Cp bonus and why?

I've hear some rumors about the Light-faction having a cp bonus at the moment, is this true? And if true, then how come?(By what I understand, the faction who have made less cps the prior week gets the cp bonus in the coming week. Is that not unfair towards the other faction, being punished for playing the game and earning cps getting a stalemate for their hard work as a result. I'd call that a major bug or an "issue"?)  

It is a daily adjustment, apparently currenlty darks are generating more cp.

Tibr wrote:

It is a daily adjustment, apparently currenlty darks are generating more cp.

So we are indeed being punished for playing more/longer and generating more cp's than the light side, although we are outnumbered! The current map situation illustrates this phenomenon very well.  

We are being pushed back and the more/longer we play, the more likely it is that this will continue to happen(That will mean less playing from my side, why bother?).  

Pardon me for saying this, but what is the point of buying gems and upgrading, when in fact this will only prolong the stalemate(which sadly has become a demoralizing ongoing issue in this game again)?  

This has to be the biggest bug in this game   

Fair or not this is how the game has been for many, many months.  The cp bonus is nothing new and goes back and forth between the light and dark faction.

Oingoboingo wrote:

Fair or not this is how the game has been for many, many months. The cp bonus is nothing new and goes back and forth between the light and dark faction.

Saying "Fair or not" is tantamount to saying you don't care if something is unfair. Dialogue works because the two parties are looking for a fair resolution to an issue.

Bobo is saying that there is a problem...you're just saying you don't give a shit whether there is or not, don't change it either way.

I'm not saying that Bobo is or is not right...but at least I'd be willing to entertain the idea and then talk about a solution, instead of dismissing it out of hand.

Oingoboingo wrote:

Fair or not this is how the game has been for many, many months.  The cp bonus is nothing new and goes back and forth between the light and dark faction.

Yes, you are absolutely right. I just thought that this inbuilt unfairness was dropped after the merger. I'm a bit shocked to find out, it was not!

It would be nice if there was a CP counter on the world map, then the two factions could see which faction had generated the most CP's and then they could try keeping the CP's to a absolute minimum(A game within the game), by not playing the game, but by doing something else, like watching TV or going on a stroll in the woods, which apparently the game favors more than making an effort.

The faction and players that generate the most CP's have my respect! That faction or player deserves a win, not a slap in the face -be it Dark or Light!

A necessary evil

Probably not possible to remove the mechanic unless the game shifts away from faction vs faction to something like ... region vs region or guild vs guild, or even race vs race vs race ...
Or even changes to the way the game is ending, which i´d hope for the most.

The top CP gainer dont benefit from it as their rewards are capped, which probably means that only less than half the generated CP are affected.

If you have an alternative to the CP mechanic, bring it up. Try looking for old topics, as there have been quite a few on that matter.

Tibr wrote:

A necessary evil

Probably not possible to remove the mechanic unless the game shifts away from faction vs faction to something like ... region vs region or guild vs guild, or even race vs race vs race ...
Or even changes to the way the game is ending, which i´d hope for the most.

The top CP gainer dont benefit from it as their rewards are capped, which probably means that only less than half the generated CP are affected.

If you have an alternative to the CP mechanic, bring it up. Try looking for old topics, as there have been quite a few on that matter.

I'm thinking why not make it 50/50! You flip a coin, the faction that has got momentum gets a 50 % chance of gaining extra momentum, whilst the "losing" faction has a 50 % chance of gaining the same CP bonus helping them defend their faction/hexes, this will create more dynamic gameplay!?(or maybe 40/60 % in favor of the faction that is producing less CP's)

And couldn't a solution to the player imbalance be: You allow 10 new players to join the Dark faction, then let 5 new players join the Light faction until it evens out a bit more?

I don't understand why this issue hasn't been addressed?(If the 10 dark players decide to leave the game and the 5 light players stick to the game, its just bad or good luck, depending on how you look at it?)

