Change to CP Bonus - Population Control Algorithm

First the facts

From the 1st of July till today we have the following:

903 new registrations

Light: 412 players

Dark: 491 players

Only for today and until a few hours ago:

Light: 192 active players with 536 victories (Ratio: 2.79/player)

Dark: 145 active players with 314 victories (Ratio: 2.16/player)

Earlier data are somewhat similar, so it is very safe to assume that we have a good understanding of what is really going on in the game world.

Allow me to provide a more in depth analysis with a bit more recent data (only 3 hours ago):

Light/Dark

Population: 193/148 with a ratio 1.3:1

Total Victories: 546/319

Avg. Victories/player: 2.83/2.15

Avg. CP/victory: 85.84/78.9

Total CP: 46867:25168

Conclusions:

1. The most important one being...We are not happy with the current CP bonus algorithm which has not been working as efficient or effective as it should have. It is evident that it wasn't helping the underpopulated side as much as it should.

2. The Light side has currently more active players than the Dark side, but not at a ratio which is troubling or not expected. The active players ratio plays between 1.15 -1.33 :1, which makes it absolutely manageable.

3. The "New Registrations" algorithm/mechanism works as intended, providing more registrations to the side which has a smaller population (Dark Side).

4. The Light side is fighting more than the Dark side. Whether that is because of having a low morale or something else, that is not the point of this post. However, providing a better CP bonus mechanism should make the underpopulated side feel more...reassured that its efforts are not thrown into the bin. This is ...understandable.

5. There is no clarity to the data. The Community needs to know the population activity ratio and the effectiveness of each side's players in regards to how many battles they are doing every day. The CP bonus mechanism will NOT reward the lazy side...but it will try to provide a fair ground for both sides. Therefore, more data will be visible to the players so they know which side is receiving the CP bonus and why.

Change which will be implemented

I will use the above numbers to provide an example of how the new mechanism will work with real data.

Steps:

1. At the end of each day the active players will be calculated for each side.

2. If the ratio is more than 1.2 (i.e. 20% more active players on one side compared to the other), then the algorithm will be triggered, otherwise there will be no CP bonus. Although the day is not over yet and our US players have only begun to wake up, let us assume that the ratio for today is 1.3 for the Light side i.e. The Light side has 30% more active players today.

3. Victories per player will be calculated for each side excluding the Easy difficulty victories. In our case and with the real data above, it is 2.83/player for the Light Side and 2.15/player for the Dark Side or 1:0.76.

4. The underpopulated side will receive a bonus equal to (% of more players that the other side has) x (ratio of victories of the underpopulated side). In our case: 30% x 0.76 = 0.228 or 23%. Dark side would receive a 23% bonus to CP which could PASS the CP CAPS..

As you can understand, the less active the underpopulated side is, the lesser the CP bonus will be. We do not want to provide a CP bonus to the side which is not striving for victory.

IF the underpopulated side SURPASSES the overpopulated side in terms of victories per player, then it is possible to receive a CP bonus which could overpass the (% of more players that the other side has), to a max. of 125% of that bonus. In our case, the CP bonus would never go over 37,5% (30x125%=37,5).

-------------

Taking into consideration all the above, and assuming that the Dark Side had a 23% CP bonus today, the total CP for today would have been:

Light: 46867
Dark: 30956 instead of 25168

As you can see, the Light Side STILL generates more CP but it also has MORE victories than the Dark Side because it is playing more battles.

IF the Dark side was doing more battles, similar to the amount of battles the Light side is doing, the CP bonus would be even bigger and with the extra CP and the bigger bonus, it could well surpass the Light side in CP.

Nice attempt, let see how it works

the AI army is also a good instrument of balancing, it should not produce the same amount for each side if the bonus is triggered

Ulfriden wrote:

Nice attempt, let see how it works

the AI army is also a good instrument of balancing, it should not produce the same amount for each side if the bonus is triggered

We wouldn't want to create a stalemate, so adding more factors in an attempt to balance out the population could create an unfair advantage.

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one questions though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus? Also, when would this be implementable?

Thanks.

ysosad wrote:

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one question though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus?

Thanks.

