Solutions

OK, I went through a lot of topics on the forums and distilled out a few ideas that would be quick to implement ('quick' is the key here, as we're really tied with something else atm). Some changes are already made, others will be implemented soon.


1. Removed win/loss ratio from profiles and coalitions. Added 'games won' and 'games abandoned' (%). This should hopefully encourage people to play the game to the end or at least surrender. Note that people will still be leaving games no matter what penalties we come up with. Just focus on maps and scenarios that don't require every player to be present - then leaving won't be such a huge deal.

2. Players will be allowed to stay in the Beginners room until rank 5 (including 5). Ranks 0-3 wont' be allowed to enter the Main room. This would prevent newbies from being horribly slaughtered and stop guest alts from starting scenarios in the Main room.

3. Penalty for extra alliances. We want alliances to be more strategic, so that you can't just ally every player on the map. To that end we want to make the first alliance free, but each extra alliance to bear some penalty - SP or money, I guess. Please post your suggestions here.

4. Coalitions:
- Only coalitions that have played a CW in the last 30 days will be listed in the index, similar to the players list. Other coalitions will be available under a "show all" link.
- Players will receive double SP in CW.
- Latest CWs will be shown in player profiles.
- Season will now have 20 games, with the last 20 games counted (as opposed to first 10 currently).
- The significance of competence will be lowered. CP gained/lost will range between 50 and 100 (currently be 1-100). Meaningful competence will range between 0.75 and 2. Anything below will count as 0.75, anything above will counts as 2.

5. No surrender in solo games, only abandon. Solo games wouldn't add to 'games played' stat nor to the 'games abandoned' percentage in profiles.

Great news!

Abandoned rate above 60% could be shown in green color to indicate that player have a good sportsmanship

1) Seems an adequate solution

2) Can it be possible for rank 5+ to be spectator on beginner room games? From a teaching perspective it would be useful for giving advice etc

3) I think here a consequence that affects the game being played is the best solution, already there is an SP penalty indirectly through having to share the winnings, so financial or even production penalties to ally all type players would give victims the chance. Perhaps for each extra alliance a 5% penalty on all incomes or an increase in maintenance cost for units (whichever is easier).


4) With regards to coalitions I fear that using the last 20 games could lead to unexpected consequences, clans will just stop after their games are completed if their wins at risk. Also where it is still tied to competence. You could in theory drop your competence down then use that as a leg up and win back for a higher score knowing that the loses can be covered, hopefully the smaller difference in range of CP won will sort this problem.
Nonetheless the upping in games is a good step and is welcomed, as is double SP and the cap on competence (Dalmati comeback?)

All in all a positive announcement.

EDIT: Da Fuq Tops is mod? Congrats

Geschreven door Deso, 01.10.2013 at 06:14

Abandoned rate above 60% could be shown in green color to indicate that player have a good sportsmanship

0-50% is now in neutral grey.
51%+ is red.

Great
so much have been done in 1 day

For the alliance penalty, I think the best would be to implement an option for a maximum amount of alliances.

All points supported as of now. However, I do think that your fourth point should be re-addressed as soon as you have the time to implement a better solution, but the current solution should be adequate for now.

No support for the 3rd option!!!

Nice work, guys.

I think those are some of the most wanted (and needed) changes at the moment.

Yes! no.3 is the best one here imo. We need to stop ally fagging. An option to limit alliances would be good, though it is not perfect I can't think of anything better.

Geschreven door Skanderbeg, 01.10.2013 at 07:41

2, 3 ,4, support,

But i disagree with with change number 1:

Now clan leaders cant check players stats(not all clans recruit already well known 3v3 fighters, some clans wants to recruit lower ranks, and make them CW fighters). For example, no more lost games, but percentage of left games, that mean im equal to newplayers who leave / surrender in almost every game, but technically im not equal as i leave 3v3, 1v1 or CW, which counts as opposition victory, i just dont want to have lost game / or earn +20 sp.
First thing what i do when i recruit for my clan, is checking player stats, how many victories, how many lost games. Lost games counts surrendering as well, if he have 14 W and 350 L, that mean he didnt payed attention to tutorial, or he really doesnt care(or just noob :-P). In the other hand, we will have low ranks, inactive 40-50 days, with all games played 1v1 or 3v3, 150 W and 4 L games - Alternative / multi account. You cant imagine how this will be difficult for new Clans and clan leaders to recruit. I already have alternative, will just invite old friends and ex members to join if i need more activity or strength, therefore recruiting players i already know, and will avoid new strange players.


