Currently, there are two models: one where only merits EARNED in the previous week count and are decayed, and one where merits TOTAL in the previous week count and decay.
The outcome of both of them is extremely different. Posts on the beta thread seem to suggest the merits earned are counted and decay, meaning roughly 5334 merits/week for getting/maintaining rating 5.
the 'total decay' proposed gives a much lower number to get and maintain rating 5 (albeit much longer to achieve).
the manual itself is useless in this regard, as it effectively states both: "Merits earned from previous cycles still count towards your rating at diminishing rates." "Your merit total from the previous cycle is halved then added to your current cycle value."
There's an erroneous "earned" in the first sentence or an absent 'earned' in the second. You didn't 'earn' the carryover in the previous cycle's timeframe, which is where the confusion stems from, as well as the numbers quoted seem to represent.
The outcome of both of them is extremely different. Posts on the beta thread seem to suggest the merits earned are counted and decay, meaning roughly 5334 merits/week for getting/maintaining rating 5.
the 'total decay' proposed gives a much lower number to get and maintain rating 5 (albeit much longer to achieve).
the manual itself is useless in this regard, as it effectively states both: "Merits earned from previous cycles still count towards your rating at diminishing rates." "Your merit total from the previous cycle is halved then added to your current cycle value."
There's an erroneous "earned" in the first sentence or an absent 'earned' in the second. You didn't 'earn' the carryover in the previous cycle's timeframe, which is where the confusion stems from, as well as the numbers quoted seem to represent.
