Reward for active players

[Luke]

Split from other thread...


About activity...anyone noticed the activity meter on userpages inside the game? That will soon be tied to a daily bonus. The higher, the more geos you get(with a maximum ofcourse).
I'm hoping that will be an incentive to more attacks already.

But I have this feeling it's still missing something. Throwing this out here because there might be someone with a brilliant idea.

[ghostdog]

The activity meter is a great idea but how do you derive at that number?

[Luke]

It's the killed and lost hp devided by amount of days you have been active, and then devided by another number to make it easier to read.

[ghostdog]

It's the killed and lost hp devided by amount of days you have been active, and then devided by another number to make it easier to read.

When you say active you mean days logged on gewar? & I'm not sure that hp's killed & lost in & of itself is a good indicator of activity. I think attacks made has to be a part of the equation or someone could just log on everyday make 1 big army a week send it somewhere & let it get killed & it could appear that player is very active

[Luke]

Activity meter is the wrong word then. I don't mean game activity. I mean if you are attacking or saving.

Which is hard, that is why its still in testing fase. Well, so far we know killed + lost hp should be part of it. I did think about the fact you can make 1 huge army a week and go on a stomping route. But with every idea, you can find a way to get around it. Amount of attacks would just mean people dont make bigger armies anymore, but make several smaller armies(even those that are already active) to get extra geos...so that one can not be part of the equation. And other things become too hard...can't force someone to do something several times a day. Pushing players to be active every single day will just drive them away.

That is why so far I found the only thing that makes the difference between a saver and an active player the amount of killed and lost hps.

But extra ideas(that can actually be done, dont drive players away, make sense) are welcome.

*some more info on what this is supposed to do:
Reward those high in ranking. Those are usually not the savers. If this means that savers will once a week come out with a huge army and attack a heavily defended city just to earn something, then isn't that a good start already? But I don't think a saver would do that just for the geos...because the army he bought and attacked with cost more than the reward for activity he will gain. This reward is to support those that are active because right now savers get more rewards.
It would be weird if you would get all costs of troops back. Then troops would be free or even earn you money.

It's still unfinished, so all ideas are welcome. Sometimes feel I'm missing something with this idea.

Could use it's own thread though. Might better split this thread.

[RagingMongoose]

What about if the average number of total hps killed and lost by all players in time period X is calculated, then a bonus based on the percentage you've killed/lost above that is paid out. For example, if you've just killed the average figure you receive a flat bonus amount. If you've killed the average plus 10% more, you receive the flat bonus + 10%. You could cap the bonus at whatever you deemed appropriate, say +30%, to ensure no one could profit too much just from making large hit and run armies.

I also think you should only receive the bonus if you hold value as this will ensure hit and runs don't take over the game.

I should also mention that this is a simplified twist on one of Prophet's main ideas, not one that has come purely from my own brain haha.

[Ptah]

hmm, holding value seems interesting condition.
Anyway, it looks like "best attacker of the day bonus", right?
because even sending a bunch of armies around and wasting oil - also some kind of activity.

So, the player, who used 100k hp army and was the biggest this day - should receive some return. And even if the best attacker was with 300t army - there should be minimal award (lets say 100 geo)

I think 100 geo + percentage of hp killed looks fair.
Not sure, but if you killed 100 000 hp, receiving for ex. 500 geo back isnt so bad.:confused:

[Luke]

At the moment the idea was that the higher the score, the higher the bonus. Till a maximum ofcourse.

So what you guys are saying is that value should be added to it a bit? Now, just to make it more clear to me: an example...how would it work?

[Ptah]

frankly speaking - no idea how value can work. Let's forget about it now.

[RagingMongoose]

At the moment the idea was that the higher the score, the higher the bonus. Till a maximum ofcourse.

So what you guys are saying is that value should be added to it a bit? Now, just to make it more clear to me: an example...how would it work?

Having thought about it a bit, this is a difficult one. On the one hand if bonuses are given purely on hps killed then hit and runs could take over the game. However, on the other hand then including value could cause the rich to get richer if they keep their opponents zeroed, thereby creating a massive imbalance in the game's economy.

Maybe Ptah is right, leave value out of it for now. Implement bonuses based on hps only then see if hit and runs become a real problem, tweaking the system as required if necessary.

Forgot to say before, really pleased to see this being brought in Luke, it should really shake the game up if bonuses are set at the correct level. Good work man.

[yome]

When are you planning to put this into effect. I think it's a great idea!