Profile should consist of statistics showing: activity(days), games(game names), won games, lost games. Thats the basic, now of course you can add extra like ELO, left games, current clan, ex clans etc

Complete stats, including lost games, are still available under Medals and stats.

This is gonna be the best update

Geschreven door Ivan, 01.10.2013 at 05:58

OK, I went through a lot of topics on the forums and distilled out a few ideas that would be quick to implement ('quick' is the key here, as we're really tied with something else atm). Some changes are already made, others will be implemented soon.


1. Removed win/loss ratio from profiles and coalitions. Added 'games won' and 'games abandoned' (%). This should hopefully encourage people to play the game to the end or at least surrender. Note that people will still be leaving games no matter what penalties we come up with. Just focus on maps and scenarios that don't require every player to be present - then leaving won't be such a huge deal.

There's a flaw with this I think, as a scenario creator I often test my scenarios and abandon them, and I am quite sure it count for games left as well.

I know Aetius is not a leaver but has tested many of his scenarios and probably abandoned them, look here:
https://atwar-game.com/users/profile.php?user_id=220219

Nice, this is a good start

I support all the ideas. For number 3, I think money would be the best penalty. To ally end with everyone, have a separate proposal that can be clicked, and everyone will be asked if they agree, because otherwise everyone will have to pay the penalty to ally end.

Geschreven door Milkyy, 01.10.2013 at 09:25

Nice, this is a good start

I support all the ideas. For number 3, I think money would be the best penalty. To ally end with everyone, have a separate proposal that can be clicked, and everyone will be asked if they agree, because otherwise everyone will have to pay the penalty to ally end.

Ally ending would still have the money penalty but it doesn't matter because the game is ending anyways.

What if we had a certain amount of money that goes to sustaining an alliance?

Geschreven door Ivan, 01.10.2013 at 05:58

OK, I went through a lot of topics on the forums and distilled out a few ideas that would be quick to implement ('quick' is the key here, as we're really tied with something else atm). Some changes are already made, others will be implemented soon.


1. Removed win/loss ratio from profiles and coalitions. Added 'games won' and 'games abandoned' (%). This should hopefully encourage people to play the game to the end or at least surrender. Note that people will still be leaving games no matter what penalties we come up with. Just focus on maps and scenarios that don't require every player to be present - then leaving won't be such a huge deal.

2. Players will be allowed to stay in the Beginners room until rank 5 (including 5). Ranks 0-3 wont' be allowed to enter the Main room. This would prevent newbies from being horribly slaughtered and stop guest alts from starting scenarios in the Main room.

3. Penalty for extra alliances. We want alliances to be more strategic, so that you can't just ally every player on the map. To that end we want to make the first alliance free, but each extra alliance to bear some penalty - SP or money, I guess. Please post your suggestions here.

4. Coalitions:
- Only coalitions that have played a CW in the last 30 days will be listed in the index, similar to the players list. Other coalitions will be available under a "show all" link.
- Players will receive double SP in CW.
- Latest CWs will be shown in player profiles.
- Season will now have 20 games, with the last 20 games counted (as opposed to first 10 currently).
- The significance of competence will be lowered. CP gained/lost will range between 50 and 100 (currently be 1-100). Meaningful competence will range between 0.75 and 2. Anything below will count as 0.75, anything above will counts as 2.

Great news, I like them all Ivan. I feel better already.

I love you guys I love all those solutions but the coalition ones really strike me as the best. Good job! This is excellent!

Really good news , but the best penalty would be money Thank you guys.

What about UN games?
The ally costing will mess with that significantly

Geschreven door saint_, 01.10.2013 at 10:42

What about UN games?
The ally costing will mess with that significantly

Use peace instead of allying everyone.

However, shouldn't there be a possibility of turning this off in scenarios? I fully support this for competitive games like EU+ and such, but for some scenarios which does not have teams this could imbalance factions somewhat.

Geschreven door saint_, 01.10.2013 at 10:42

What about UN games?
The ally costing will mess with that significantly

Well, you have 3 choices:

1.- do not ally-fag
2.- use the peace option
3.- do not play UN.

