| Author | Thread: Skirmish System | Page 1 | 2 |
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #6729 Posted: Jul 12, 2008, 7:08 pm |
Greets,
There's a new mini-system live today for clans: Skirmishes!
Whenever any magus in a clan attacks a magus in another clan, a score for each combatant is calculated based on damage done and the level of the golem involved and tracked as a skirmish. This is clan-wide, so multiple members of a clan can attack multiple targets of another clan (and vice versa) and it will all be tracked in one clan skirmish.
Sovereign Magistrates on either side can offer to end the skirmish, but the Magistrate on the other side will have to accept. If both accept, then the skirmish is ended. The clan with the higher score is given a +1 to its total wins while the other receives +1 to its total losses. The win-loss information can be made public and will show up on the clan's profile page, or it can be hidden from even the clan members. Active skirmishes can not be hidden until they're considered resolved.
Of course, if someone from either side attacks again, then the skirmish will become active again.
Clans and clan members are free to ignore the scoring. There will be no penalties for having a loss or a smaller score than an attacking clan, nor will there be a benefit to winning a skirmish or having a higher score (outside of bragging rights).
The current and historic skirmishes can be seen on the clan activity page.
This is NOT intended to be a substitute for clan warfare, but merely a fun way of tracking clan fights for the time being.
As always with new releases, please let me know if you find any problems. :)
Kep |
|
| CommComms Posts: 392
Location: Daylsfeld
Magus Age: 121 years old
| Message #6753 Posted: Jul 13, 2008, 4:43 am |
Cool new system. I like it.
Only notable changes/improvements I can think of so far is if resources raided were taken into the score calculations.
For example:
If my clan were in a skirmish with another clan, and I were to break one of their member's golems I get points, but it would be nifty if more points were added for the 26k bronze I walk out with over the next few minutes.
Also if these skirmish points were trade-in-able in a batch of 5000 or 10000 for 100k of a primary resource for the clan that could be cool too. Just to give some benefit to clan warfare. |
|
| Yonk Posts: 105
Location: Villuno
Magus Age: 126 years old
| Message #6771 Posted: Jul 13, 2008, 7:27 am |
I noticed that the system places notice in the Activity Log when a request to end a skirmish is given and accepted, but it would be really useful if (maybe I missed it) a message is given when a mage starts a skirmish, allowing everyone to know who broke the treaty with the Milquetoast clan.
Example
Mage X has started a skirmish with CLAN by attacking Mage Y. |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #6815 Posted: Jul 14, 2008, 12:04 am |
I added a notice to the Activity Log when someone begins a skirmish. Good suggestion.
Right now, I'm going to pass on adding clan resources/rewards for skirmishing. As mentioned, this is mostly just a placeholder until the "real" smash no-holds-barred clan combat goes in... though who knows, if people prefer the scoring system to actual building destruction, maybe I'll beef up skirmishes with resource/rewards rather than go into large scale clan-vs-clan stuff.
Kep |
|
CaduceusPosts: 185 Location: Last Alvia Dawning Magus Age: 126 years old Clan: OTAKU2 Real Name: Paul
| Message #6817 Posted: Jul 14, 2008, 12:54 am |
| A scoring system with rewards would cause less hard feelings than building destruction-- give the winner a carrot instead of hitting the loser with a stick. |
|
NecariaPosts: 505 Location: Rildesjan Magus Age: 115 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #6838 Posted: Jul 14, 2008, 6:01 am |
I have some concerns about the current implementation. As I understand it the skirmish never ends unless both clans agree to end it, which makes it unlikely for that to happen unless a) someone makes an offer while they're in the lead, the other clan pulls ahead and then accepts before the first clan can withdraw the offer or b) they're just getting absolutely thrashed, and if that's the case there is nothing to stop them from accepting, and then starting to attack again immediately afterwards.
My second concern is that it encourages ganging up on a single person(unless everyone has done missions to keep the number of attacks low), and worse, it encourages attacking the weakest members of the clan as they would most likely be the easiest to score against due to weaker equipment and low level barriers.
Hopefully I'm just being pessimistic, but it seems to me it could easily encourage griefing. Sure there isn't a real benefit aside from bragging rights, but in my experience with online games the people most prone to griefing only do it for the bragging rights anyway.
*edit* Meant to list some possible solutions but forgot, woops. So, possible solutions. For the first bit, you could add a time limit, or a point limit, or perhaps limit the number of attacks per skirmish(which would fit the name in my opinion)as a way to end the skirmish aside from agreement, and then a time limit or another agreement before a new skirmish can be started. Alternately skirmishes could be something agreed to in general, rather than just being any fight, or perhaps a configuration choice.