[Spywareagen7]

Things that show activity which I think should be included:
-Attacking (homebases/cities, intercepting armies), instead of the ratio being based on amount of troops/hp killed, I think that there should be levels: For example
---50K HP killed: +.10%
---100K HP killed: +.25%
---150K HP killed: +.50%
---200K HP killed: +.75%
---250K HP killed: + 1%
---Anything over 300K is back at the minimum amount so to prevent people from just blowing their bank wad in one day and recuperating a ton of money doing so
All these numbers are samples, they should somehow relate into the percentage.

it would run similar to our interest rates:
10% for the first 5000, 7.5% for the next 5000 Geos, 5% for the next 10000 geos... etc

-Moving armies (if you chase an army that's hit and running for 2 hours, but can't get close enough to kill it, shouldn't your effort still be applauded for keeping your opponent on his toes? If you're strategically moving armies to threaten your opponents, or make them chase you down to kill you, shouldn't you be rewarded?)
EDIT: I think that moving armies should have a structure as well to encourage people to have more armies moving and threatening enemies, encouraging others to further hunt those armies down. A scale like above could be put in place:
---10 army moves: +.05%
---30 army moves: +.1%
---60 army moves: +.2%
---100 army moves: +.3%
---100+ army moves: +.4%

-Jeweling, if you're jeweling you're logged into the game, I'm usually also watching for attacks on myself and teammates, looking for armies to intercept, and posting on our board looking for where we need help, updates on events happening... etc, I think consideration should be given here, especially considering the limited number of playerrs who jewel as it is. This could be capped out at a very low max obviously
---100 army moves: +.05%
---500 army moves: +.1%
---1000 army moves: +.2%
---2500 army moves: +.3%
---5000+ army moves: +.4%

-Maintaining Value/number of cities: If attacks are being rewarded, shouldn't we balance that out with a bonus for holding your cities/value so that hit and runs (which seem to be everyone's fear already) aren't the only strategy in the game that payoff? If you can maintain your value/number of cities over an extended period of time by continually recovering cities that get taken from you, or fighting off militias to recapture a city that was hit and run or radiation wearing off you should be rewarded as well.

I don't know how to properly integrate a % for amount of value held but think that it's essential to the system working correctly, perhaps the amount of value and number of cities held determines the max bonus that you can receive.

[Luke]

I could think about some of those(warning though: means the activity reward will be pushed back several months as it sounds very complex), but there were already 2 things I'm not willing to do:

Army moves: this just means that even active players instead of moving a bigger army will just move several smaller armies. This doesn't show activity at all, but just changes gameplay into something i do not want. Just way more stress on the server. Plus inactive players will just move armies around without a goal. Again more stress on the server.

Jewelling: I stated a lot of times I'm against jewelling. It's emergency cash or startup cash. I don't want to promote it too much. I believe 99% of the players agree jewelling is boring. It's part of gewar, a unique part, but forcing people to jewel more likely means losing more players at the same time.

Value: thats the one I could be considering. However as said, it's very complex so would take a lot of debating and a lot of thinking about how to code it well. Danger with value:
Savers that are NAP'ed still gaining over this. Plus imagine the active player being zero'd(or not even zero'd but just hit hard) right before the cron runs that hands out the rewards once a day. You'd be pissed, right? Because you are active, but you simply can't be online at the moment the cron runs because in your timezon its 4am then. Thats why it needs a lot of debating.
And one doesn't want to hold too strong onto value, as then a city pays out double.

Levels(the first one you start with): that is already in place. Instead of in the activity meter, the levels are in the payout.

It isn't easy to find that thing, is it? I've been thinking about it for months. It was then that I came to the conclusion to keep it simple as more complex isn't always better. To make my idea work, cities would indeed need to be worth much more to not change gameplay either. I'm not affraid people will create armies to get the bonus, as the army is more expensive than the bonus they get.

[Spywareagen7]

luke if you're using number of cities or value as a factor, it shouldn't be based on a cron, it should solely be based on average value / cities held throughout the period of time that the HP killed or whatever is being calculated within.

This would mean that if I held cairo for 6 hours in a 24 hour period, BigKeefy held it for 12 hours, and itchy held it for 6 hours I would get 1/4 of it's value for the day added towards my bonus, BigKeefy gets half it's value added, and itchy gets 1/4 of it's value added

I can see not wanting to further encourage jeweling, eventually it's a part of the game that will be killed off in my opinion so I'd let that slide

As for army moves, I think it deserves a little more input and consideration, even if it's a minor factor it has to have something to do with your activity.