I understand it's hard and it's probably a time consuming process changing the game, but if it's not done, won't this game just have a lot of players that decide to give up and cash in on the aether rewards because they have made a ridiculous amount of CP's, but see no end in sight?

ysosad wrote:

Oingoboingo wrote:

Fair or not this is how the game has been for many, many months.  The cp bonus is nothing new and goes back and forth between the light and dark faction.

Saying "Fair or not" is tantamount to saying you don't care if something is unfair. Dialogue works because the two parties are looking for a fair resolution to an issue.

Bobo is saying that there is a problem...you're just saying you don't give a shit whether there is or not, don't change it either way.

I'm not saying that Bobo is or is not right...but at least I'd be willing to entertain the idea and then talk about a solution, instead of dismissing it out of hand.

It sounded from Bobo's response that he was surprised about the cp bonus mechanism.  I was honestly just trying to be helpful by simply commenting that this wasn't something new and that it's been a part of the game for a long time; I wasn't trying to start a fight about the merits of the cp bonus.  We've talked ad nauseam about the stalemate nature of this game and I've been one of several who has commented on a desire to find a way for either side to be able to "win" more often.

Oingoboingo wrote:

ysosad wrote:

Oingoboingo wrote:

Fair or not this is how the game has been for many, many months.  The cp bonus is nothing new and goes back and forth between the light and dark faction.

Saying "Fair or not" is tantamount to saying you don't care if something is unfair. Dialogue works because the two parties are looking for a fair resolution to an issue.

Bobo is saying that there is a problem...you're just saying you don't give a shit whether there is or not, don't change it either way.

I'm not saying that Bobo is or is not right...but at least I'd be willing to entertain the idea and then talk about a solution, instead of dismissing it out of hand.

It sounded from Bobo's response that he was surprised about the cp bonus mechanism.  I was honestly just trying to be helpful by simply commenting that this wasn't something new and that it's been a part of the game for a long time; I wasn't trying to start a fight about the merits of the cp bonus.  We've talked ad nauseam about the stalemate nature of this game and I've been one of several who has commented on a desire to find a way for either side to be able to "win" more often.

Well this is clearly not a issue to fight over, but its definitely worth fighting for a solution for both factions and all players! But as long as the dev's aren't participating or maybe they are discussing this within the High Council, it just feels as if the dev's are satisfied with status quo?(They of course have that right!)

Forcing players to play a side is not acceptable. That is not even worth discussing; if you limit racial choice for new players you can also assume you limit the number of ppl willing to give the game a try at all.

As for the CP bonus, activity based one is providing the best ballance of power. This is what we have right now. Whatever side is less active gets cookies to keep them running.

If CP bonus was switched to flat population bonus it would favor the underdogs.

If CP bonus is revomed it would favor the more populated side.

Is the CP bonus perfect? Absolutely not. Do we need it? Absolutely yes. Can we improve it? Definitely, to a degree ...
Can we remove its necessity? Yes, if the game gets different goals (other than capital takedown), more factions/parties.

Technically the game needs a ballance of power. Sadly this results in a stalemate. It always will, the only way out of it is to change the end of the game or the way of pursuing it.

Tibr wrote:

If CP bonus was switched to flat population bonus it would favor the underdogs.

Sorry, but why is this considered a problem? Seems to me your summary of the options clearly favours this one. It's the only one that DOESN'T result in the overpopulated faction gaining a reward...

Why exactly do you think it would be better than activity based one? After all activity is not constant and the shifting factor.
With population you are taking into account all ppl who do not generate any CP, and those who hardly generate any. A lot more factors need to be considered to make a population bonus reasonable, while the activity one is very simple - you see it directly when you have CP data.

Because I don't think anyone NOT fighting should have a positive effect. The system as it is rewards whichever faction DOES LESS. Arguments like "oh, but what about the people who just dump res to their guild, they're still counting as population" and the other 'complications' of a population based bonus simply pale in scope.

The usual dev response to this is "CP bonus? oh it's only so much, just fight harder and overcome it". So the situation ends up being as follows. A bunch of lazy, do nothing players get a reward for getting beaten. But there is more of them. So when they get this bonus their lazy play is enough. One side gets a fundamental bonus (higher population) and then a temporary bonus based on a shifting scale (activity, basically theirs...). The other side has to work hard to overcome the fundamental bonus and is therefore penalized for working harder per capita.