No obvious solution springs to mind for the second issue though.Last Edited: Jul 14, 2008, 6:06 am |
|
laidanPosts: 1158 Location: Mottonsborough Magus Age: 113 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #6865 Posted: Jul 14, 2008, 5:04 pm |
| I see the active skirmish notice on our clan page, but there are none listed on the publicly available clan info page. Is this only going to show finished skirmishes, or is that a bug? |
|
| Amelsh Posts: 54
Location: Broukendale
Magus Age: 116 years old
| Message #6868 Posted: Jul 14, 2008, 5:14 pm |
| Necaria said:
No obvious solution springs to mind for the second issue though.
Perhaps this can be alleviated by offering incentives for attacking tougher opponents. Like more points toward the skirmish results, or better rewards afterwards (if those were implemented). |
|
| Kaelas Posts: 1052
Location: Darghelm
Magus Age: 118 years old
Real Name: Barry
| Message #6870 Posted: Jul 14, 2008, 5:25 pm |
| One way to do it would be to base most if not all the points won for the skirmish score off the xp gained by both sides. If a level 10+ Magus piloting an exotic golem slaughters a dozen or so low level Magi with only fleshies out, they would win the skirmish despite the level 10+'s greater destruction. Granted there are those around that don't care what it costs them to destroy everyone weaker than them but that should prevent the more reasonable, non-psychotic Magi from griefing. |
|
| Panacea Posts: 167
Location: Broukendale
Magus Age: 116 years old
| Message #6910 Posted: Jul 15, 2008, 3:24 am |
I like the idea of the skirmish system but perhaps make it so that skirmishes start when two clans agree to one instead of whenever you attack another clan. I can see it a bit annoying in a pvp focused clan which may end up having 10 or 15 active skirmishes that are tracking one or two attacks.
Also is score based on using a higher level golem gets you more points? Because my main pvp golem is a bone and I've demolished I think 3 golems and I can't seem to catch my skirmish score up. I would also like to know if wall damage (by the golem and to the golem) is factored into the score. |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #7041 Posted: Jul 16, 2008, 3:30 am |
Several good points brought up, and I've had some time to ponder them a bit.
I'll plan to put in a scoring penalty based on magus level to discourage attacks against low level magi, down to a minimum of 1 point. I'll also likely put in a score bonus for attacking a higher level golem. Hopefully this won't encourage folks to stop leaving high level golems out for fear of being skirmish targets.
For skirmishes where one clan won't accept the other's offer to end, I'll probably install a time limit or a score maximum (or a combination of both). Reaching one of those limits will automatically end the active skirmish.
Unfortunately, I...uh, sort of tore into the development version of the combat mechanics while installing some proof-of-concept stuff for spellcasting. Updating the skirmish score stuff may take an extra day or two just because I'll need to juggle in an archive copy of the combat mechanics to make the changes. Hee. ;)
Regarding the current scoring system, both wall level destruction and higher level golems contribute to more skirmish score.
Kep |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #7196 Posted: Jul 17, 2008, 8:29 pm |
The following tweaks and changes have been made to the skirmish system:
1) Clans now have the option to ignore skirmishes. If a clan is ignoring skirmish results, neither clan involved in a combat will gain points toward their skirmish rankings.
2) A score penalty has been added based on Magus level; attacking a lower level magus will result in less score (down to a min of 5 pts). In addition, a score bonus for attacking a high level golem has been added.
I have not yet put in an automatic end to skirmishes when the score reaches a certain point/time limit, but intend to do so sooner or later.
Let me know problems, issues, ideas. :)
Kep |
|
laidanPosts: 1158 Location: Mottonsborough Magus Age: 113 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #7199 Posted: Jul 17, 2008, 9:08 pm |
| So is it deliberate that all the clans still show no skirmishes on public record? Is that just going to be for ended skirmishes? If a skirmish is ended, then re-opened, does it count as a new skirmish or continue the old one? Last Edited: Jul 17, 2008, 9:09 pm |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #7203 Posted: Jul 17, 2008, 9:21 pm |
Only the count of skirmish win/losses show up on public record, and then only if the clan makes them public.
If a new skirmish begins, then it won't show up in the win/loss record until it ends.
For example, Clan Whale and Clan Shark start a skirmish. The skirmish is not public while it's active; Clan Shark pulls ahead in the score and then both clans agree to end the skirmish. Clan Shark gets a +1 in their win column while Clan Whale get a +1 in their losses column.
Clan Shark makes this info public: now anyone who views the full info on their clan will see that they have one win against Clan Whale. Clan Whale, shamed, decide not to make their loss public. Nobody can see that they have a loss (unless one uses logic after viewing Clan Shark's profile).
Make sense? I'm open to revising the wording to make this clearer in the skirmish info of the clan if folks have suggestions.
Sooner or later, the public win/loss records will show up in an ingame newspaper.
