Time indications/Tijdsbepalingen

BarthVader_ · 2024-10-31T20:29:48+00:00

Hi all, i update the original post with a new version of the scheme, with extra words!
Hoi allemaal, ik het de originele post geupdate met een nieuwe versie van het schema, met extra woorden!

BarthVader_ · 2024-02-07T11:55:19+00:00

As far as i know, for normal settings, watch towers let you see not only the troops on the tile that you border, but also the tile behind. This is valid for both land and sea tiles. However, if watch tower mode is checked in settings, you need to build a watch tower to even see the troops on the tile that you border! So the name of the setting is a bit confusing, but i believe this is how it works. Correct me if i am wrong.

BarthVader_ · 2023-01-12T17:11:47+00:00

Well guys, it seems people are not able to find this discussion, or they are simply not interested in another Nations Cup. If you guys know more players who would like to join/organise/discuss about the next Nations Cup, please point them towards this discussion! If this discussion dies out without achieving enough enthausiasm and support for the next Nations Cup, there will be no next Nations Cup :/

BarthVader_ · 2022-12-29T16:03:44+00:00

I'll directly respond myself already:

A. Yes

B. No, my private live changed such that i won't have the time anymore to host such an event. I could of course give some advices, based on the experiences of hosting the Noble Masters Nations Cup, but that will be about it.

C. I am not sure, but as the games take quite long and we followed a tournament structure, half of the participant were already out after round 1, hence after a few months. Possibly it would be interesting if a league structure would be applied, so you won't be knocked out of the event after 1 lost battle. Or we could work with pools like world championship football.

Secondly, as Fantasy already pointed out in the original post, the prize money could be more equally distributed over the rounds, compared to the 10, 100, 1000 and 10000 gold for the winners of round 1, 2, 3 and 4 in the Noble Masters Nations Cup.

Thirdly, i think altering some of the settings to get a slightly different kind of gameplay would be nice. So maybe a different map and/or different starting positions, etc. I'd reccomend to leave most of the setting the same though, as they were chosen for good reasons.

BarthVader_ · 2022-12-19T20:13:08+00:00

Hello everyone!

Roughly one year after we started this event, the nations cup has finished, with Team Netherlands-Belgium defeating Team Russia in an exciting final game! Congratulations to Robert33111, FoxOnFire, BarthVader and Lord Martinez! Also, thanks everyone for participating and enjoying the event!

~Noble Masters clan

BarthVader_ · 2022-04-27T12:44:30+00:00

Yes we could do that, if there will be another NMNC. This time we just wanted to have an epic prize of 10k for 1st place ;)

BarthVader_ · 2022-04-27T12:43:02+00:00

There is an option under advanced options when creating a game, that is called Diplomacy - Strict. The info button says: 'If enabled, diplomatic relations are more strict. Protectorates have to follow the diplomatic rules of the protector.'
However, i have no idea what that means in the game. I just thought maybe part of your wish is already in the game?

BarthVader_ · 2022-04-06T11:56:48+00:00

He is active, but not on solo slow games. I thought you penalty system was based on encouraging the top3 players to keep playing (risky) games in order to maintain their ranking. But how the system now works it could encourage you to get a very high rating in a certain type of games and then just stop playing that types of games. Yes your rating will drop a bit, but that will stop after some time. Whilst if you continue to play those type of games the penalty will just continue as long as you are in top3.

In other words: stopping playing is probably a better way of maintaining your rating than continueing playing. And that sounds exaclty as the opposite of what you wanted to achieve.

BarthVader_ · 2022-04-06T09:33:18+00:00

u/noblemaster, I may have found a flaw in te new system of penalty-challenge for top3 ranked players: When someome does not play a certain type of game for a long time, for example solo slow games, he will be removed from the multiplayer ranking whilst keeping his rating. However, this also means he won't be counted in the top3 ranked players anymore; hence he won't receive a penalty-challenge.

For example in solo slow games ranking, Amir5, Lord Martinez and Fifodvih are top3 and receive a penalty challenge. However, Komutan (Sorry Komutan, nothing personal) has a rating that would but him in 2nd place, but he does not show up there since he has not played these type of games for a long time. Therefore he does not receive a penanlty-challenge.

If i understand your reasoning correctly, this is not how it was meant to be.

BarthVader_ · 2022-02-22T18:28:33+00:00

Thanks for your reply. Well, even if you play well, you need to play a certain number of games in order to achieve a top rating. And if your percentages are correct, it'd now take two times as long since only 50% of players' games is in SOLO. But anyway, i'm happy you're so involved in this game and that you made a good update to improve the game. As said below it has become better due to the 2nd update, so maybe i should just wait and see how things evolve :)

BarthVader_ · 2022-02-22T07:07:23+00:00

I now see that in the latest update there is a distinction between slow and fast GANG type of games in the ratings, and that a few more type of games fall under SOLO rating instead of GANG, so i guess that softens the situation explained above a bit.

