New Ranking System

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

Posts : 131 Join date : 2013-11-10

RuneSlayer wrote:: We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

how would the rewards and quests work? what can one earn from the quests?
fame, since this is limited?

and will we then split the fame into an olympus and erevos gained fame?

Posts : 3124 Join date : 2012-11-13

Wave_Rida wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:: We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

how would the rewards and quests work? what can one earn from the quests?
fame, since this is limited?

and will we then split the fame into an olympus and erevos gained fame?

As they work right now, though instead of Fame they can give additional CP.

There is no Olympus and Erevos anymore, only one world...Hades

Posts : 698 Join date : 2013-08-21

Do you have data for lifetime CP contribution that could be added into the ranking? Also, consider that building walls is a counter CP process equal to the actual CP generating. Guess who is paying for walls more .. the one who needs his res for cities or the one who have things to spare? You will never have a fair ranking with purely CP, there are more factors at hand to make it that simple. As for aether and stuff, how about we keep two rankings .. a hall of fame with lifetime performance and the ranking that matters only for current cycle?

Posts : 124 Join date : 2013-11-10

Piktas wrote:: Way to miss the point entirely. CP should be the most important factor that is unquestionable. But denying the EFFORT people have put in to build up their cities is no where close to honest and reasonable rankings. Also not to mention that an active player will always outrun a casual vet. No one will see the capitals fall anytime soon so you will have plenty of time to change the rankings with actual effort that you speak of.

I think you're the one who missed the point. The effort you put into your city you already get back in the form of increased CP. Veteran players are able to generate more CP per battle than a noob. Veteran players are able to win battles much faster because of godlikes. Veteran players can reach the same CP numbers as a noob with much less effort. The mechanism for rewarding the "effort" of upgrading is already there.

As for how fast the capital will fall, that's something that's hard to say. It's clear that the light side has a massive CP advantage.

Posts : 131 Join date : 2013-11-10

RuneSlayer wrote:

Wave_Rida wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:: We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

how would the rewards and quests work? what can one earn from the quests?
fame, since this is limited?

and will we then split the fame into an olympus and erevos gained fame?

As they work right now, though instead of Fame they can give additional CP.

There is no Olympus and Erevos anymore, only one world...Hades

which means we will be comparing yen with euro's regarding fame, which I render, is still pointless, and therefore I vote no to any fame induced ranking, until this matter is fixed.

Posts : 121 Join date : 2013-10-03

I could live with that Rune, still it could be done better.

Players who play a long time (aka represented by fame) should get their part of a cake, even they didn't do any CPs.

Because there's 2 worlds with big history differences it's inpossible to make everything fair, but just pick what is the fairest as possible. Or just separate worlds again, haha.

Posts : 93 Join date : 2013-11-07

agree with Anduin, cps and Aktivity should be rewarded .
(voted for cps only)

fame or city-points are fine to see how long a player might been part of the game..and to compare this with the cps, that player has..

but still cps rules,it shows who is aktiv (guilds\players)..and the cps maker are those who move the game forward..playing farmville\simcity dont defeat a capital or even a hex\region..

i allready talked a lot to piktas on our different opinions and dont wanna forward it in here,people can have own points of view..

And dont wanna talk about everos\olympus even if it matters, cose even without that they are enough reasons for me to vote for a ranking system based on cps.

about the "veteran" thing..As veteran u can have tittles from old worlds like demigod,legend,champion ect..to show everybody that u are a veteran,its not needed to trash the rankings for this.

so i hope this vote will help and show how people see it

greetings

Posts : 451 Join date : 2013-05-26

RuneSlayer wrote:: We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

That would be perfect for me Smile

I hope for guilds and guilds member such option will appear too.

The Unyielding Posts : 802 Join date : 2013-05-31

Rune wrote:: There is no Olympus and Erevos anymore, only one world...Hades

everything concerned by fame, still hurt Olympus players because of different costs/effort to build up.

(oh and highest by cps dark guild is almost entirely olympus-based, and seems that their fame and lowish ranking doesn't prevent them from being powerful ;p By cps, yea we're equal on bc3, but by fame..? I alone could count for 25% of total guild's fame. talk about fair. boring!) Sleep

Which ranking/sorting is primary? Some people will want cps, some will want fame. More prefer to see cps as first, it seems.

Which is in guild? Both? In guild view, the cp-only worked so damn well.

tommarkc wrote:: Players who play a long time (aka represented by fame) should get their part of a cake, even they didn't do any CPs

hm, as secondary option? and tsk, talking like a builder.

Tibr wrote:: You will never have a fair ranking with purely CP

if one of the rankings/options, ofc it's fair. Even aether - you get stuff based on how you performed on the last map.

Would be fun to see lifetime stats though.

