto View Post
During the course of a duty damage done, damage taken and effective healing (not overhealing) will be calculated awarding you with a grade at the end C, B, A and S.
Who is going to figure out what the threshold for these grades is, and how are they going to determine what it should be? You see wide fluctuations in expected DPS on different fights due to the mechanics of that fight and group composition (a SAM paired with BRD and AST is going to look a lot better than the same one pared with BLM and WHM on any DPS measurement scale). SE having to assign someone to come up with grading criteria for every new piece of content they add, without having large quantities of sample points to work with because it's new content.

That will be a significant ongoing expense any time new content is added, let alone if they wan't to give meaningful feedback on existing content when job mechanics change.

Now depending on your job these values will differ for example a MCH will not be weighed as heavily for damage to say a BLM or SAM each is taylored to the job much like the savage dummy challenges
So take the above cost and multiply by the number of jobs, because now you have to do it for all of them. Do we want SE developers doing this instead of working on game content or system improvements?

For healing as stated above effective healing (damage absorbed by shields also would count towards this) meaning no overheals would increase your "score"
But non-overhealing amounts are determined entirely by how much damage people take. A good group will require significantly less healing than a bad group, and thus in the good group a good healer will have less healing but more DPS than the exact same healer in a bad group. Grading how effectively healing is being done is a not-straightforward task. That gets even more true if you want to grade stuff like "did the AST use their cards correctly", because what does "correctly" mean in the context of a dungeon where the tank is undergeared and getting hammered, thus making extended Bole a great card?

So during the course of a dungeon you will generate invisible points for your contribution to the group and after the duty complete message you will recieve your grade card showing you what rank you got ( varies on job and duty naturally) showing people where they have room to improve ranks A, B and C or knowing you did well with a rank S, your grade is only viewable by yourself to stop abuse if you didnt meet certain expectations.

Perhaps include a rewards system to help enforce the idea that if your playing with people especially strangers that doing your best is best for all. C 1 point, B 2 points A 3 points with S granting 5 points possibly to spend on glamour items, minions, mounts, untradable consumables, titles etc

Any thoughts? Additions? would like to know what you all think, could it work or is it just another shower thought.
I think it's an overcomplicated way to try and get around the problem. An entirely new system needs to be built to mostly track something that's already trackable (DPS) and will require constant work because every time new content is added new scoring tiers will need to be added for every job.

It also doesn't address the problem that C is entirely satisfactory for a lot of people, and with no failure grade that'll cover someone who is trying but just doesn't understand their rotation, and the guy who thinks Jolt is the only spell that he should ever use even when there's 10 packs to AoE. Not to mention the guy who stands in stuff and dies 10 times.

Fundamentally, the content itself needs to give you the risk of failure in order to address this problem. I'd much rather see them introduce enrage timers in Doma Castle or even earlier, instead of letting people get by until it suddenly slaps them in the face at endgame.