What the hell do you people have against people working hard to win the game? Why is this mechanism necessary? I'm not a huge fan of welfare policy in general society, why should I like it here, in the virtual world?

You asked why I think it would be better than an activity based one... the short answer is because this one just plain stinks.

The phrase "balance of power" is a joke. The game should be balanced by the conditions of victory, not slow-down mechanisms to prop up the losers and drag out the length of the round. A game should not have even balance of power, it should have a bloody winner. What happens when an immovable force meets an immovable object? Balance?!

Quote :

Because I don't think anyone NOT fighting should have a positive effect.

Exactly, they should have none. The way it is right now they dont. However the way you advocate - they will, becoming a burden for their side. That just calls for problems on flat ground, mostly because nothing, and especially no mechanic should force players to play in any particular way. Its up to them to decide how casual or semi-casual or hardcore they want to spend their time in the game. Any customer is a good customer, with few exceptions as usual

Quote :

The system as it is rewards whichever faction DOES LESS

So darks were having cp bonus for months, because they were doing less, true. Now someone sais light has a cp bonus, because they are doing less. Sooo what?
You do not have any data about population numbers who generated CP in the last days, i know hc doesnt, i doubt devs even took a look at it, so probably nobody knows. You only assume that more ppl were playing yesterday on the light side because there are more lighties in the ranking. Imagine a dozen accidentally dont log in for a day or just dont fight, thats all it takes.

Without the CP bonus we would have an olympos scenario on the long run because of felt disballance of power. If ppl dont have the feeling they can win, they wont stay long. So the ballance of power, the funny it may sound to you, is in fact necessary to keep players in the game.

Imho CP bonus is a necessary evil because of a flaw in game design, it is necessary because of the faction vs faction and the desired 6months+ game cycles. I dont agree with that, as evident from maaaany posts by now

Quote :

...Why is this mechanism necessary?

So you actually want the CP ballance completely gone?

[not to anyone particularly, just general statement to prevent one sided arguments]
Please make the discussion constructive. If you want a mechanic change you need to make it as fair as possible, without favoring either one or the other side, otherwise we havent improved anything.

I actually want it gone. It genuinely makes no sense to me. I have been on both sides of it (from both sides, lol) playing on Olympus, Hades and Erevos and I have hated it the whole time.

As much as it is valid that players get frustrated and quit because they get steamrolled (your Olympus point) players also get frustrated and quit due to stalemates.

Stalemates are bad. This system promotes stalemates.

My solution; let the game end more often. 6+ months is ridiculous. Let players know that they may lose (or win), but that they will also get another chance and suffer minimal penalties. <-No details, I know... lol...

Tibr wrote:

Quote :

Because I don't think anyone NOT fighting should have a positive effect.

Exactly, they should have none. The way it is right now they dont. However the way you advocate - they will, becoming a burden for their side. That just calls for problems on flat ground, mostly because nothing, and especially no mechanic should force players to play in any particular way. Its up to them to decide how casual or semi-casual or hardcore they want to spend their time in the game. Any customer is a good customer, with few exceptions as usual

I dislike the CP bonus, but if we can't get rid of it (which I think we can, but that is another matter)....

If non-combatants are able to benefit their Faction through resource gains, they are supporting the war effort. In my opinion, that is an active player. I see no reason for why the hardcore, casual, noob, vet, etc. etc. should be considered differently from anyone else...and that includes the non-combatant.

If the mechanism were to look at all players the same, then it wouldn't be preventing anyone from playing the game the way they want...it is just treating them the same as everyone else.

Tibr wrote:

Quote :

The system as it is rewards whichever faction DOES LESS

So darks were having cp bonus for months, because they were doing less, true. Now someone sais light has a cp bonus, because they are doing less. Sooo what?
You do not have any data about population numbers who generated CP in the last days, i know hc doesnt, i doubt devs even took a look at it, so probably nobody knows. You only assume that more ppl were playing yesterday on the light side because there are more lighties in the ranking. Imagine a dozen accidentally dont log in for a day or just dont fight, thats all it takes.