Posts : 1043 Join date : 2013-07-09 Age : 42

I voted for ranking purely on cps. Great points Anduin. I would like to put it in example. A veteran can make 160 cps in 10 minutes. If a noob makes around 10 cps every 10 minutes(I know there is Fast Forward and battles don't last that long) It would take that noob 16 battles to get the same cp as the veteran. So 160 minutes or 2 hours and 40 minutes. And then if that same veteran did suicides for that 2 hours and 40 minutes they would have 2560 conquest points. And then the time stacks up again for that noob. Not sure why you are complaining about veterans not having the upperhand.

Posts : 19 Join date : 2014-03-24

This is BATTLE Conquest, rewards should be based on battle. Raise the cap for CP being gained on the harder levels with the better armies that will give those who have spent more time building bigger armies an advantage.

As for the complaint of losing everything for those who moved to Olympus to help start it. Do you still have backups of Erevos before Olympus was opened? Any way to give a credit of materials or adjustment in building levels for what was built before the transfer? Any way to make a material adjustment for the difference in cost between the two servers? Something that gives everyone credit for all their time in the game?

Not trying to give you more headaches, but just some thought of making an even playing field. I do like your suggestion of being able to sort by CP or Fame.

Posts : 511 Join date : 2013-05-08 Location : Amber Shores

Steinhund wrote:: And dont wanna talk about everos\olympus even if it matters, cose even without that they are enough reasons for me to vote for a ranking system based on cps.

This whole mess is because of lost progress for olympians. IF you don't wnat to talk about it then you shouldnt have even voted.

Steinhund wrote:: 'about the "veteran" thing..As veteran u can have tittles from old worlds like demigod,legend,champion ect..to show everybody that u are a veteran,its not needed to trash the rankings for this.

oh the irony... cp 100% is the definition of trashing the rankings.

Scaren wrote:: I voted for ranking purely on cps. Great points Anduin. I would like to put it in example. A veteran can make 160 cps in 10 minutes. If a noob makes around 10 cps every 10 minutes(I know there is Fast Forward and battles don't last that long) It would take that noob 16 battles to get the same cp as the veteran. So 160 minutes or 2 hours and 40 minutes. And then if that same veteran did suicides for that 2 hours and 40 minutes they would have 2560 conquest points. And then the time stacks up again for that noob. Not sure why you are complaining about veterans not having the upperhand.

Comparing extremes? Why don't you talk about how when a player reaches the 160 cap he is still like twice as small as a really bug player? So all that extra invested time and res is completely useless. What you have described there is how it should be. noobs aren't supposed to dish out the same damage as a person with a well developed city.

Seriously... you guys are looking at it like it's all or nothing. There needs to be a balance. Stop going into extremes.

RuneSlayer wrote:: We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

This would be closer to an ideal situation, yes.

Posts : 131 Join date : 2013-11-10

Coridise wrote:: As for the complaint of losing everything for those who moved to Olympus to help start it. Do you still have backups of Erevos before Olympus was opened? Any way to give a credit of materials or adjustment in building levels for what was built before the transfer? Any way to make a material adjustment for the difference in cost between the two servers? Something that gives everyone credit for all their time in the game?

I presume the developers will have cleared all old account data regarding erevos, seeing that olympus and erevos have already gone. IF not, this would be a great option to provide fair credit.

Seccondly, it seems this issue first has to get onto the developement table, before we can even talk compensation, since the only response has been so far that olympus and erevos dont exist anymore....

Posts : 124 Join date : 2013-11-10

RuneSlayer wrote:: How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

If the biggest aether rewards go to those who earn the most CP, that would certainly satisfy me.

Beyond that, the ability to switch between CP rankings and fame rankings would be great, as we value CP more than fame in our guild Razz

Piktas wrote:: This whole mess is because of lost progress for olympians. IF you don't wnat to talk about it then you shouldnt have even voted.

This is not an Olympus vs Erevos issue. This is an active undeveloped player vs inactive veteran issue.

Posts : 93 Join date : 2013-11-07

@piktas

seriusly pik i absolutly disagree with u,but dont wanna argue about it.

btw in my point of view its the ironie that the ranking how it is now is 100% trash
(and cps only was the best option not only in rankings also in guild..to see who is aktiv)

and just as example veterans can have so much high lv units\equip that they dont have to wait 4 healing\repairing and can split their armie to make more and faster cps while others are waiting\healing..

so we agree that we disagree and thats it.

----

RuneSlayer wrote:
We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

>>>that idea is not bad at all...and would probably work for most people

Posts : 511 Join date : 2013-05-08 Location : Amber Shores

Steinhund wrote:: so we agree that we disagree and thats it.

Posts : 3 Join date : 2014-03-24

RuneSlayer wrote:: We have already added the option to the player to click on the "CP" icon and the "Fame" icon and Rankings will sort accordingly. (not live yet, didn't have time to add it to today's update)

You click on CP, and then you see the Rankings comparing CP.