[Edit] I should add that the reason I set up the public win/loss record this way is to encourage clans to agree to end ongoing skirmishes. If a clan has twenty ongoing skirmishes but none have ended, then it's incentive to end some of those so they get points in the win column to show off.
KepLast Edited: Jul 17, 2008, 9:24 pm |
|
laidanPosts: 1158 Location: Mottonsborough Magus Age: 113 years old Clan: OASIS | Message #7216 Posted: Jul 17, 2008, 11:18 pm |
| But there is no incentive to end a skirmish if you're losing, especially if they can start things right back up. Maybe a time limit as you mentioned before would help? |
|
| Gryficus Posts: 239
Location: Mottonsborough
Magus Age: 121 years old
| Message #7219 Posted: Jul 17, 2008, 11:28 pm |
or just impose a penalty to attack for a period of time after a skirmish ends. This way you can't just start it up again as easily.
Double motivation
no resource stealing
etc.
The time period could be anywhere from 1 week to 2 months or so. You could have the length in the proposal to end the skirmish (e.g. Clan A has proposed to end the skirmish with a peace period of 1 month, do you accept?) |
|
| FatherCoyne Posts: 332
Location: Mallow
Magus Age: 116 years old
Real Name: Kevin Coyne
Email: KCoyne@umail.ucsb.edu
| Message #7231 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 1:41 am |
| Hey, the Skirmish Records section on the clan search page seems to show your own clan's records, not the clan you're looking at. ^^ |
|
| Panacea Posts: 167
Location: Broukendale
Magus Age: 116 years old
| Message #7244 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 4:04 am |
Well the active skirmish display seems to have changed... into a ridiculously large mass that eats my page.
I actually do like the extra information added to the skirmish page, it's just overly large, maybe this is another incentive for clans to end skirmishes.
I'm also wondering why I can set our clan to ignoring all skirmishes but not accept any offers to end a skirmish. |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #7249 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 4:51 am |
Fixed the public display, and also rolled in the clan permission tree (which is what was preventing you from accepting offers).
Also, what do you mean by "large mass"? There should only be one additional box as of today that gives you the option to ignore clan skirmishes.
Kep |
|
| Panacea Posts: 167
Location: Broukendale
Magus Age: 116 years old
| Message #7254 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 6:16 am |
Sorry that was just me commenting on the fact we have a lot of active skirmishes and they take up a lot of the page now.
Oh wait it's gone back to the previous display, that must've been your fix.Last Edited: Jul 18, 2008, 6:19 am |
|
| FatherCoyne Posts: 332
Location: Mallow
Magus Age: 116 years old
Real Name: Kevin Coyne
Email: KCoyne@umail.ucsb.edu
| Message #7257 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 7:07 am |
| Say, when will we gain full access to that permission tree? I've been looking forward to it. ^^ |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #7266 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 3:21 pm |
| Oh wait it's gone back to the previous display, that must've been your fix.
Uh... I didn't change the display either time. Now I'm really curious what it was. Heh! I'm suspecting a CSS-issue, but if it does it again, take a screenshot for me, please.
Say, when will we gain full access to that permission tree? I've been looking forward to it. ^^
I meant this one:
http://www.muelsfell.com/clan.php?permissions=1
Kep |
|
| FatherCoyne Posts: 332
Location: Mallow
Magus Age: 116 years old
Real Name: Kevin Coyne
Email: KCoyne@umail.ucsb.edu
| Message #7268 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 3:26 pm |
| I know you meant that one. :P But that's obviously a place holder for a big grid of check boxes that the clan leaders can access and customize. ^^ And I want some of that. |
|
[ADMIN] ArkhamPosts: 902 Location: Mallow Magus Age: 124 years old Clan: AGOMC | Message #7270 Posted: Jul 18, 2008, 3:38 pm |
Checkboxes, eventually. Only reason I didn't do it that way to start was time constraints. :)
I'll probably institute a time limit on restarting skirmishes like Iaidan and Gryficus suggest; likely it'll just be a flat timer since that's simple to add. I don't want to bulk up the system with a lot of excessive checks.
Also, I'll put in something to make sure you can't ignore skirmishes while active ones are ongoing.
Kep |
|
| Nageya Posts: 86
Location: Asylum
Magus Age: 111 years old
| Message #7391 Posted: Jul 20, 2008, 4:37 am |
I have an issue with how the lower lvl mage protection is being carried out, if I attack anyone other then OTAKU's leadership regardlessly of what golem they left out and what I attack with and how much damage I do the other clan will get more points from the attack.
Right now the clan with the lowest average lvl has a huge advantage. If the skirmish system is supposed to be some sort of measure of clan strength then making it so that the weakest clan is most likely to win a skirmish seems rather backwards to me. |
|
| |
| Page 1 | Last |
