Players killing game with boring play

[Dadtallica]

27 v 3 this morning.  27 players having fun without worrying about side balancing.  Maybe not so much fun for the 3.   

One man’s trash…

[popeye]

"Another idea is to become so restrictive with ENY..."

The thing about ENY is that it is global not local.  So, there is no incentive for the 17 side to attack the 10 side instead of the 3 side.  ENY applies to either situation, so why not attack the 3.

Another approach would be to modify down-times according to side numbers:

Modified down-time = normal time * side number / side number.

Bish 17, Knit 3, Rook 10

Bish attacks Knit:

Modified down-time = 30 min * 3 / 17 = 5.3 minutes. 

Bish attacks Rook

Modified down-time = 30 min * 10 / 17 = 17.6 minutes.

Rook attacks Bish

Modified down-time = 30 min * 17 / 10 = 51 minutes.

This would create a clear incentive for Bish to attack Rooks and Rooks to attack Bish rather than gang up on the lowest number Knit.

(It might be necessary to scale or cap the modified time so it doesn't get too extreme.  Also, the side numbers for the calculation would be rolling averages to reduce volatility.)

Another idea for the ash heap....   

[CptTrips]

I think it might solve the problem, but would not be popular. 

Are wildly unbalanced player numbers popular?


The point you made about the Auto-Balance until some threshold is reach is important.  Battlefield did this.  It could allow a little leeway until things go too far and then start auto-switching.

This allowed players to manage things themselves to a certain point. So if the players behave like gentlemen and voluntarily keep things balanced, it would never even need to kick in and they wouldn't even know it was there.  Only when things got excessively unbalanced would it need to start to kick in.  Handle things yourself, or it will be handled for you.

There are 4 main alternatives I see (and variations of each)

1.  Make ENY painful enough to whip them into moving sides.  Possible extend to ENY for Fuel\Ord.
2.  Start auto-moving people past some threshold and don't let people log in to a high side.
3.  Hope players themselves will move to keep things balanced for fair play.     Maybe find ways to bribe them.
4.  Get over and accept that wildly unbalanced player numbers are part of the game at times.  Maybe justify it as every team get their turn in the barrel eventually. 

[CptTrips]

So, there is no incentive for the 17 side to attack the 10 side instead of the 3 side.

I find no blame in that.  Ever read Sun Tzu?  You match strength against weakness, not strength against strength.  I consider that good tactics.

If you don't want that, you keep numbers balanced so that obvious tactical strategy doesn't present itself.

[Dadtallica]

Auto side switching would be a dealbreaker for me and I assume many others.

I really don’t think this is as much of an issue that it gets made out to be but I only play in prime time. We had about 40 each side last night and people still complained.

Changing it all for a select few who play at off times is not going to happen sadly. This is a US based game after all.

[popeye]

I find no blame in that.  Ever read Sun Tzu?  You match strength against weakness, not strength against strength.  I consider that good tactics.

Maybe if Sun Tzu had written, "The Art of Having Fun", his tactical advice would have been different.   

[Shane]

Many in the morning are US players themselves and are often here throughout the day. That's kind of selfish thinking on your part, "Changing it all for a select few who play at off times is not going to happen sadly. This is a US based game after all."   I haven't even asked for anything except for morning players to set a different tone to foster better game play for the rest of the day.   Even of some of these ideas were implemented, you'd never be affected being an evening player since eny doesn't get overly skewed for any length of time.

You haven't/can't even offer any solutions if you have no idea about what goes on when you're limited to playing evenings and mavbe some weekends.  You're just blindly defending what you think is an attack on your chess piece (your ride or die stance is misplaced, admirable, but still misplaced.)

The morning sets the tone for the afternoon/evenings.  You're a bish, playing primetime, you'll find your action for the reasons I outlined in the very first post.  Eagler only plays primetime, generally as a knit, and he's struggling to find action. Why would that be?

Morning action spills over and sets the tone for afternoon/evening. How would morning changes affect your evening gameplay, I wonder? Do you have any ideas?

Bish complaining about being double-teamed in the evenings (and they do, complain, but not defend) calls to mind the meme of the kid riding a bike who stuck a stick thru his own wheel and cries about the spill.

Like Trips said, every side has their time in the bucket, but not every player.  Knits and Rooks have their locusts, but they're somewhat diluted by higher numbers playing in evenings.

I dunno, sun tzu has little relevance in a game at this stage in its life cycle.  Game.  (Or what Popeye also said, lol.)

Auto side switching would be a dealbreaker for me and I assume many others.

I really don’t think this is as much of an issue that it gets made out to be but I only play in prime time. We had about 40 each side last night and people still complained.

Changing it all for a select few who play at off times is not going to happen sadly. This is a US based game after all.

[CptTrips]

Maybe if Sun Tzu had written, "The Art of Having Fun", his tactical advice would have been different.   

But if you had balanced numbers that would never occur.

So what is the root cause problem?  A strong team rationally attacking the weakest enemy?  Or grossly unbalanced numbers which present them that oppertunity?

[CptTrips]

I dunno, sun tzu has little relevance in a game at this stage in its life cycle.  Game.

Nah.  Sun Ztu applies to game theory equally well as war. 
It is even very applicable in business if you look past the wording and see the underlying wisdom.

Same with the Book of Five Rings. 

[Shane]

End goal: Win the war. Kill the game.  All worship the mighty Sun!

Nah.  Sun Ztu applies to game theory equally well as war. 
It is even very applicable in business if you look past the wording and see the underlying wisdom.

Same with the Book of Five Rings. 

[CptTrips]

End goal: Win the war. Kill the game.  All worship the mighty Sun!

Well, OK then, you are back to what you can control and what you can't.

A larger team will often attack the weakest enemy first because that maximizes their competitive advantage.  It is a tactically sound strategy.

If you are hoping they will voluntarily refrain from that...well, good luck with that.

So if you want to change that, again, only code, map design or HTC rules can alter that behavior.

[Dadtallica]

I’ve been playing on and off since 2009 and I’ve played at all hours. Maybe US based was not the best way to describe, I was referring to it as a reflection of time.

I’ve also offered plenty of solutions in plenty of threads.

I also think three sides is the best for the now and the future of the game but lots of people are not happy with that. The overall point here is it’s time to let it go.

Maybe we may get some tweaks to things here and there but major coding changes are just not going to happen barring some shift in current events. ENY changes are a good compromise but I don’t know what that would take to accomplish. Two weeks?

I like the game the way it is… sorry.

[JimmyD3]

My 2 cents, Kong's Adjusted Down time suggestion has merit, with what I believe would require minimal coding change.

[popeye]

Thanks, Kenai.

As interesting as it is to speculate on technical "fixes" to hording, I suspect that current players would be unhappy with anything that interfered with their fun.  If the game were new and no one had expectations for rules and gameplay, some technical anti-horde coding might work, but I suspect it is too late to introduce such a change.  The Horde obviously enjoys the game just as it is, or they wouldn't show up every morning for it.

Maybe the Auto-Side-Switch reward could be increased to persuade players to even the sides.  How about exempting AAS players from ENY restrictions?

Edit:  Um, players switched to the lowest-number side wouldn't be affected by ENY anyway.  So, my idea has already been implemented, and it's working great!   

[CptTrips]

How about exempting AAS players from ENY restrictions?

That is not an unreasonable idea. 
But it would require coad. 
Probably less than fiddling with all the ord.