New Ranking System

I don't think that's necessarily the case, about half of the vets in the top 100 now have 0 CP. They're inactive and not donating anything at all. Of the remainder, only some of them will donate to their guilds.

I don't follow the logic that older players donate more and therefore deserve to be ranked higher, because it's not always true. There are a lot of selfish players who would rather buy fragments.

Even for those who do donate, it takes very little effort to do so. A vet clicks bank, donates, and then logs off shortly thereafter - so they're worthy of getting a bigger aether reward in place of a newbie who players many hours a day?

I think that Rune nailed it, the aether reward should be based on CP generation. That's the real measure of effort.

I don't think that aether should go to people simply because they're older players. It should be something that people have to work for each time the map resets.

Why do you insist on denying the effort that it took to build up the big cities in the first place?  

Anduin wrote:

I think that Rune nailed it, the aether reward should be based on CP generation. That's the real measure of effort.

Yes, he did nail it. He said that personally he wants a balanced system not pure CP.

Anduin wrote:

I don't think that's necessarily the case, about half of the vets in the top 100 now have 0 CP.  They're inactive and not donating anything at all.  Of the remainder, only some of them will donate to their guilds.

I don't follow the logic that older players donate more and therefore deserve to be ranked higher, because it's not always true.  There are a lot of selfish players who would rather buy fragments.

Even for those who do donate, it takes very little effort to do so.  A vet clicks bank, donates, and then logs off shortly thereafter - so they're worthy of getting a bigger aether reward in place of a newbie who players many hours a day?

I think that Rune nailed it, the aether reward should be based on CP generation.  That's the real measure of effort.

I don't think that aether should go to people simply because they're older players.  It should be something that people have to work for each time the map resets.

I fully agree with andy's arguments, and in supplement,
Should the "hall of fame" even be based on a lifetime? I would prefer it to reflect the "last" cycle of the map that found place, regarding cps. stacking up twenty previous rounds is of no use, especially when half go inactive, and most players cannot recall that far themselves.

I don't think Tibr mentioned anything to do with Aether?

Even so, unless the map ends SUPER FAST (like it did on Olympus), any city score will be mostly irrelevant by the time a capital falls.

As I mentioned, it ends up being such a small percentage of the overall score and becomes insignificant very quickly. Especially if CP is going to be calculated at a rate far higher than 1/10.

@Wave: The "Hall of Fame" (lifetime stats) is NOTHING but a record. It would have no affect on any rewards. Simply another ranking list that could be looked at. I see no harm in the idea?

Piktas wrote:

Why do you insist on denying the effort that it took to build up the big cities in the first place?   

I don't - I'm saying that 'effort' is already rewarded.  A maxed out city allows a player to generate CP much faster than a player with an undeveloped city.

In a system where CP determines ranks, active vets will take most of the top ranks.  It is only inactive vets that will be left behind, as they should be.

I put in a great deal of effort and managed to generate more CP than anybody else on Olympus and placed very highly for aether rewards. All of that fame that I had disappeared when the map reset, and that's just fine with me.

I'll just have to do it again. Just because I put in effort in the past does not mean that I will necessarily do it in the present, and the rewards should go to those who do put more effort in the present.

The hall of heroes should be a lifetime contribution as a memorial of BC heroes and icons that were shaping the game over the whole time. A game and community needs ideals to look up to and that should be something the best and most active ppl want to strive for - to finally be in the hall of heroes and have a world quest (or loading screen) mentioning their name ;D
The hall of heroes should display lifetime CP, city, total prestige ever accumulated.

Anduin wrote:

I don't - I'm saying that 'effort' is already rewarded.  A maxed out city allows a player to generate CP much faster than a player with an undeveloped city.

I don't agree. There is a "plateau" where it all levels out. I experienced this myself when I started playing. It wasn't long before my CP generation per battle was equal to that of Six, Tibr, Piktas, etc. While my 'City Progress' was less than half of anything they had created.

There are players in my guild with a FAR LESS developed city than myself running Suicides for 160 CP. You can't get any higher than that.

Because that's how it should work. You have to put in the work to beat the vet.s God damn it stop asking for freebies. I had to work my way up to the top of the ranks. I only beat Yan like 9-10 months in. You wnating to skip all just looks like you have no patience for this game.