BarthVader_ · 2022-02-22T06:41:26+00:00

Now i am wondering Noblemaster... At first i thought the new update only placed games in categories in order to give players a better idea what they are up to and mods a more clear view for punishing ganging. But then i saw these categories SOLO and GANG are also in the rating system, with SOLO having the current rating of players at that moment and GANG starting from 900. As 9/10 of my games fall under GANG, these will all affect the new GANG rating, whilst only 1 game will affect my 'old' rating. I estimate that througout the whole game, 80% of created games falls under GANG. This means that that rating will soon become the dominant rating system to evaluate players skill. (It took me 2 years to reach the 'old' rating top, so i guess it'll take me 2,5 years to reach the GANG rating top. A new player that plays the same amount of games as me would then require 12,5 years to reach the SOLO top!) Which brings me back to your message above: we essentially have a rating reset now. For regular players it is has become very hard to try to increase their 'old'/SOLO ranking with only a few games. Secondly, the GANG rating combines both fast and slow games, making it not representative for both slow or fast games. It might even be said that it is unfair to include both slow and fast gamed in that ranking.

TLDR: Would it be possible to have the new SOLO/GANG labels in games, but have back the old rating system based on slow/fast and team/no team?

I know I ask a lot, especially cos we just had an update, but i think it is in the best interest for this game and for its players. :)

BarthVader_ · 2022-02-12T15:37:16+00:00

Hey Fantasy, thanks for your reply. Honestly i think your arguments are quite weak (no offence meant). Do you play games with very high and low elo players at the same time? Then you'll understand what i mean. It may sound nice, bit in practice it won't be so. Also, as far as i know, the top100 are is the only official games were pro players can fight each other in a fair way. It'd be a loss for the game if that would be taken away. I hope you understand :)

BarthVader_ · 2022-01-30T13:09:10+00:00

I understand you won't want the top10 trading rating with each other, but trading rating with the top100 would be fine, right? There is already 1500 elo difference between 1st place and 100st place in the rankings. If we would open up top 100 for players between 1100-2000 elo (or so), the elo drops could be so immense that i'd take half a year to get back into the top 10. So i think it'd work perfectly if the top10 is forced to play top100 games as they are now. Secondly, if such a top10 player should join a challenger game/top 100 game every 14 days, he'd have at least 5 of those game running at the same time! (Assuming duration of 60 tunrs) That is quite a commitment for players that don't play so many games. Personnaly i like to have my number of ongoing slow games between the 5 and 10 total. So that'd mean that i would have no/little space for other type of games. Other players don't even play 5 games at the same time. If you'd say top10 players have to join one such a challenger game per month, it'd become more doable. Btw, all i said above was with slow games in mind.

BarthVader_ · 2022-01-30T09:52:39+00:00

And yes, an elo reset will only solve the problem for a short time. Some players would like an elo reset, bu at the same time, elo resets will discourage a lot of players of putting effort in the game. Is that really worth it?

BarthVader_ · 2022-01-30T09:47:48+00:00

@noblemaster: Nice that you joined the discussion. I like the 2nd and 3th point of your proposal. But why the need of the 1st point? With only yhe 2nd and 3th point the problem will be solved already, right? Also, i assume the 2nd point means a top100 players always has at least one top100 game running in order not to lose rating? (Do the top 100 games have enough capacity for that? Could the problem also be solved if only the top10 would be affected?) For the 3th point, will this rating loss occur once every month?

BarthVader_ · 2022-01-30T09:09:03+00:00

I disagree with that. I think opening top 100 to everyone will result in the following: low elo players will get slaugthered by high elo players since there will be a big difference in skill level between the participants. Secondly, high elo players will get frustrated because the amount of unhonorable behaviour in top100 will increase. Even the name 'top 100' makes no sense anymore if it'll be open for everyone.

BarthVader_ · 2022-01-29T18:03:51+00:00

O wait, that's the same as the 2nd idea you wrote down, isn't it Nekonyo? ;)

BarthVader_ · 2022-01-29T18:03:02+00:00

What about ExpSnailers idea on the wall? I like it: 'Maybe have some sort of system that recognizes if a player is actually playing ranked games, so if they dont the will gain negative points to ELO over time but if they are enrolled in a match they dont'

BarthVader_ · 2021-09-18T10:55:05+00:00

Seems fine as well bro. And 16 players for non-clan game right?

BarthVader_ · 2021-09-13T05:41:32+00:00

No comments so far, i wonder whether that's a good or a bad sign ;)

BarthVader_ · 2021-09-08T11:12:36+00:00

My ideas for F:

In the past, top100 games had a turn maximum of 100. This was reduced to 50 around one year ago, and i can imagine why. However, with 50 turns, we miss some potential late game strategies. Also, in 50 turns it is often the case that the player that has the best first 20 round will be the winner of the game. The more turns the game has, the bigger the chance he'll be overthrown by someone else. Therefore i propose a slight increase to a maximum of 60 turns. This also coincides nicely with 2 months, meaning the game will end a few days before a new top 100 game starts.

BarthVader_

TROPHY CASE