[Luke]

Activity is the wrong word also. It's just based on not saving but attacking. However number of attacks is something I thought of first time also...but then came to the conclusion it doesn't make sense. It just forces every player to attack with smaller armies. Gewar would be so very slow.

Jewelling: Mind you though it's the basic of gewar, and therefor will always be here. But I think more and more it will be for emergency cash. Still the most original gewar feature though.

Ah yes, average value. That is possible. But then I would recommend only minor. Because as soon as city tax goes up, they already pay out and we really don't want cities to pay out twice. If you gain geos from a city, you already are winning from that.

[Spywareagen7]

yeah I guess that makes sense luke. thanks for clarifying a little better, I like the openness to discussion of these changes, the more people that pitch in ideas the better so lets keep them coming ladies and gentleman.


P.s. In true gentleman fashion I'll continue to like forum posts that make sense this reset

[ghostdog]

However number of attacks is something I thought of first time also...but then came to the conclusion it doesn't make sense. It just forces every player to attack with smaller armies. Gewar would be so very slow.


What forces players to attack with smaller armies is under defended cities which most are nowadays, scouting the size of an army or lack of geos. if you remove these attacks from your equation then I dare say you will be removing more than 50% of all attacks made in this game

[Spywareagen7]

Ghostdog is right, there's still the benefit of attacking with small armies to get troop counts and add a few hp's to your kill sheet, but some alliances have members (like ghostdog) who do a ton of recon and it REALLY helps out their team and requires a lot of time commitment, why wouldn't this be equally rewarded

[bluecoat]

Maybe have it done like fantasy hockey, or any kind of fantasy pool and make it Rotisserie style. Have the armies lost and killed earn a maximum 2.5 points and have number of hp killed and lost earn a maximum of 7.5 points. So if you rank first in both categories which may be as many as you want, you have 10 points, if someone passes you in either category, you drop in the ranking and you have 9.90 all depending on the number of players.

[Luke]

@Spy: It is. It's already in the total killed hps. It's not much, but as I said before this is not an 'activity' reward. I chose the wrong word as said before.

Rewarding 'number of attacks' makes no sense imo and changes total gameplay. Then it's even better to have no reward at all. I'm leaning towards that now actually. Because I have the feeling that killed hps + lost hps is still missing something, but I can't figure out what. I just know it's not number of attacks. That changes both gameplay, and we'd have a much slower server when players start doing their big wars with small armies(especially with the multiple send armies with 1 click that is coming). But then again killed + lost hps doesn't feel 'complete', and I have a feeling now we aren't going to get this right or don't have the means within the game yet to get this right(maybe the game is still missing something).

[bluecoat]

As for alliance stats, you could maybe do the same and have it rotisserie style, but based on average cities held per day, average value held per day, average troops lost and killed per day, average online time per players within the alliance per day. etc.

[Capt_ItchyBeard]

I have been reading this and need to say at first I liked the idea, but now not so much.

I think it will bring more hit and running in the game which to be honest is one aspect of the game which I think stinks. If you want to get people fighting payout more on resources start players with more geo's when you reset.

bein' th' dog shipmate I be, me mates will need more time in cites t' ensure that all th' rum an' lasses be havin' be taken care o'.

Want to make it cool if your army takes a city it must remain in that city for more the 24 hours. That will kill hit and runs and let players defend there cites.
;i02
Did I mention thanks for all that you do Luke

[Luke]

Ok then that is all I needed. The idea is officially cancelled :).

Then I also dont need to break my head about it anymore, and can move on to the next thing.

ps: I'm pro hit and run though(atleast its still action). But I know many are not and don't want to get complaints again.

*edit: although it is cancelled, I should add that when I think about it...it would be stupid to do hit and runs because of the bonus...you'd lose more because an army costs more than the bonus. But then again I already understand the add-on is going nowhere. There is no way to initiate a bonus for activity or reward active players. Probably never will be.
I only want to do features that are clear. Not features that are 'out there' and confusing etc.

[Peonboss]

I just don't understand the idea. The reward is called city income. If you are not active you loose it.

People hit and run you then you retake the cities. Or if your not active you don't.

[Specter]

I just don't understand the idea. The reward is called city income. If you are not active you loose it.

People hit and run you then you retake the cities. Or if your not active you don't.
Say's the fella who just collects cities and doesn't war entire round :dwarf

[Peonboss]

Why start a flame in the middle of a good thread, that helps no one. Especially since all you need to do is look on hall of fame and add hp's up.

[RagingMongoose]

Ok then that is all I needed. The idea is officially cancelled :).

