Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Samwise

Strongest Alliance award

Recommended Posts

On 11/20/2017 at 3:50 AM, StevieG said:

We have had Infra destroyed, theres tech destroyed too, land, . Lots of things that can be used, and changed regularly. However whatever the 2 nation qualifier is needs to be something other than finishing NS.

 

I also think at least some individual awards should be changed from rewarding building tons of cash for a late game push, and moved towards damage output and things like that. Over a whole round instead of the BIGGEST war etc.

 

Most destructive war and Most bills are pretty silly awards. And you could even argue Peak NS and Land just reward hoarding 500 600 million dollars at this level of starting cash. But some would probably argue we should keep some "money" awards.

 

Rewarding solid building collecting and fighting throughout the entire round is what we should do to incentivize all members who are active and fighting and building a solid nation.

 

Its pretty simple to use Infra, Tech, Land, Soldiers, Tanks, Navy anything. And tally it up over a round.

 

Although something will have to be done about the numbers dropping off when opponents nations delete. Maybe its not that big a deal.

 

 

 

I didn't really mind the way the top NS award was given before. To me, it was more fitting that the nation that ended the tournament round with top score should win it, considering now all it's done is make it harder to hunt these flagrunners down since they can break earlier and build when it's convenient to them, leaving them without cash to finish the end of round wars. That just may be me being old fashioned though. 

 

MDW and land are silly awards. Most land is just a spin on a money award, that slightly encourages you to raid early on to boost peak land numbers. And MDW has always been a contest of who can lower their defenses the best and let their nations be destroyed to pad stats. If we made MDW cumulative like you're saying, and track war damages all round, this award becomes better since you're less as likely to let yourself become destroyed every war you partake in, due to the rebuilding costs being so high.

 

I agree that even if someone deletes, those stats should remain recorded.


 

Here's an old suggestion thread on how to fix MDW if anybody's interested. I liked tracking the value of infra/tech/land destroyed throughout the round, since it encouraged people to updeclare, instead of making everybody raiding crazy and kill off all the micro alliances and unaligned.

 

But as far as the current topic at hand, I've been trying to think of how to fix the suggestion of avg NS award so every alliance doesn't throw all but their top 10 to pending status. Maybe instead of the return of the avg NS award, an avg damage dealt award? It is football season, and a popular suggestion seems to be capping alliances. Maybe do that fantasy football draft we always talked about and for one round, cap alliances at 12 members, and actually draft players. That could be fun if done right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@admin We're all pretty much in agreement that this award needs to replaced or removed. Can you weigh in here please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about we lock nations into their alliance once they choose and prevent new nations half-way through  or 3/4 through a round. Merging alliances at the end or stuffing them with new nations has to stop.

@MaineGOP

The only thing that needs to happen is to stop using score as the way to define strongest AA. Score is highly weighted towards member count. That isn't necessarily Strength. Average NS has always been the real gauge of how solid you are (in the past it was a 15 minimum to qualify for awards based purposes) but for general strength we always look to ANS. You could even use total NS, but that wouldn't necessarily stop mergers at the end to "win".

 

You could place some sort of time limit (ie last quarter of round) But i think its not good to stop new recruits joining the game and then joining an AA at least half way through a round. We want players to join at any time I think. Just rid Strongest AA award and problem solved. Dont even need to try and change score formula or anything like stopping people joining and locking into AAs. (Unless you wanted to go a true "tournament" style where you have teams of 6 to 12 or something. I dont think we have enough for many teams of 12 tbh. And you have a bunch of solid teams battle it out tournament style. that could be fun for a round.)

 

Replace it with Average NS if you wanted to keep it economic based, or convert it to something that incentives warring. The majority of the people who come to this game want to do just that, and they should be able to compete just by warring well. You cannot war well without a decent economic plan either, so its not like econ suddenly goes out the window and everyone gets CIA MP day 0 and 5 based on 2 war awards for AAs

 

 

Edited by StevieG
typos :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/22/2017 at 6:04 AM, Samwise said:

 

 

Here's an old suggestion thread on how to fix MDW if anybody's interested. I liked tracking the value of infra/tech/land destroyed throughout the round, since it encouraged people to updeclare, instead of making everybody raiding crazy and kill off all the micro alliances and unaligned.

Yes total over a round average damage per war is terrible.

 

But as far as the current topic at hand, I've been trying to think of how to fix the suggestion of avg NS award so every alliance doesn't throw all but their top 10 to pending status. Maybe instead of the return of the avg NS award, an avg damage dealt award? It is football season, and a popular suggestion seems to be capping alliances. Maybe do that fantasy football draft we always talked about and for one round, cap alliances at 12 members, and actually draft players. That could be fun if done right.

 

Its top 15. And I dont see the problem with making everyone but top 15 pending. That is a "We have the best Top Tier" award anyways. Still economic award if you think about it. Or yeah remove it and replace with a "warring" award.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2017 at 9:58 AM, Samwise said:

@admin We're all pretty much in agreement that this award needs to replaced or removed. Can you weigh in here please?

Yep. For round 46 I've changed the award to "Top Two Nations By Strength In The Alliance with the Most Infrastructure Lost".

 

I've also added a new award, category "Most Nuclear Missile Launches".

 

Here are the current prize details:

https://tournament.cybernations.net/prizes_static.asp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2018 at 12:55 AM, admin said:

Yep. For round 46 I've changed the award to "Top Two Nations By Strength In The Alliance with the Most Infrastructure Lost".

 

I've also added a new award, category "Most Nuclear Missile Launches".

 

Here are the current prize details:

https://tournament.cybernations.net/prizes_static.asp

 

can we get rid of top 2 nations by strength?

the award is infra lost. so reward the 2 nations who lost the most infra during war. important that this doesn't include selling infra off.

anything to get away from the "top 2 nations by strength" please.

 

This current system incentivises me to save all my money and let all my AA mates do the hard work. and then on the last day I can spend hundreds of millions to buy up to 1 or 2 and profit off all the hard work from my AA. during at which time that I was saving money, I was also contributing far less towards the group.

 

can you see how that is a bad thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×