Geschreven door Pyrrhus, 01.10.2013 at 10:44

Geschreven door saint_, 01.10.2013 at 10:42

What about UN games?
The ally costing will mess with that significantly

Use peace instead of allying everyone.

However, shouldn't there be a possibility of turning this off in scenarios? I fully support this for competitive games like EU+ and such, but for some scenarios which does not have teams this could imbalance factions somewhat.

Options would be good
This guy, Ivan, has it

1, 2, and 3 are great changes.

Geschreven door Ivan, 01.10.2013 at 05:58

4. Coalitions:
- Only coalitions that have played a CW in the last 30 days will be listed in the index, similar to the players list. Other coalitions will be available under a "show all" link.
- Players will receive double SP in CW.
- Latest CWs will be shown in player profiles.
- Season will now have 20 games, with the last 20 games counted (as opposed to first 10 currently).
- The significance of competence will be lowered. CP gained/lost will range between 50 and 100 (currently be 1-100). Meaningful competence will range between 0.75 and 2. Anything below will count as 0.75, anything above will counts as 2.

This really is too bad though. This allows people to cover up games and only encourages games to a point. It's a coin flip. I would hope this is only temporary but I guess not. I believe counting all games per season is a better choice.

Good change compared to the system before of course, it makes a great difference. Thanks for listening.

Geschreven door Guest, 01.10.2013 at 12:16

To those who may complain that either

Everyone will have an abandon rate higher then 50%...

or

That Testing games as a map maker will make any meaningful difference (preview function is your friend)

I present you with

Well, testing strategies are still a part of the abandoned percentage, so these percentages are actually not a great indicator anyway... but at least it gives an overview

Geschreven door Guest, 01.10.2013 at 12:26

Geschreven door Milkyy, 01.10.2013 at 12:21

Geschreven door Guest, 01.10.2013 at 12:16

To those who may complain that either

Everyone will have an abandon rate higher then 50%...

or

That Testing games as a map maker will make any meaningful difference (preview function is your friend)

I present you with

Well, testing strategies are still a part of the abandoned percentage, so these percentages are actually not a great indicator anyway... but at least it gives an overview

Well simply put... this game was not made to be played solo. And when starting solo games it even gives you a warning telling you there is no way to win. The only one you can blame on your lose in that situation is yourself.

Yea, you're right but I just wanted point out that they still count as well. We all try out stuff, so it's normal

Geschreven door Milkyy, 01.10.2013 at 12:53

Geschreven door Guest, 01.10.2013 at 12:26

Geschreven door Milkyy, 01.10.2013 at 12:21

Geschreven door Guest, 01.10.2013 at 12:16

To those who may complain that either

Everyone will have an abandon rate higher then 50%...

or

That Testing games as a map maker will make any meaningful difference (preview function is your friend)

I present you with

Well, testing strategies are still a part of the abandoned percentage, so these percentages are actually not a great indicator anyway... but at least it gives an overview

Well simply put... this game was not made to be played solo. And when starting solo games it even gives you a warning telling you there is no way to win. The only one you can blame on your lose in that situation is yourself.

Yea, you're right but I just wanted point out that they still count as well. We all try out stuff, so it's normal

Terminal is not a map maker or a competitive player, you. Should not take advice from noobs, quitting to test maps is normal, and playing solo to practice is even more normal, nevertheless i can confirm that terminal only plays NC and UN.

No rated team games

Great update! I support all the changes.
I would recommend a stiffer SP penalty for allying. If you only have a $ penalty, people will make peace and wait till the end to ally, when $ is no longer an issue.

Only problem is this:

Geschreven door Pyrrhus, 01.10.2013 at 08:12

There's a flaw with this I think, as a scenario creator I often test my scenarios and abandon them, and I am quite sure it count for games left as well.
I know Aetius is not a leaver but has tested many of his scenarios and probably abandoned them, look here:
https://atwar-game.com/users/profile.php?user_id=220219

This is true for solo practice games as well (a good fraction of my abandoned games). Abandoning games where there is only 1 player should not count. That, or just introduce a "test mode" where win/lose/abandon does not count and no SP is gained.

I suggest SP % reduction for every ally after the first and a money penalty for every alliance breakup.