Without the CP bonus we would have an olympos scenario on the long run because of felt disballance of power. If ppl dont have the feeling they can win, they wont stay long. So the ballance of power, the funny it may sound to you, is in fact necessary to keep players in the game.

Imho CP bonus is a necessary evil because of a flaw in game design, it is necessary because of the faction vs faction and the desired 6months+ game cycles. I dont agree with that, as evident from maaaany posts by now

The 'so what' comes from WHY it activates and I think you know that.

The last (and only time I know of) Rune provided the statistics on the active population (despite several requests and hopes that it would be included again) the numbers were 55% Light and 45% Dark. It just so happens that Dark generated more CP during that time...it also just so happens that for one day during the period sampled the Light inexplicably had a recruitment bonus (which would be funny, except that it is true).

Tibr wrote:

Quote :

...Why is this mechanism necessary?

So you actually want the CP ballance completely gone?

[not to anyone particularly, just general statement to prevent one sided arguments]
Please make the discussion constructive. If you want a mechanic change you need to make it as fair as possible, without favoring either one or the other side, otherwise we havent improved anything.

While Larry has not gone into great detail...I agree, I'd want the CP balance mechanism gone. Do I think that it is possible to get rid of it right now? No. Do I think that other measures could be taken so as to make it unnecessary? Yes.

Pretty sure the majority of sim city players who do not battle do not spend their resources for the sake of their faction. I am basing that statement on the fact that resource gains without battles are low and the cost for buildings and research are high, particularly in gold so trading is involved which is normally not internal. I do assume the goal of sim city players is personal advancement. Thus the resouce flow into faction "wallet" is neglectible. A sim city player needs to get everything built and researched before donating, that must be over a year old one with vip. In fact i known two of the kind, both quit by now afaik.

Even leaving sim city players aside, you cant compare a 50 battle player with 10 battle ones, and especially not to <5 battle ones. HC may remember an idea about average player gains i proposed few weeks ago.

Quote :

The 'so what' comes from WHY it activates and I think you know that.

The cp bonus activates whenever one side has generated about 30% less CP than the other side within said time frame (a day or so). You lost me on that one, please elaborate what you mean. Do i need to find it unfair that the side with statistically more players cares less about grinding CP? Thats their choice. I have always supported casual gameplay since i regard it of bigger importance to the game functioning well than CP grind. According to common rants, grinding is the worst part of this game. Now go figure

I am convinced that without the CP bonus the game would have lost a lot more players than due to the stalemate. Simply because the stalemate annoyance is bothering veterans while the power disballance affects all.

The way Rune had put it, goal is to have a fair CP totals, a ballance. What matters in order to win is where those CP are put in action. Makes sense. If one side has internal wars, the other faction immediately starts pushing good.
Logical consequence ... make guild wars a sub focus. Implement automatic mercenary contracts, so that dark can hire light mercs and vice versa ...
Or change that dark vs light duality to something less stalematy that possibly does not require power ballance between factions.

Now that i thought about it, proper guild wars with slim aether rewards sounds amazing. That way you would get ppl to have wars so much is certain.

Tibr wrote:

Pretty sure the majority of sim city players who do not battle do not spend their resources for the sake of their faction. I am basing that statement on the fact that resource gains without battles are low and the cost for buildings and research are high, particularly in gold so trading is involved which is normally not internal. I do assume the goal of sim city players is personal advancement. Thus the resouce flow into faction "wallet" is neglectible. A sim city player needs to get everything built and researched before donating, that must be over a year old one with vip. In fact i known two of the kind, both quit by now afaik.

Even leaving sim city players aside, you cant compare a 50 battle player with 10 battle ones, and especially not to <5 battle ones. HC may remember an idea about average player gains i proposed few weeks ago.

Quote :

The 'so what' comes from WHY it activates and I think you know that.