You click on Fame, and then you see the Rankings comparing Fame (Building lvls and Tech lvls).

How about we keep Fame (only building lvls and tech lvls) and CP (100%) in the Rankings, allowing players to sort Rankings as explained above, and have CP the only req for Aether rewards.

Would that satisfy everybody?

My two cents. Yes, this would satisfy me. You can change the rankings based on CP or fame, but have CP as the only req for Aether Rewards, and the bonus aether for being in the top 100+ be based on CP.

Posts : 830 Join date : 2013-08-23 Location : Australia

I think your last suggestion is perfect RuneSlayer.

I feel sorry for you. Always trying so hard to please everyone, an ever impossible task.

People demand a change, so you make it.
Then other people complain you made the change and demand you change it back.
Poor Devs! :\

Posts : 103 Join date : 2013-10-28

XViper wrote:: I think your last suggestion is perfect RuneSlayer.

I agree, it seems an amicable solution.

Posts : 11 Join date : 2013-12-20

Hello all,

Letting the community decide is a great idea, however..........if the poll totals for "CP only" are say 100 for arguments sake, and the total for the last 4 options total 105.....that should be a clear indicator that the majority want some sort of combination of CP and Building/Research to put in place. Declaring a poll winner by which single option has the most votes would be wrong in this case. Just my 2 cents. Peace.........Paddy.

Posts : 1 Join date : 2014-03-24

This is the first time i am posting despite reading the forums regularly. I understand the arguments that having spent time to develope your city you should be rewarded, but having only just started this game a couple of months back on Olympus I have a slightly different perspective about how far behind new players are. Based on CP alone I was considered in the top 50 players, with combo as it stands I'm over 800. So despite my efforts I wont be rewarded at all. This discourages me from trying to play, and this is how new players will see the game. I have no problem incorporating city fame into a ranking system but as it stands my fame from city is around 1500 while top players have around 30k. I can't make up that gap in 2 months no matter how active i am. as it stands i would need to accumulate around 140k CP just to be equal footing to someone with a high city score who doesn't even play. at 50 cp a battle thats almost 15k battles just to be on an even footing to someone not playing anymore. I know as I level my cp will increase but even at 100 cp a battle thats 7k battles. If you want city fame to count maybe at 1/4 city fame to 1 cp I would vote for it. I mean thats only a 200 battles behind a non player.

Posts : 830 Join date : 2013-08-23 Location : Australia

CP generation overtakes City Score incredibly fast.
City Score will only affect the rankings near the start of the match. Those with big cities who don't fight much will soon be knocked down the rankings VERY quickly.

Posts : 698 Join date : 2013-08-21

We would all benefit from a fair system. The longer i think about it the more i favor a two ranking solution. One for lifetime performance, a sort of "hall of heroes" and one for current cycle. The hall of heroes should sum up all contribution a player has made to the game over his whole time he was playing. The current cycle ranking should determine the aether rewards and only display current performance and impact on the winning process.

While there is no need to argue about CP being the most important factor, it seems not everyone shares the view that wealth and city progress have a signficant impact too. Let me elaborate a little.
We have a wall system in place that is absorbing about 500 CP per level, thus reducing enemy sides CP generation. So by logic building a wall and generating CP is equal and both have a tremendous effect on the game outcome. As an example remember Joyce. She was spending a lot of coin to support the game and also building a lot of walls, literally hundreds, out of own pocket. While it is rare to track down one players influence with structures, here it is very obvious.

The tendency is clear - players who have played a lot and do not need to invest into their city are the ones donating resources to build walls in the first place. I can speak about CK and i am very confident to say that literally millions of resources or about 75% of all donations can be tracked down to less than 5 players. I can tell you that CK has spent millions of resources supporting other guilds so they can build walls on the front.

I can also say that during the game cycle where erevos won, the capital was taken down by only 15 players - those veterans who were able to do and win suicides at all. This is an example where players could idle over the whole cycle and barely play, but when the final push comes the faction may not be able to win without them. So again total CP cannot be regarded that simple because the effect of only 20k suicide/pvp CP on the capital easily outweights 100k coop CP.

Now let us think into the future. Mechanics that have been announced are - guild controlled capital armies that you fund and raise and upgrade with resources. Bribing neutral factions. Both mechanics will most likely come in place within this game cycle. Again we have a tendency who will be the ones to spend their resources on this, the players that struggle to build their city or the ones who dont. Certainly there are players like soulthief/joyce who invest a lot and support the game, and honestly i dont see any reason to not give them a slight advantage in ranking because of that. Their impact with funding neutral CP or CP counter is not less important that regular players CP generation.

Posts : 830 Join date : 2013-08-23 Location : Australia

Yeah that ^^ Smile

» Ranking system
» Ranking bug.
» CP Ranking
» Bring back cp ranking
» Top100 CP Ranking