Cheers ysosad.

Base CP of course.

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one question though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus?

Thanks.

Cheers ysosad.

Base CP of course.

Very comprehensive post btw...gonna have to give you a +1 for that.

I added a 2nd question late: Any idea when this would be implementable?

ysosad wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one question though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus?

Thanks.

Cheers ysosad.

Base CP of course.

Very comprehensive post btw...gonna have to give you a +1 for that.

I added a 2nd question late: Any idea when this would be implementable?

The algorithm? In one day...

To create a window for the front end...more...possibly 2 days.

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one question though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus?

Thanks.

Cheers ysosad.

Base CP of course.

Very comprehensive post btw...gonna have to give you a +1 for that.

I added a 2nd question late: Any idea when this would be implementable?

The algorithm? In one day...

To create a window for the front end...more...possibly 2 days.

So, the impact could be seen as soon as Sunday/Monday? Impressive.

ysosad wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one question though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus?

Thanks.

Cheers ysosad.

Base CP of course.

Very comprehensive post btw...gonna have to give you a +1 for that.

I added a 2nd question late: Any idea when this would be implementable?

The algorithm? In one day...

To create a window for the front end...more...possibly 2 days.

So, the impact could be seen as soon as Sunday/Monday? Impressive.

If we do this tomorrow, then it can be seen on Saturday.

Then players will be able to have access to the data in a special window we will create by....Tuesday? Maybe..

I am personally just waiting for more positive votes on this...

Once this is done...it will be scheduled for tomorrow.

Sounds very good, thanks. So here's a positive vote   

+ 1 positive vote, then :-)

ysosad wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

ysosad wrote:

Hi Rune,

First off, let me say that it looks like a large step in the right direction, it looks quite good.

I do have one question though (as I like running figures): are the average CP/player that you provided going on base CP or is it including any current CP bonus?

Thanks.

Cheers ysosad.

Base CP of course.

Very comprehensive post btw...gonna have to give you a +1 for that.

I added a 2nd question late: Any idea when this would be implementable?

If Ysosad likes it, then I like it  . Heard rumours about a certain Monday, will that be next week?

Hope its not too late!? (OK, Saturday maybe, got it!)

Few details..

Rune wrote:

side would receive a 23% bonus to CP which could PASS the CP CAPS..

Does any % of bonus pass the CP caps, for each battle that the underpopulated side wins? Or only under certain circumstances? (eg all suicides get 160+23% on that day in your example, or ..?)

Rune wrote:

As you can see, the Light Side STILL generates more CP but it also has MORE victories than the Dark Side because it is playing more battles.

More battles mean more victories, or all attempts? Are all solos, coops etc counted as 1 battle? The same if a noob does normals and someone else does suicides? (and coop.. 1 battle x 2 persons, or 1 battle?)

A bit suspicious about comparing victories for the sides since people see how map looks and it affects the motivation. But oh well.

Rune wrote:

I am personally just waiting for more positive votes on this...

Ha I don't think anyone would be too opposed to try, since it's better than the current one... Then later you could wait for complaints :p

RuneSlayer wrote:

Ulfriden wrote:

Nice attempt, let see how it works

the AI army is also a good instrument of balancing, it should not produce the same amount for each side if the bonus is triggered

We wouldn't want to create a stalemate, so adding more factors in an attempt to balance out the population could create an unfair advantage.

right point let see how it will work.
And, change the map after each war, please =)

Fyrr wrote:

Does any % of bonus pass the CP caps, for each battle that the underpopulated side wins? Or only under certain circumstances? (eg all suicides get 160+23% on that day in your example, or ..?)

If a high lvl player can generate more CP with the CP bonus than the CP cap, then he will not be limited by the CP cap.

CP caps will also be increased for Nightmare, Suicide, Insane and of course PvP.

Fyrr wrote:

More battles mean more victories, or all attempts? Are all solos, coops etc counted as 1 battle? The same if a noob does normals and someone else does suicides? (and coop.. 1 battle x 2 persons, or 1 battle?)

A bit suspicious about comparing victories for the sides since people see how map looks and it affects the motivation. But oh well.