The cp bonus activates whenever one side has generated about 30% less CP than the other side within said time frame (a day or so). You lost me on that one, please elaborate what you mean. Do i need to find it unfair that the side with statistically more players cares less about grinding CP? Thats their choice. I have always supported casual gameplay since i regard it of bigger importance to the game functioning well than CP grind. According to common rants, grinding is the worst part of this game. Now go figure

I am convinced that without the CP bonus the game would have lost a lot more players than due to the stalemate. Simply because the stalemate annoyance is bothering veterans while the power disballance affects all.

The way Rune had put it, goal is to have a fair CP totals, a ballance. What matters in order to win is where those CP are put in action. Makes sense. If one side has internal wars, the other faction immediately starts pushing good.
Logical consequence ... make guild wars a sub focus. Implement automatic mercenary contracts, so that dark can hire light mercs and vice versa ...
Or change that dark vs light duality to something less stalematy that possibly does not require power ballance between factions.

Now that i thought about it, proper guild wars with slim aether rewards sounds amazing. That way you would get ppl to have wars so much is certain.

I said non-combatants...not sim-city players. While non-combatants includes sim city players, it also includes players that no longer fight (or very little fighting) but still donate. These players may not even build much or at all any longer...just socialize. I can say definitively that there are more than 2 such players currently playing.

The 10 battle player could choose to be the 50 battle player. I don't intend to compare them. I don't care if a player does 0 battles or does 100, both could choose to be the other, it's up to them what they will do. However, the system should treat them the same.

The 30% figure, I have no idea where you are pulling that from or when. Rune refused to answer exactly how the CP bonus activates when I asked him something like 15 times in HC. The closest I got was it was a complex algorithm. However, if this 30% you talk about is something new...then that is as idiotic as it gets.

If the Light chooses to 'slack off' then they should lose. Light has substantially more players, they don't need handouts.

The Light side can be more casual, less into grinding. There is nothing wrong with that...but then you should lose. You can find it unfair or not...but that's how it should be IMO. If the Dark faction is trying harder to a man, they deserve the win...and the Light doesn't deserve a CP bonus for making the decision to be more casual...they certainly don't deserve a recruitment incentive that they've gotten several times over the past 3 weeks or so. (including the week where Light had 55% of active players)

The CP bonus at best is a poor attempt at creating a fair system. At worst it is what you state, an attempt to make it about where the CP is put...and to reduce or eliminate the extra effort a Faction (and the effort of individuals) may be giving to generate more CP.

Tibr wrote:

I am convinced that without the CP bonus the game would have lost a lot more players than due to the stalemate. Simply because the stalemate annoyance is bothering veterans while the power disballance affects all.

I am not. I was a lightie in Olympus, imo less people quit there because of losing to dark (there was a handy burst of inactivity to get aether... don't count that ;P) than quit on Erevos (prior to Olympus' creation) due to complaints about "trench warfare" and "stalemates".

People are better at losing than they are at NEVER HAVING A CHANCE TO WIN! The only time this game ends is when the player base says "ah what the hell lets get some aether" and lets it happen. Real satisfying endgame, right....

Tibr wrote:

Do i need to find it unfair that the side with statistically more players cares less about grinding CP? Thats their choice. I have always supported casual gameplay since i regard it of bigger importance to the game functioning well than CP grind.

You should be able to see how people consider it unfair, yes. If somebody decides to do less they shouldn't have an invisible servant just show up to do it for them, should they? Why do you consider casual gameplay so important? Simply to grow the user population and generate revenue for devs? I'm in no way against them making money, in fact I'm all for it. But rigging the game so that they make more money is a different story. I don't play ring toss at the carnival, thanks....

The CP grind is the core of the game. It's how you make resources at a functional pace. It's how you level your units (especially later). It's how you choose to progress in the game, unless you are a boring sim player. It should be the same on the map. If one side, as a side, decides to PROGRESS LESS then that is exactly what they should get, less progress.

Tibr wrote:

What matters in order to win is where those CP are put in action. Makes sense.