Then I also dont need to break my head about it anymore, and can move on to the next thing.

ps: I'm pro hit and run though(atleast its still action). But I know many are not and don't want to get complaints again.

*edit: although it is cancelled, I should add that when I think about it...it would be stupid to do hit and runs because of the bonus...you'd lose more because an army costs more than the bonus. But then again I already understand the add-on is going nowhere. There is no way to initiate a bonus for activity or reward active players. Probably never will be.
I only want to do features that are clear. Not features that are 'out there' and confusing etc.

That's a real shame. In my opinion then this is a much needed feature, one that should be added and one that would help the game immensely.

The issue here is that as happens with all public discussions, the idea has spiralled out of control. What was a simple idea based on simple code which calculated a couple of variables has turned into some monster with crons and a good couple of thousand lines of code being required.

The original discussion was sound, with the idea put forward being simple but effective. This game never seems to progress once any idea is put forward to a "public vote" and I've seen very few relevant responses being raised that are actually helpful in how it could be done, just complications to the idea or wild wish lists that would take weeks to code for very little benefit. That is why I backed off from my suggestion of incorporating value into the equation, it was unnecessary and over-complicated.

Peon is right - Value is rewarded already with city income. To me it seems logical that if value is rewarded, hps killed should be rewarded too given that it is the other main statistic to judge performance by.

Why not implement a simple reward based on hps and that's it? See how it goes, see what issues arise, see what effect it has on gameplay. There's nothing to lose, everything to gain, and those that moan about it should just be told to shut up. Not everyone will agree with it, they never will around here, but sometimes a good idea should be implemented and players told to like it or lump it if it's for the good of the game like this one. If there really are serious issues with it and these are proven to be problematic after a decent amount of time then fine, no problem, the code can be removed and the reward disappears. Nothing ventured, nothing gained!

I know I'll get some moaning coming my way after this post, however players should remember that this addition would be to my detriment as I'm not that active these days and therefore rewarding activity is not in my personal best interests.

[Ptah]

why people complain/hate H&R? such tactic has sense, its a part of game, its PURE ATTACK and EARNING HP, but hit'n'runner of course not such rich as city holder. If you are active player, not napped, don't return cities - H&R almost useless against you ;smoking

[Starbuck]

I agree with Mongoose, nothing will happen in this game if we don't try a few things and see what happens. Awarding activity should've happened a long time ago imo.

[RagingMongoose]

If we're talking about increasing activity, or making it more advantageous to be active, the bigger picture that I would like to see happen is:

1) Implement a simple reward system for hps killed as Luke suggested.

2) Only pay interest on the first 10k geos banked, but raise the interest rate to a flat 20%.

3) Increase the strength of nuke shields so 5-6 nukes are required - this would allow an increase in the size of armies defending cities, thereby mitigating some of the hit and run concerns.

4) Possibly reimplement the minimum value requirement for bank access and interest earning.

All of these combined would mean that players would have to be more active and those who are, i.e. the ones who make this game what it is, would be rewarded fairly for their effort and hard work. There would be no advantage to sitting and saving, the only way to earn additional geos to keep up with the active players would either be jewelling or attacking to gain the hp reward bonus.

Best of all, the points above would require very little coding and could be implemented very easily.

[stanley6148]

If we're talking about increasing activity, or making it more advantageous to be active, the bigger picture that I would like to see happen is:

1) Implement a simple reward system for hps killed as Luke suggested.

2) Only pay interest on the first 10k geos banked, but raise the interest rate to a flat 20%.

3) Increase the strength of nuke shields so 5-6 nukes are required - this would allow an increase in the size of armies defending cities, thereby mitigating some of the hit and run concerns.

4) Possibly reimplement the minimum value requirement for bank access and interest earning.

All of these combined would mean that players would have to be more active and those who are, i.e. the ones who make this game what it is, would be rewarded fairly for their effort and hard work. There would be no advantage to sitting and saving, the only way to earn additional geos to keep up with the active players would either be jewelling or attacking to gain the hp reward bonus.

Best of all, the points above would require very little coding and could be implemented very easily.
Point #2..I think 20k Geo's would be a good cut off point. Gives you about 75% of interest from 40k. That last 20k is a long boring road.

[Luke]

I will think about it today. What scared me off a bit was also a lot of PMs from people saying the feature wasnt good and needed tweaking, combined with the posts here. Especially when its coming from those that are already active.

Simply because I dont want to put work in something I am getting a load of crap about later.

