1 Topic by Processor VX (edited by Processor VX 15-Oct-2016 19:24:06)

  • Posts: 275
  • Tag points: 13

Topic: EOR Winner?

As it stands, everyone seems to be of the same opinion that most planets at the end of a round dictates the winner. This kind of thinking tends to skew the pace of the round:

- Long term naps are established with plans for EOR wars (to try for that coveted "largest size" win).
- Some mid round wars that see a few planets swapped and end in NAPs, which may later turn into EOR wars ^.
- Massive hording of rez and econ all planned around late game planet acquisition, again for the "largest size" wins idea.


I think a better gauge of the round winner should be which family held the most planets per tick throughout the round. This would encourage a constant need to gain more planets, and put the planet fat families as a more ideal target.

I say this with no idea on how the current score mechanic works. I think a simplified score would be something like:
- Tick ends
- familyScore += totalFamilyPlanets * planetValue
- Repeat each tick.


You lose a few planets? That means your score won't increase as much, and the family that captured the planets can close in on any potential leads. Perhaps a multiplier (planetValue) could be put on the planet count in the early to mid portion of the round when there are still unexplored planets, after that point perhaps a 1:1 planet to score ratio would work.

Just my 2 cents, I'm not a big fan of this sort of silly most planets wins at the EOR thing, it doesn't really make much sense. I feel the family that controlled the most planets throughout the round is the true victor.

mbvX, jamjam, nobody, smax

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 282
  • Tag points: 12

Re: EOR Winner?

I'm pretty sure score currently is just 50% size and 50% NW relative to everyone else. I would think that "planet value" could be resolved by just having score go up relative to percentage of explored planets your family controls. That way the total number of "score points" given out between all families would be the same every tick of the round.

I certainly agree that strictly having most planets be the winner is silly since nowadays everyone has a PNAP with most of the galaxy by EOR so it comes down to which of the top fams can farm whomever they are fighting harder than the other biggest fams.

But man is not made for defeat. A man can be destroyed but not defeated

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Hala
  • Hala
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 351
  • Tag points: 7

Re: EOR Winner?

nonsense, I'm getting beat now, so guess I'm pretty neutral. Only real win is eor size.
Don't care how you got there, only thing that matters is the size when the final wistle blows

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 275
  • Tag points: 13

Re: EOR Winner?

Hala wrote:

nonsense, I'm getting beat now, so guess I'm pretty neutral. Only real win is eor size.
Don't care how you got there, only thing that matters is the size when the final wistle blows

Making the first 80% of the round pretty meaningless. You realize how much this encourages resource hording and naps? Largest at the end is nonsense. I am in a fam tied for first and we are only there because we were fortunate enough to have easy targets at EOR. The round up to that point was mostly meaningless.

mbvX, jamjam, nobody, smax

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 751
  • Tag points: 2

Re: EOR Winner?

Networth is no less silly than people who talk about planet counts, which has contributed to farming.  Networth end of the round jumps give families who lost a war or had something happen during the round a shot for a better ranking and reason to continue.  It all depends on your perspective.

“I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.”

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 275
  • Tag points: 13

Re: EOR Winner?

Warhammer wrote:

Networth is no less silly than people who talk about planet counts, which has contributed to farming.  Networth end of the round jumps give families who lost a war or had something happen during the round a shot for a better ranking and reason to continue.  It all depends on your perspective.

I agree about the perspective. Anything really that puts the entire rounds winner on the results of the near end seems foolish. Whoever controlled the most territory throughout the round makes more sense to me personally.

mbvX, jamjam, nobody, smax

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Hala
  • Hala
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 351
  • Tag points: 7

Re: EOR Winner?

Processor VX wrote:
Hala wrote:

nonsense, I'm getting beat now, so guess I'm pretty neutral. Only real win is eor size.
Don't care how you got there, only thing that matters is the size when the final wistle blows

Making the first 80% of the round pretty meaningless. You realize how much this encourages resource hording and naps? Largest at the end is nonsense. I am in a fam tied for first and we are only there because we were fortunate enough to have easy targets at EOR. The round up to that point was mostly meaningless.

Is that your rationale for basically all sports and games ever?
Chess is decided by check-mate in the final move, meaning all moves before that were meaningless?
Soccer is decided by the score on the board at the end. If that's 1-0 by a goal in the last minute, does that mean the 89 before that were meaningless?

Come on man, size win at the end is the results of a tactical play all round long. All round my fam, #3500, was ahead this round, resulting in us having the highest 'score'. Even though we messed up at the end, we lost two wars in a row and got raped by #94.
Pimps played smarter, and took the size win. They strategized, worked together, showed patience, and won the round.

Size win is what matters, and to win it, you need to know what you're doing the whole round.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,404
  • Tag points: 33

Re: EOR Winner?

Agreed with Hala for SB. For SN not so much.

IMHO p-count should represent how successful one is in attacking.

In SN alot of players go inactive sometimes leaving over 300 explorable planets. I nowadays track online status,  after 48h of no show I infill to determine removal time, after which I attack someone near to shorten expo time. But still you have to be lucky to explore most of the planets.

These 'easy' planets (which you sometimes have to Expo at 3am, 5am...)  give a distorted view on who is the best attacker. Hence I would like to see an attacker rating based on attacks and not on lucky exploring.

~Attacking is a Skill~
~Defending is an Art~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 86
  • Tag points: 2

Re: EOR Winner?

Maybe we could try to do a sort of round where fams try to control a preset list of systems.

Or instead of saying biggest in size win the round. Let the first fam to hit a preset amount of planets win the round. That way you have to go to war instead of pnapping etc

0 Dislike 0 Post Points