It makes very little sense as soon as you look at the map. Unless one side essentially 'tanks' the war the CP are put into action in the same places. Guilds aren't fighting each other, they're all just sitting there. There is no incentive to fight anywhere but at the front. Anybody generating CP consistently knows where the fight is within twenty min of looking at the map, tops. I don't care what side, I don't care what time. If you have half a brain you can look at the map and know quickly. The map allows two fronts at most, simply not enough variety. Obvious and central chokepoints add to the simplicity. Players are always going to fight in the same places, therefore it actually does NOT matter where the CP are put. And therefore, cuz you know, logic, it does not make sense...


Here's a thought. If you, for whatever twisted reasons, really do like this stupid bonus... award it to the faction with a recruitment bonus. That depends on active population already, no? Light apparently somehow got this recently too, so it's not just going to 'always' be dark.... The CP bonus benefits new players more than old (they rarely cap CP) so add it to the recruitment bonus for a 'double whammy'.

I actually dont like the CP bonus. But i am probably the biggest enemy of the capital vs capital scenario that is responsible for so many flaws. And under those terms if there was no bonus dark side would have lost many times over fist 9 months of the game. This would have had dramatic result on the overall game population. On olympus most lighties who quit left because of "no way to win", the darkies that were gone left because of stalemate. I wish we had numbers which side lost more.

Also something that can be closely tied to the win/lose faction imballance etc. Permission to choose a race without losing progress whenever a game cycle ends would go lenghts.

y wrote:

The 30% figure, I have no idea where you are pulling that from or when.

It was off the top of my head, didnt care to look up yesterday. Did now.

Info is from HC in April 2014. A very well visited topic called "CP count comparisons".

RuneSlayer wrote:

Tibr wrote:

Does CP ballance gets triggered by a prozentual or an absolut difference, also roughly how much does it have to be?

Percentage...I think when it is more than 60-40.

Thats is "roughly" when side A is generating 50% more (or side B is generating 33% less)   


In that topic you wrote

y wrote:

The 60-40 split I assume it to be the difference in active population, based on previous posts on what triggers the bonus.

I dont know why you assumed the data to be population related. Otherwise I´d need to figure out why Rune would reply to my CP related question with population data  

Tibr wrote:

Permission to choose a race without losing progress whenever a game cycle ends would go lenghts.

^A thousand times yes. Let's pretend for a second that we're playing a FPS game, not a RTS/Sim. Teams are unbalanced, the round ends. Teams are shuffled somehow. Teams end up more balanced for the next round. I know the original intent was to lose ALL progress on map ends, but Devs had to change it (for obvious reasons!) and now people are permanently attached to a team.

While I find it VERY hard to say to any player "Oh, BC says you don't get to be Orc anymore, you're an elf, fight for the light!" I believe if you gave players even the OPTION to choose a new race at the end of a round a LOT of us would switch. Add to our natural curiosity some sort of scaling 'recruitment' bonus if a player switches actual factions and we could just keep playing against endless combinations of the same people.

I always say I enjoy losing PVP battles to real people more than winning PVE battles v. AIs. I'd happily switch to the losing side every time . I don't expect this to be everyone's attitude, and I'm sure there would be collusion (IE new darks v. Joyce on founding of Olympus) and players who just don't want to change....

But it's gotta be better than what we have?!

RuneSlayer wrote:

CP control doesn't trigger if the population is balanced and it will definitely not trigger for the Faction which has the most active players if for a particular period they haven't generated enough CP as the other Faction with less population.

RuneSlayer wrote:

There is a reason why in the algorithm active players, CP generation and population ratio are all variables

Dug these outta that thread (it's your fault now Tibr! ;P) to point out that Devs have access to numbers on active population and already consider it.

Note; according to these two quotes we must infer that our population of actives is actually balanced, or close enough that the game activates its CP balancing. If our active population is in fact balanced, why do we need the CP bonus at all? Now it seems even more like a handicap to those who try harder and a boon to a bunch of lazy players.....

NOOOO now there are more active darkies around and they even generate more CP, herecy !  

On some days this is true i guess.