They count as 1 battle. In the beginning, I wanted to add weights to each battle, so for example Suicide would count as 2 battles, but I changed my mind because frankly a Suicide or a higher difficulty in general will always generate more rewards/CP to a player than a Normal one.

Fyrr wrote:

Ha Smile I don't think anyone would be too opposed to try, since it's better than the current one... Then later you could wait for complaints :p

Ok then!

how's about what i suggested in the other thread: do a concurrent map reset.
start over, more level playing field. that would actually motivate dark players: having an actual chance.

What about cp that we spend to protect our regions from wrecker. Light faction has internal war, someone want to help balance both faction. So Ulfriden it wont work as long as we have this war, we cant focus on attacking/defending on front line.

klaas wrote:

how's about what i suggested in the other thread: do a concurrent map reset.
start over, more level playing field. that would actually motivate dark players: having an actual chance.

This is not something that will be easy.

Even if we make a poll here, a lot of people who are not registered in the Forums (the majority of the BC players), will not have a say over it.

Hooray! This sounds promising.

RuneSlayer wrote:

klaas wrote:

how's about what i suggested in the other thread: do a concurrent map reset.
start over, more level playing field. that would actually motivate dark players: having an actual chance.

This is not something that will be easy.

Even if we make a poll here, a lot of people who are not registered in the Forums (the majority of the BC players), will not have a say over it.

  
In Erevos our side was so close to win and the map restart. We put lot of efforts and good manouvers there, all was lost and no aether gained by anyone, while in Olympus the lame light side of that world managed to lose 3 times in a row.
Who like me had not an account there could not get the reward after long fights.
So, now u say that we can't reset? bah..

I vote for a map changing and a map reset
This with the new algorithm.
I am not able to fight the dark side while they are so weak, it would be infamous So, restart and let's do a good war in a new challenging map (this one was good, but doing the same map 2 times is ugly)

Strachu wrote:

What about cp that we spend to protect our regions from wrecker. Light faction has internal war, someone want to help balance both faction. So Ulfriden it wont work as long as we have this war, we cant focus on attacking/defending on front line.

  
the first crying even before to try the new balancing method?
Strachu, u are better than this   

In a balanced war, i am a Light warrior, as u should know well! A good one, if i remember right 

Ulfriden wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

klaas wrote:

how's about what i suggested in the other thread: do a concurrent map reset.
start over, more level playing field. that would actually motivate dark players: having an actual chance.

This is not something that will be easy.

Even if we make a poll here, a lot of people who are not registered in the Forums (the majority of the BC players), will not have a say over it.

  
In Erevos our side was so close to win and the map restart. We put lot of efforts and good manouvers there, all was lost and no aether gained by anyone, while in Olympus the lame light side of that world managed to lose 3 times in a row.
Who like me had not an account there could not get the reward after long fights.
So, now u say that we can't reset?   bah..

I vote for a map changing and a map reset
This with the new algorithm.
I am not able to fight the dark side while they are so weak, it would be infamous So, restart and let's do a good war in a new challenging map (this one was good, but doing the same map 2 times is ugly)

You are a true warrior Ulfriden and the dark faction salutes you!   

Ulfriden wrote:

RuneSlayer wrote:

Ulfriden wrote:

Nice attempt, let see how it works

the AI army is also a good instrument of balancing, it should not produce the same amount for each side if the bonus is triggered

We wouldn't want to create a stalemate, so adding more factors in an attempt to balance out the population could create an unfair advantage.

right point let see how it will work.
And, change the map after each war, please =)

+1


For now the war is too easy , we win hexs at all cycles , we dont need strategy just put cp , i understand why darkies stop figthing

Less Fun


Ulfriden have tried to balance the game , but there is too much probs with that , i hope you ll found a better way for this prob


THX for the good job

Boboknack wrote:

[
You are a true warrior Ulfriden and the dark faction salutes you!  

  im affected...

but wait to taste my greataxe  in the new world!

klaas wrote:

how's about what i suggested in the other thread: do a concurrent map reset.
start over, more level playing field. that would actually motivate dark players: having an actual chance.

+1


I agree , but peoples who are in top players ranking will not be happy if you just reset like that