CP Bonus Ceiling

Many players desire change with the CP bonus. With so many individuals having a variety of opinions it is difficult to determine exactly what the community wants. In part, I believe that is due to the many 'parts' of the CP bonus.

I created this poll as the first in a series of polls to systematically address those many parts in the hopes that once the developers can make changes they fully understand where the community stands on the matter. Hopefully, this will take away any guesswork or, perhaps worse, any delays to making needed changes.

---

The current poll is on whether to change the CP bonus ceiling or leave it as it is.

5-day poll, multiple selections allowed.

---

Among other items, in no particular order, future polls may include:

1. Overpopulated Faction CP bonus
2. Minimum Population Difference for CP Bonus Activation
3. Trial period
4. Diminishing base CP bonus
5. Removal/Reduction of Non-combatants in the CP bonus calculation
6. Maximum(/Minimum) CP bonus modifier

I don't presume to know every relevant issue or intend to make the point that these are the most important ones. If you have any suggestions, please PM me in-game or through a forum PM...just so that we can keep this thread limited to the discussion on the CP bonus ceiling.

Thanks.

I picked 25 %, because I think a 40 % increase is a lot and maybe to much?

I'm not entirely sure what a decrease to the CP bonus will do to/for the game - hope it will make the game more fair somehow, plus getting a small reward for playing a lot of battles, I think should be a part of the game.

I said various months ago that the cp bonus just should be implemented to balance the population issue between darkies and ligthies, I said that an stalemate could be the result of that but to break the stalemate Ysosad and Johntheright suggested to create chokepoints special regions that will be taked by special conditions with player skill instead of grinding, like only pvp, and that only certain amount of players chosen by a faction council would be able to attack chokepoints, why chokepoints?

1. To break the stalemate chokepoints would be added to the game as secundary targets, these will be accesable regardless of the map situation, these chokepoints are supposed to give a cp generation and cap bonus to the faction that own and that the bonus gradually increases over time, is a faction own it for many cycles.

2. Chokepoints aren´t normal regions, and these can be only taked with player skill and not grinding, and a limitation of how many players can touch these chokepoints to prevent population/grinders to get it easily, this mean special winning conditions to take them and to give both sides the same chance of get the chokepoints and with this the both sides have same chances of winning/losing the game based on player skill.

And returning to the topic I voted reduce the bonus back to 25%, 40% seems to be so high and I don´t want the same thing that happened to darkies happen to ligthies too, more people may leave the game is something don´t get done, and please reduce the power or eliminate the CA armies, I personally don´t care much of wnning/losing the war or cp but is people are leaving the game for that then I start to care about it, the only reason of why I play this game is because is a multiplayer game, is the people leave that mean no people to play with in coops or against in pvp, and the most fun part of the game will be gone, I like all others just want keep alive the game, I don´t want or like always keep grinding and figthing against the same damn bored AI that just rush my army give me recourses frags and excellent perfomance I see fun in getting good frags and crafting but that is not compared to the fun of fighting in pvp and in coops.

The only better idea I have is change the victory conditions of the game and give both sides the same chance of winning based on player skills, don´t force people to grind solos until they get bored and leave the game, I think you should focus on save the main parts of a multiplayer games that are coop and pvp.

I think 35% would be about right. Combine this with nerfing capital armies and it should start to feel less like fighting against "game systems" and more like fighting against the opposing faction.

Using choke points in that fashion would prevent a large portion of the players from ever having a chance to be on an even footing with the more developed ones. It isn't a solution to the current problem of finding an effective balance to a bonus between one faction and the other based on population.

As far as the bonus goes, I voted 40% (no change). 40% is supposed to be a cap, not a constant. If a limit is imposed on to what is exactly considered an active player, the bonus will never hit that high. A minimum CP requirement should be imposed to count as an "active" player for the purposes of bonus calculation. Average victories should still play a role as preventing a lazy faction from getting a bonus, but by placing a minimum average victory number the count is thrown askew and leaves the window open for possible abuse of the count. The minimum CP should be high enough to prevent someone from creating multiple accounts and just logging in, but low enough that someone who plays for a few weeks is able to become an "active" player in the count.

I voted for 25%. My understanding was that the bonus existed to help balance the population differences between the 2 factions. That difference generally seems to be around 25%, give or take 5%. So, to me, 40% seems too high.

But this vote comes with a caveat. People that login and generate ZERO CPs should not be counted in the equation. I'd like to see that change before any change is made to the percentage bonus (though I think the bonus should be close to whatever the population difference is). Since player logins and average battles are so important now, some of us have been keeping closer tabs on guild member logins and CP generation. I was quite surprised to find that 25-30% of Diamond members login but don't generate any CP. And these are low-level players....not farmers that collect resources, build their cities, and donate to the guild. These players are at a low enough level that we would gladly give them resources to build-up their cities. So, basically, they are players that add nothing of value to the game, and whose login "activity" is suspicious and skewing the population difference. This suspicious login activity needs to be dealt with first.

Am I the only one who thinks that in a multiple choice poll it's reasonable to select more than one thing?  

I personally don't have issues even with 40%, since it's just a cap. Meaning that population imbalance can get higher than this, and then what? Would low cap be enough?
Or populations/effort aren't that different, and then we never reach the cap...

Narmis wrote:

I voted for 25%. My understanding was that the bonus existed to help balance the population differences between the 2 factions. That difference generally seems to be around 25%, give or take 5%. So, to me, 40% seems too high.

you mean that the effort shouldn't be rewarded with bonus? Only the difference in population? In the case you describe, if 40% was never reached, would it still be bad?

Also, there seems to be some bigger problems with victories per player?

yso, you might want to add an option 'yes, I've read the last sentences of your post' and see how many people select that.

There should not be cap for cp bonus to population imbalance, there can be 10 players on one side and 100 on the other, 25 or 40 % wont solve the problem.
Also 1 bonus that contain population imbalance and efforts is unfair, light side never got any bonus even when we have better victories/player ratio. Now the problem is players activity that gives us nothing, some players quit coz of it.

We need few bonuses, 1 for population imbalance, maybe one for cp imbalance I mean big players vs new(small) players, other bonus for efforts. Something to think about.

Fyrr wrote:

you mean that the effort shouldn't be rewarded with bonus? Only the difference in population?

Maybe I have my BC history wrong, but I thought the bonus was only started to help balance the population issue. I don't remember there ever be a "work real hard" bonus. So, yes, I think the bonus should be used to balance population. Faction effort should be a part of it. But if populations were even, I absolutely don't think there should be an effort bonus. With even population numbers, increased effort leads to increased CPs leads to winning the war. Why would the winning faction need a bonus on top of that? Makes no sense to me.

it is nice to see new posts on a old topic . Keep trying maybe in 1-2 yeares somebody will look in this posts and change something