@wave read Tibr's post again. He did advocate for a system that you think would be better. Aether would go for the most resent round. Overall rankings would just show total records.

Seriously you guys just obviously want to deny all and any kind of effort made by people who played before you. Shame on you for being so utterly one sided.

XViper wrote:

Anduin wrote:

I don't - I'm saying that 'effort' is already rewarded.  A maxed out city allows a player to generate CP much faster than a player with an undeveloped city.

I don't agree. There is a "plateau" where it all levels out. I experienced this myself when I started playing. It wasn't long before my CP generation per battle was equal to that of Six, Tibr, Piktas, etc. While my 'City Progress' was less than half of anything they had created.

There are players in my guild with a FAR LESS developed city than myself running Suicides for 160 CP. You can't get any higher than that.

CP per battle may "level out" after a certain point, but the vet player still has a large advantage.  A veteran player will likely have more GLs, which lets them win the battle faster and with fewer casualties.  They're also going to have the battle clerics upgrade for faster unit heal times and more units in their barracks that they can cycle through.

The vet player will have researched things like runed weapons and adamantine armor for a permanent 18 damage/armor bonus for all of their melee units.

These things let the vet win battles faster and easier than another player who goes all out with inferior gear and upgrades.  The vet's units heal faster too.  

I think a maxed out player is still at an advantage in CP generation over a nearly maxed player.

Piktas wrote:

Seriously you guys just obviously want to deny all and any kind of effort made by people who played before you. Shame on you for being so utterly one sided.

So, the tremendous effort I put in to top the rankings on the first world should disappear when the world resets, but you clicking upgrade every few days should permanently boost you way up in the rankings every time the world resets, giving you a massive advantage beyond the advantage you already have in CP generation - and we're the bad guys here?

Anduin wrote:

CP per battle may "level out" after a certain point, but the vet player still has a large advantage.  A veteran player will likely have more GLs, which lets them win the battle faster and with fewer casualties.  They're also going to have the battle clerics upgrade for faster unit heal times and more units in their barracks that they can cycle through.

The vet player will have researched things like runed weapons and adamantine armor for a permanent 18 damage/armor bonus for all of their melee units.

These things let the vet win battles faster and easier than another player who goes all out with inferior gear and upgrades.  The vet's units heal faster too.  

I think a maxed out player is still at an advantage in CP generation over a nearly maxed player.

Your point would be valid if it didn't take forever to gather the resources and then research and build those things. Like it or not we all have a city to manage. This is not a purely rpg game or smth. EVERYTHING matters and it should be represented on the rankings. CP is most important but you cannot completely deny tech and buildings.

New players will always be in the underdog position in any game. Play it right. Get a temple to decrease heal times, get a forge to increase chance for crafting better gear. WORK YOUR WAY UP instead of demanding the game to be catered to your liking. Show some backbone.

It seems everybody is advocating the solution that is best for him. I could settle for the middle ground here.
For those who mix this discussion up with some kind of vanity ranking who is biggest of all times not resulting in any kind of aether or other currency reward, I'm all for it, but thats not really the matter of dicussion here.
I could settle for City score + CP, if you must show off that you have build a lot and your account never had to start from scratch on another world.

Anduin wrote:

CP per battle may "level out" after a certain point, but the vet player still has a large advantage.  A veteran player will likely have more GLs, which lets them win the battle faster and with fewer casualties.  They're also going to have the battle clerics upgrade for faster unit heal times and more units in their barracks that they can cycle through.

The vet player will have researched things like runed weapons and adamantine armor for a permanent 18 damage/armor bonus for all of their melee units.

These things let the vet win battles faster and easier than another player who goes all out with inferior gear and upgrades.  The vet's units heal faster too.  

I think a maxed out player is still at an advantage in CP generation over a nearly maxed player.

Research is also increasing AP, also on units that dont need it, yay melee artillery.

Higher lvl units need longer healing, proportionally the higher your hero/unit level the longer you heal, research only helps you to keep the scales. In the end level overweights and you heal slower than you used before...

The lower lvl your units are the less godlikes and the less quality items you actually need (at start of suicide you can do without any godlikes at all, once you face lvl 18AI you wont manage without godlikes anymore).