But something like RM's post might work. I just dont want to code stuff i dont believe in, like number of attacks. I believe that will hurt everyone(including the server, and those who are active but play with bigger armies).

[Ptah]

yeah, better dont mix all ideas together. Lets implement "attacker of the day" bonus!
Number of attacks, nukes, interest should be another story ...

[RagingMongoose]

Point #2..I think 20k Geo's would be a good cut off point. Gives you about 75% of interest from 40k. That last 20k is a long boring road.

My thinking with a 10k geo limit for interest earnings but a 20% interest rate is that it would allow players to fight to the last geo and then recover quickly and easily to maximum income. It would also shorten the dreaded saving phase to 40k geos at the start of every round.

In addition, it also goes some way towards resolving the issue of newbies not being able to compete when they join after the first month.

At the end of the day though, whether it's 10k or 20k geos as a bank limit for interest earning doesn't particularly matter, either would be a massive improvement and would encourage activity. I completely agree with you Stanley that at present, 20k to 40k geos is a painfully boring road.

I will think about it today. What scared me off a bit was also a lot of PMs from people saying the feature wasnt good and needed tweaking, combined with the posts here. Especially when its coming from those that are already active.

Simply because I dont want to put work in something I am getting a load of crap about later.

But something like RM's post might work. I just dont want to code stuff i dont believe in, like number of attacks. I believe that will hurt everyone(including the server, and those who are active but play with bigger armies).

Follow your instincts on this one Luke. You've been thinking about this for a long time now, seeking input from both active and non-active players as well as other long term staff members. The idea is good, really good in my opinion, and it has the best interests of the game at heart. More to the point, quite often the best ideas are the simplest ones that have a positive effect so I agree with your thinking of removing the complexities around this reward system if it's implemented.

Change is always feared and disliked, however sometimes it has to happen for progress to stand a chance.

[evian]

3) Increase the strength of nuke shields so 5-6 nukes are required - this would allow an increase in the size of armies defending cities, thereby mitigating some of the hit and run concerns.

Sorry, I disagree with it. Better get rid of uranium before it total become useless in game. Last reset already proven it, nukes are pointless since players can spitting and intercept. Extend nuclear time 2-3days or longer more realities.

[Spywareagen7]

(especially with the multiple send armies with 1 click that is coming)

YES!!!! Can we rename multiple armies at the same time too? Oh how I've missed this, get ready to see so many more armies going out!

Sorry, I disagree with it. Better get rid of uranium before it total become useless in game. Last reset already proven it, nukes are pointless since players can spitting and intercept. Extend nuclear time 2-3days or longer more realities.

I really feel that the value of nukes has decreased so substantially since the time I started playing, you can't sell them, they usually are not worth what you've invested planting mines unless you get lucky and find a huge army hiding in an unshielded city, and they don't count towards your stats, only burn an enemies money spent on troops... weak


If you want to get people fighting payout more on resources start players with more geo's when you reset.

The change that I want the most is variable resources rates depending on how much is sold by players, I don't care if it changes day to day or week to week or every x amount of days, I just want them to change, keep players on their toes and always watching the market.

As for more startup geo's I don't agree with that, it makes it too easy for people get frustrated, make a dupe account, blow all their money fighting an enemy, and then never log into that account again, I trust most players in the game to be above such a grimy tactic, but I certainly don't trust them all. I think everyone should start with 5K geo's, and have interest cap out somewhere in the 15-20K range

Did I mention thanks for all that you do Luke

LIKE

[Ptah]

regarding nuke shields: lets make automatic shield disappearing in 10 days. And you have to buy a new one.

[Spywareagen7]

the amount of resources it would cost a town to build an actual "nuke shield" or even have a airforce/ground force capable of intercepting and disarming a nuke to protect a city would be exorbitant, and should only be available in cities with enough industry to support it.... just a thought

[bluecoat]

Would it be possible to put the transfer of geos between players? If the problem was accounts being created to send the start of geos to other members... maybe limit the feature to donators only?

[Spywareagen7]

BC the problem isn't transfer of starter geos, the problem is farm accounts that plant all reset, never attack, and then send all their money to a friend/the farm overlord

[yome]

Score didn't update today at the usual time?

[thomas85]

Yes there is a problem and admins are aware of it. This will be fixed as soon as reasonably possible.

[Luke]

Updated at a later time today. Was necessary but future updating should be at the normal time again.

[yome]

No bonus again this morning? I need the geos ;)

[Luke]

Yeah the server was offline due to maintenance. I will have to start it manually.