Bring back cp ranking

Tibr wrote:

Everything most of you say sounds like "olympus is disadvantaged to erevos".
This isnt a topic about fair ranking anymore, this is about ex-olympus players feeling in inferior position, which is true (however it doesnt matter in few months anymore, but the ranking system will).

Sadly, both of them are tangled together, and even in a few months it will still matter. What happens when the publisher puts through his first actions and another server opens up? anyone going to go over? ofcourse not, the chances of getting screwed over are present once again. It sadly will leave a stain, for the length of time in which any olympus players remain active.

Tibr wrote:

The only vent ppl see is aether, so why dont you just ask about free aether for all olympus players

Aether doesn't even fit in my picture, it does not stimulate the growth of my armies xp level, or the level of buildings and amount of resources.

Tibr wrote:

(where the majority = darks won TWICE and on average have gotten MORE aether than pure erevos players ...)

Olympus darksides guilds put its head together, and won the game two times by playing strategically, which would be a totally different story. And again, aether doesn't compensate for the huge lack of resources and levels of buildings missing.

Tibr wrote:

Seriously the only ppl who have the right to put their discomfort into an argument are the olympus light players who got the least aether of all represented "groups".

which is rather biased, since several people on the light side used a seccond account (from erevos - to olympus).

Tibr wrote:

Please stop making it about aether and construct your argument on "how does a fair ranking system looks like"

I agree with you about the aether, yet I fail to see any mentioning of aether. Seccondly, most fair ranking systems taking in the players fame into account, will fail to work due to olympus players still feeling screwed over.

soulthief wrote:

Then why did we lose all our fame when we went to Olympus?

Come on now.


ST

You are referring to a one time mechanism called "Migrate" back then, when the users were informed that they could migrate to a brand new world, but that would mean that they would have to start a new account. The players were well aware of what that meant and we added 2 fail safes to protect the player from doing it in a rush.

1. Final confirmation explaining that he is starting completely from the beginning

2. By adding a text req which the player had to type and click on Ok to proceed

The flaw is I had to give up 50k fame when I went from BC1 to Olympus. I have never got that fame back.

Those who simply came from BC1 to Hades brought there fame with them intact. For me that is the rub. And I have been play for a god long while.

ST

Okay Rune,


I can not seem to make my point and this horse is dead, do as you will.

ST

RuneSlayer wrote:

There is no Gems purchase of CP.

Oh, you're right. But fame buys aether... wanna ask players whats better, gems or aether?


And Rune, just for the case, here's the all explonation. In case you didn't saw, just to be sure. Wanna explain what you have to tell on Andy's post?

Anduin wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

Taters....the system was just CP, everybody complained.

The system became fairer, as I explained above...everybody complains.

How is this more fair?  Who complained?  I didn't hear any complaints before - I do now though.

The older players who have more developed cities reap the benefits of their efforts by generating more CP per battle and having tons of GLs.  Fame in this case acts as an additional modifier to keep lazy players on top of more active players who play your game.

Those of us who have less developed cities and unmaxed armies already have to work harder to generate the same amount of CP.  Why penalize us further?

Rankings should be decided by how much effort players put into the war.

Why should a lazy vet automatically be placed ahead of a very active player who is actively generating tons of CP?

And what are you doing it right now is adding Olympus to Erevos, not merging 2 worlds. I'm clapping, sarcastic.

RuneSlayer wrote:

soulthief wrote:

Then why did we lose all our fame when we went to Olympus?

Come on now.


ST

You are referring to a one time mechanism called "Migrate" back then, when the users were informed that they could migrate to a brand new world, but that would mean that they would have to start a new account. The players were well aware of what that meant and we added 2 fail safes to protect the player from doing it in a rush.

1. Final confirmation explaining that he is starting completely from the beginning

2. By adding a text req which the player had to type and click on Ok to proceed

Yes we all know. But the image created by the developers, was that this new server wasn't going to be temporarily, but a permanent option. Now, what is it? two months? we get tossed back to where we came from, even though it has a few improvements, it feels like a setback to most players. But, then again, we could start a new topic on this, its already up and running....

http://www.battleconforum.com/t2093-compensation-for-comparative-progress-on-olympus-vs-erevos

Taters wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

Taters....the system was just CP, everybody complained.

Who? Where? I never noticed such a thing.

Everyone (in faction chat at least) was happy about it.

I would still like the answer to that. Beside Tibr and Piktas I can't remember seeing anyone else being unhappy with pure CP ranking. Is that majority for you? Look at this thread - how many people is defending the fame system? 1? 2?
Way to go. Stubborn as usual.

*Grumpy Taters*

My opinion may not matter, but +1 for bringing cp ratings back. And to settle all of this why don't we be civil and just do a poll instead of taking shots at each other?

I have created a poll for this matter.

I have locked this thread as the poll will determine the Ranking System.