I cant say my battles are now easier than when my units were lvl 12. In fact they are a LOT harder while having solid item choice and they will become even harder once i face lvl 20 AI.

So in any terms, once you do suicides you do them on equal level, whether you play 3 months or 12. Thats judging from my experience

Piktas wrote:

Your point would be valid if it didn't take forever to gather the resources and then research and build those things. Like it or not we all have a city to manage. This is not a purely rpg game or smth. EVERYTHING matters and it should be represented on the rankings. CP is most important but you cannot completely deny tech and buildings.

New players will always be in the underdog position in any game. Play it right. Get a temple to decrease heal times, get a forge to increase chance for crafting better gear. WORK YOUR WAY UP instead of demanding the game to be catered to your liking. Show some backbone.

Taking 'forever' is not effort. They're not the same things. You can max your research and base with minimal real effort over a long period of time.

In contrast the guy who tops the CP ranking puts in much more real effort in terms of time spent on this game, yet that effort resets every time the map resets.

Why should the "effort" you put into maxing your base be worth so much more when it comes to ranking and aether placement? I'm sure I have spent much more time on this game than nearly all of the players who are currently ranked 1-100, despite starting later.

I've already posted why you're already rewarded for maxing your base. Maxing your base comes with plenty of rewards in the form of decreased healing times, permanent upgrades, and resource generation.

I feel we're going in circles here. So I think it might be time to agree to disagree. We can let the voters decide.

Tibr wrote:

Can we add the lifetime CP somewhere in brackets? Does the info from previous game cycles still exist on the server? Also somehow i favor two different rankings, a lifetime contribution and current cycle.

That would be fair. I like it.

Tibr wrote:

Research is also increasing AP, also on units that dont need it, yay melee artillery.

Yet everybody seems to think it's worth it and gets the upgrade

Tibr wrote:

Higher lvl units need longer healing, proportionally the higher your hero/unit level the longer you heal, research only helps you to keep the scales. In the end level overweights and you heal slower than you used before...

Higher level units are a function of play time, not upgrade time.  There are a lot of casual players who don't battle very much who have maxed bases and lower level units.

In contrast, I have level 15 units wielding the Soul Catcher and an unmaxed base.  I don't even have battle clerics to heal my higher level units.

I get by through unit rotation.  While one set of units heals, I use another set.

Tibr wrote:

The lower lvl your units are the less godlikes and the less quality items you actually need (at start of suicide you can do without any godlikes at all, once you face lvl 18AI you wont manage without godlikes anymore).

This is only the case for players who aren't playing on higher difficulties.  If you try to play on suicide, the enemy will have tons of GLs whether you have GLs or not.  

So, somebody without many GLs is going to take heavy casualties on higher difficulties, and if they don't play on higher difficulties than they will be bringing in less CP per battle.  In either case, the vet has the CP advantage.

Tibr wrote:

So in any terms, once you do suicides you do them on equal level, whether you play 3 months or 12. Thats judging from my experience

I have to disagree with this.  I think it's highly dependent on the playtime of both players.

EDIT: Lifetime CP generation does seem much more fair, though I'm not sure that such data has been stored. I would prefer the ability to switch between rankings based purely on CP and rankings based purely on city score. They're really two separate things.

Piktas wrote:

@wave read Tibr's post again. He did advocate for a system that you think would be better. Aether would go for the most recent round. Overall rankings would just show total records.

Sadly he did not. I disagree with the idea of an "hall of fame" regarding the whole "lifetime earned cps".

Piktas wrote:

Seriously you guys just obviously want to deny all and any kind of effort made by people who played before you. Shame on you for being so utterly one sided.

Dont lay words in my mouth, thank you. I want to keep this game fresh, running active while remembering people that make an effort on a recent basis, instead of carving old names in stone. It would give off a better picture to the newer players, showing them they can make a difference over time, and that even last round, when they were ranked 700th overall.

Seccondly, as put in the Xviper argument, anyone coming from the Olympus tragedy has a serious handicap, so these rankings are all slanted, unless you see fit to compare yen with euro's. And then, not only the fact that olympus players got the short end, but also the fact that several erevos players cashed seccond accounts in receiving an even bigger advantage. But that is a different topic, which I feel that should be discussed before we can actually discuss a ranking system based upon fame or lifetime cps.

