Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 I hereby suggest that the Conquest Ladder be "wiped" and all Nations start from ZERO points before the end of the present cycle of 7 days. It is proper, it is fair and it permits a clean test of the system. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anolytic Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Every cycle should start at zero, so only successful attacks or successful defences give points. Otherwise just wiping it this one time you're just taking away from those who have worked hard up until now and have already conquered a lot. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monk33y Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 I think the conquest cycle should be, two weeks fighting then finish, and one week rest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 Just now, monk33y said: I think the conquest cycle should be, two weeks fighting then finish, and one week rest. Makes sense given the timescale of 22 hours per PB and 48 hours cooldown on regions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 Just now, rediii said: There is a reason why you lose 2 points loosing a port. Correct. From zero to -2 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monk33y Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) If we want a ballanced game, either the Cooldown on successful defence is needed or increased to match the Cooldown on a capture. As a pirate on eu, next week we'll have only Mt. No chance of ever taking back the shallows. We will just evolve and become the pirates we should be. Last night we were told that the British are considering agreeing to fix which nation wins in certain cycles, if the Danes/sweeds agree!! That should never be allowed to happen!! I'm not suprised that the brits want to play without fighting! Edited July 18, 2017 by monk33y 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 Are we exchanging ideas or debating the purposes of playing ? Get a grip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 Why ? We just started I do play a lot of boardgames with similar systems where there's prestige points at baseline 0 with positive and negative scales. ( on a note, not a fan of the system but a fan of the idea, so implementation perfection is what is sought after without unncessary complications ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 attack/defense does not work as it is abusable. The current system actually could work, I would test it for some weeks. Why? Who is the biggest should be your main target. GB attacks ES to get more ports and they defend vs the rest. The rest have to attack GB and probably try to get free ports from ES. If you do not attack GB they will win for sure. The system is asking you to attack your friends. If SVE grows a lot what is DN going to do? Only one of you can earn marks? I know, it feels bad after all these years if you carebears actually have to play the game. Can you guys start a war or will you just watch how GB is earning marks? How many weeks of carebear diplomacy is needed until you grow a set? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monk33y Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) I think the scores should reset otherwise the winning nations will be unstoppable. It should be set that the nation who wins cycle one, is heavily unlikely to win cycle two!!! If for example the sweeds win cycle one with 20 ports, the scores should be reset, meaning the sweeds would be at a disadvantage for cycle two!!! Not this rubbish scores continue so the two or three top nations are uncatchable Edited July 18, 2017 by monk33y Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, monk33y said: Last night we were told that the British are considering agreeing to fix which nation wins in certain cycles, if the Danes/sweeds agree!! I am so surprised. Edited July 18, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 Gotcha. How would you make points then ? Make sure that there's incentive in not losing while winning also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monk33y Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 But if the score reset between cycles back to 0 taking into consideration the ports a nation owns. If gb with cycle one with 100 ports, at the start of cycle two everyone who wants to win will be forced to attack gb. I know it's hard attacking your friends Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) 6 minutes ago, rediii said: This can be changed if win/lose each portbattle is adjusted. 2 points lossing and 1 point gain each won portbattle is just not enough. It has to be WAY bigger to give nations a reason to fight and to be able to win a round only with a successfull campaign. The current system is asking you to end your carebear alliances and attack big nations. Your system does nothing for carebear alliances. Big nations have control points, small nations have to attack them to decrease their control points. If one nation grows big, friends may become enemies. Edited July 18, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hethwill Posted July 18, 2017 Author Share Posted July 18, 2017 Leave particular server politics out of here. Why 15 or 20 points ? I think the single digits work perfectly. 1 point per conquest. 2 points per loss of region. - forces a counter attack to regain 1 single lost point and deny that same point to the enemy. Technically a sucessfull attack then countered by a loss puts it at 0 level between two nations. RiderZ has a strong point. Diplomacy becomes important as long as it suits the needs. Once the biggest contenders are dealt with, former allies may become enemies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 6 minutes ago, rediii said: So you prefer the current system with no possibility for small nations to win ever? Why you cannot win ever? 1st round, you probably cannot win, true. If you do not attack GB, they will win, as they have most ports and they have easy access to ES ports. ES ports are free as they do not have enough players to defend those, if even one. DK and SE has a good change to win right now if they attack GB and ES, and especially GB as they are still active. Pirates may try to capture free ports from ES, but they do not have SORRY any more. How well the rest are organized? FR, NL, US, do they even have numbers? If you spend your energy hunting these small nations, you are definitely not going to win anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) 8 minutes ago, rediii said: Right now GB on the server is easily able to win the next 3-4 maprounds I think and until then they have such a huge advantage of points that they don't care if they loose 5 regions or not and keep winning anyway because 10 points right now is nothing. GB wont even win the 1st one if all the rest attack them. They have to capture two ES ports for every port they lose for you. If you continue raping the small ones like usually, yes, you will lose. Edited July 18, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) Maybe I have understood it wrong, it can be that I have actually misunderstood... At the end of cycle, you get 1 point from a region, more if important region. You lose 2 points if you have lost a region. ES has 20 points, so natural target for GB, they cannot win if ES does not lose ports. As this is something they probably have to do, and they have a good front with them to encourage them to do so. The rest have to attack GB to create negative points for them, at the same time increasing their own points. If you spend time attacking small nations, GB will win for sure. Lets say GB lost 10 regions and ES 10 as well. It is probably either DK or SE that is going to win. If DK is winning, SE should attack DK. You should not get any points from won/lost battles, just from regions controlled at the end. If you fight multiple times from the same region and it finally ends for the original owner, no points should be granted or taken. Edited July 18, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 7 minutes ago, rediii said: Earliest right now is that we go for a 1 point region tomorrow. So portbattle on the day after. On the portbattleday GB already has a advantage of 21 points or so. Do they care about losing 2 points? haha. What if SE, DK, PR, FR, NL, US all attack GB and take one port from them. That is -12 point for them. Like I said, small nations have to attack together vs big ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, rediii said: What you miss in your explanation is that points will not be resettet at the end of a round. I give you a port and get -2 for this cycle and you get +1. You will win and after reset you give the region back. It probably cannot be reset. Edited July 18, 2017 by Cmdr RideZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr RideZ Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 1 minute ago, rediii said: A increased pointgain by winning portbattles would encourage people to be offensive. Right now, if dutch for example attack GB they mostly help the nation right behind GB and not the dutch. Carebear alliances will just attack small ones or one nation together. It has to be from control, that it forces you to attack big ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teutonic Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Wait. The points won't get reset after every week? I thought that was the plan and this week was just the culmination of conquest from after the wipe patch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teutonic Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 So "old control will move to next round" means it will be reset to 0? I don't need a copy paste of a quote i have already read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teutonic Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 Ok thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monk33y Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 (edited) Is the sweeds want to stop the British winning round one, would George Town not do that, -2 points to gb and gives the sweeds a raiding point for the future!! But the big three will not attack each other while the pirates/French/USA/Spain have ports. When it's only down to three nations on eu will the big three fight each other. But the server will be dead!!!!! After two rounds the 2 point ports should be added too any nation that wins two or more cycles.... Making those nations the targets for the nxt round!!! Edited July 18, 2017 by monk33y Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now