XViper wrote:

@Wave: The "Hall of Fame" (lifetime stats) is NOTHING but a record. It would have no affect on any rewards. Simply another ranking list that could be looked at. I see no harm in the idea?

And yet, I see more use in one only covering the last round, which provides a better actual ranking, compared to  one "of a lifetime". Not only due to the olympus tragedy, but also the round length. There should be no people up in the rankings that haven't moved their mouse for the last two months.

How about giving us access to the raw data so we can sort and massage it any way we want? Then nobody could complain about how the "official" ranking is unfair. I know Guild leaders would love to be able to save a spreadsheet of data weekly and see who's doing what in their guild to be able to reward the achievers.


Just a thought.

Dren

How did Olympus players get screwed exactly?

Did you guys not get to keep your city progress or something?
Have I missed something?

You guys also all have far more Aether than any of us due to the 'quick wins' experienced in Olympus.

End of the day, I'm not really that upset either way. I'm not so attached to my ego that I need to have some kind of high rank to feel worth something. I just don't see why this is such a big deal?? :\ Especially if you'll be able to 'sort' by CP anyway??

XViper wrote:

How did Olympus players get screwed exactly?

Did you guys not get to keep your city progress or something?
Have I missed something?

You guys also all have far more Aether than any of us due to the 'quick wins' experienced in Olympus.

Yes, that 1x more aether item really does solve that lack of atleast 50% of my xp and progress down the drain, not to mention the higher progress costs.

XViper wrote:

End of the day, I'm not really that upset either way. I'm not so attached to my ego that I need to have some kind of high rank to feel worth something. I just don't see why this is such a big deal?? :\  Especially if you'll be able to 'sort' by CP anyway??

Because its comparing pears with apples, while the propositions I am against, severely reduce the image shaped towards newer players. It seems like we want history in the rankings, instead of actuality.

XViper wrote:

How did Olympus players get screwed exactly?

Did you guys not get to keep your city progress or something?
Have I missed something?

You guys also all have far more Aether than any of us due to the 'quick wins' experienced in Olympus.

End of the day, I'm not really that upset either way. I'm not so attached to my ego that I need to have some kind of high rank to feel worth something. I just don't see why this is such a big deal?? :\  Especially if you'll be able to 'sort' by CP anyway??

Rankings are a big deal because aether is distributed by rank.  If aether was distributed by CP, then I would have no issue as long as people can switch between viewing fame and CP rankings.  I think that being able to see the top CP producers is far more important battle information.

I'll let Wave talk about Olympus, because that's not the argument I'm making.  I think this is an issue the effects more than just Olympus players, it effects everybody who's active and not maxed.

Olympus players are in slight disadvantage by an unfortunate turn of events (that erevos players did not inflict in any way), nothing more. You want freebies because you feel disadvantaged, how exactly does that relate to ranking? Imho it shouldnt, imagine we are having a conversation about ranking one year later where anything related to olympus and erevos is far in the past and forgotten. You will have the situation where superold veterans, about hundred of them have by the beginning of the game a core ranking of 30k. Which would take only 60k cp to counter completely. If you make the conversation about aether, maybe aether table has to be improved and changed too, a lot (imho it should). Any suicide capable active player will outrun any inactive veteran within few weeks while a game cycle lasts several months. Most likely he will outrun an active veteran too, just because veterans dont have the motivation to grind as much ... and a core motivation to grind for many is to build a big city.

And as for hall of heroes, i did say it is a lifetime record and has nothing to do with game cycle rewards.

And somehow nobody even has a counter argument for walls and resource generated CP we will see soon. Neither about veteran impact on the game outcome. The most i read is "olympus is in disadvantage, lets screw up ranking so we dont feel like we lost months of playtime".

Tibr wrote:

Olympus players are in slight disadvantage by an unfortunate turn of events (that erevos players did not inflict in any way), nothing more. You want freebies because you feel disadvantaged, how exactly does that relate to ranking?

Ranking is going to be determined by cps, I think that is something we can all agree to. Missing out on 50% of your capacity, means you will generate 50% less cps on average. assuming the map will finish before the end of this year in which you claim the difference between olympus and erevos is closed, which I even doubt, all olympus players will loose out on rewards.

Tibr wrote:

Imho it shouldnt, imagine we are having a conversation about ranking one year later where anything related to olympus and erevos is far in the past and forgotten. You will have the situation where superold veterans, about hundred of them have by the beginning of the game a core ranking of 30k. Which would take only 60k cp to counter completely.

And in the meanwhile, people missed out on the profit taht should have been gained. in the acutal compensation thread, people are talking about 600%, which even I say is too much.

Tibr wrote:

Any suicide capable active player will outrun any inactive veteran within few weeks while a game cycle lasts several months. Most likely he will outrun an active veteran too, just because veterans dont have the motivation to grind as much ... and a core motivation to grind for many is to build a big city.

Which is tbh rubbish. A veteran can be motivated by his guild duing a guild warfare, or another conflict.

Tibr wrote:

And as for hall of heroes, i did say it is a lifetime record and has nothing to do with game cycle rewards.

Nope, but I did. Shorten it to the last game cycle, to keep it more actual.

Tibr wrote:

And somehow nobody even has a counter argument for walls and resource generated CP we will see soon. Neither about veteran impact on the game outcome. The most i read is "olympus is in disadvantage, lets screw up ranking so we dont feel like we lost months of playtime".

I dont understand how you can say that last line... If you acknowledge that there was a merge which placed the olympians behind, how can you vote for a ranking that only builds upon this bad transfer? It's the only reasonable fair option we can actually compare ourselves to the erevos, who still got a nice bonus from their cashcow accounts on olympus. ITs less dependant of this transfer, still affected though by costs.

Tibr wrote:

And somehow nobody even has a counter argument for walls and resource generated CP we will see soon. Neither about veteran impact on the game outcome. The most i read is "olympus is in disadvantage, lets screw up ranking so we dont feel like we lost months of playtime".

I countered that argument earlier. The idea that vets deserve a higher ranking because they have resources to donate is flawed on many levels.

1. A good portion of the vets in the top 100 are inactive and have 0 CP, they're not donating anything.
2. Not all vets who can donate will donate, there are selfish people who would rather buy fragments.
3. You say that having an upgraded city should be rewarded, but having resources to spare IS a reward for an upgraded city. You want to be rewarded for having resources?!
4. For those who actually do donate - it would take me well over 150,000 CP for me to reach the top ranks for aether placement from my current position, and my base is fairly well developed. It would take much more effort for the average player to have a shot at it. Why do you think that clicking 'bank all' entitles you to such a high starting position?

What is the point in having a hall of games heroes if it only displays last game cycle?

I want a fair ranking system that is taking all aspects into consideration. Many here want a short living system that will benefit them in this game cycle and thats about it. Voices driven by discomfort about olympus process and attempts to vent onto those they feel have an advantage now. Claud is right, the majority posts are ppl being selfish and not constructive. This topic should not even have any mention about olympus and erevos, then we could have a reasonable discussion about how a fair ranking should look like. Currently it is just poisoned by whatever disadvantage ppl feel and the game cycle rewards (that, as stated several times, most olympus players got a lot more than erevos).

Also the only two pole options we should have had here are "ranking only by cp and ranking not only by cp"

Tibr wrote:

What is the point in having a hall of games heroes if it only displays last game cycle?

I want a fair ranking system that is taking all aspects into consideration. Many here want a short living system that will benefit them in this game cycle and thats about it. Voices driven by discomfort about olympus process and attempts to vent onto those they feel have an advantage now. Claud is right, the majority posts are ppl being selfish and not constructive. This topic should not even have any mention about olympus and erevos, then we could have a reasonable discussion about how a fair ranking should look like. Currently it is just poisoned by whatever disadvantage ppl feel and the game cycle rewards (that, as stated several times, most olympus players got a lot more than erevos).

Also the only two pole options we should have had here are "ranking only by cp and ranking not only by cp"

You need to get off this Olympus thing, because most players here are not making that argument. If you're attempting to brand us all as Olympus players than I think you're straw manning us.

What this gets down to is a few people want to be entitled to a higher rank for aether rewards while putting out far less CP. I think this is a far more selfish position than one that rewards people based on the effort in each game cycle.

If you put more effort into a game cycle, you should get better aether rewards. If you put less effort into a game cycle, you should not place highly, regardless of what your city looks like.