Guild Expedition Encounter Rank

[DeletedUser111351]

Proposal:
Modify the GUI in the Guild Expedition to display the rank of players based on number of encounters completed.

Reason:
Guild Expeditions have several points systems happening simultaneously. One is the raw Contributed Points upon which ranking is currently based. This is a useful number and ranking, to be sure (this number is also heavily skewed based on a player's technology level). Never the less, trophies are awarded based on percentage of encounters completed. It would be nice to be able to easily see which where a person ranks in this regard and easily see the order of participation.

Details:
Modify both tabs in the Guild Expedition Contribution dialog.

The second tab, Contribution, displays a tabular set of all guild members and their current scores in the event. Make the table's columns sortable. Currently it is sorted on "Contributed Points". The "Encounters" column is the additional sort desired here (although I see no reason to not also allow sorting by player name if sorting is being added to the table).

The first tab, Overview, displays what the actual logged in player has done so far within the current guild expedition. It does not tell the player how much they have contributed toward actually winning the event. Add the player's current expeditions-completed rank.

Visual Aids:


Balance/Abuse Prevention:
This is simply a visual change.

 

[DeletedUser111848]

it already has that under contribution so -1 from me

 

[DeletedUser111351]

it already has that under contribution so -1 from me

No, it does not. I asked for RANK based on participation. It shows participation, but one must look through the entire list and manually figure out the order. The game does not display the rank based on a player's participation.

 

[Vesiger]

+1
Sounds reasonable.

 

[DeletedUser108379]

-1

As it is now it shows clearly that higher age members are more beneficial for the guild as they bring more points.

 

[DeletedUser111351]

-1

As it is now it shows clearly that higher age members are more beneficial for the guild as they bring more points.

Trophies are won based on participation, not score. Trophies get a percentage boost to the entire week's gain for all players.

Also, I did not suggest removing the current information. I agree that the current information is also quite valuable. What I asked for is to allow BOTH to be viewable. This idea suggested that players could sort the display in either way based on what they wanted to see at the time.

 

[DeletedUser108379]

Trophies are won based on participation, not score. Trophies get a percentage boost to the entire week's gain for all players.
...

Trophies are won by participation. But power points for the guild level are won more by players in higher eras, so the percentage has more to boost.

 

[DeletedUser111351]

Trophies are won by participation. But power points for the guild level are won more by players in higher eras, so the percentage has more to boost.

Correct. That is why BOTH are worth knowing. You want points and you want trophy boosts. And, as a player, one can't control how many points they get. They are the age they are. They can control how far they go into completing levels. So it is nice, as a player, to see where one falls within the rest of the guild. Who is pulling their weight and who is not.

 

[DeletedUser110195]

All you peasants below Arctic Future should be grateful to the high and mighty Oceanic Future players for tolerating your existence within their guilds, and you Arctic Future people better keep your mouths shut when the OF speaks, you have your cushy position as errand boys to the OF by their good graces alone. Higher eras more valuable....those higher eras wouldn't count for a hill of beans without the ENTIRE guild pulling its weight in GE and ensuring a gold trophy each week.

+1

 

[DeletedUser108379]

Well you have crossly misinterpreted my words @Augustavian. That was born more by all the complaints about being forced by the Halloween Event to switch the Era. One should make clear for all that there are advantages in being in higher eras.

 

[DeletedUser111351]

Well you have crossly misinterpreted my words @Augustavian. That was born more by all the complaints about being forced by the Halloween Event to switch the Era. One should make clear for all that there are advantages in being in higher eras.

Sure, keep pointing it out to the smaller era player that their contribution in GE doesn't matter. The guild has 50 people and no matter how much work that Iron Age player does he never manages to rank above 42/50. Continue pointing out that his contribution is so small as to be meaningless. Maybe he'll quite messing with GE altogether.

Instead let him see, oh, yeah in my rank of points is 42, but my rank of percent complete I'm 3rd. Or I'm still 42 there, but look 2 more wins and I'd move up to 30th. A leaderboard that is set in stone who will place where before it begins is of marginal value. A leaderboard where everyone can compete is much more likely to inspire players to try to do more.

 

[DeletedUser108379]

Sure, keep pointing it out to the smaller era player that their contribution in GE doesn't matter. The guild has 50 people and no matter how much work that Iron Age player does he never manages to rank above 42/50. Continue pointing out that his contribution is so small as to be meaningless. Maybe he'll quite messing with GE altogether.

.....

If he quit messing with GE depends on the leadership of the guild, and whether the guild is competitive in the GE. If so, there is a clear advantage that an Iron Age player does as many encounters as possible. But, nonetheless, he will do the guild more good if he advances to the next era instead of staying in Iron Age forever. That is just the reality. Most players are adults, so should be able to deal with it.

 

[DeletedUser111351]

Most players are adults, so should be able to deal with it.

The whole concept of these games is to give constant positive feedback for any little task to keep one playing and addicted even though most of the gameplay is rather mundane.

Look around your land for an incident, sure most of them will give you such a small amount of coins or supplies that it is less than worthless, but, "Woo hoo," got a prize. Every little GE encounter, "Yay, another prize." Events, quests, trophies, leaderboards, prizes and rankings are all over the place.

Can people live in a world that doesn't get a ranking for GE participation? Absolutely. Could the game get rid of the current ranking display of points? Well, yeah, people could still play the game. People can "deal with it" in most situations.

Proposals are suggestions for things that could be added or changed to hopefully make the game that little bit better or more enjoyable. I think a participation rank goes along quite well with the entire theme of the game. I think it could be implemented very easily by the development team. And I just would like to see it.

You are certainly welcome to feel otherwise. It just sounds like you are saying that your city is already high ranking and your level makes your GE rank high no matter how many or few fights you do. That's great for you. Not sure why that's a reason to say others shouldn't be allowed another ranking system where they can see improvement and comparison in what they do.

 

[DeletedUser110195]

I think a participation rank goes along quite well with the entire theme of the game. I think it could be implemented very easily by the development team. And I just would like to see it.

I know that's what I look for, we all know the OF players are going to score the most raw points, and below them are the AF's, then FE's, TE's, CE's, PME's and so on. As has been said, it would be far more useful to know who has done how many encounters, you already know who will score the most points.

 

[DeletedUser108379]

As it is now, with every Event, with every historical questline there are players complaining that there is a quest to research a technology because they only could do so if they go to the next era. And they do not want, they want to stay in the old era. Sometimes it may be because they rushed through that era and it would really be better for them, to stay a bit longer in that era. But very often they just do not want to change the era. Why not? Because it is easier to stay in the same era, you can win more encounters in GE, you can win easier in hood fights because your LG are higher than those of your neigbours, you do know this era and its production, it is easy and comfortable. To advance to the next era means to leave that zone of comfort. In GE you will have to fight against units you to not have, are you will need goods you have not researched yet. Yes, they are problems with advancing to the next era. And because of that, players do need an incentive to make that step, a reason for doing so. If the list in GE goes according to participation and not according to earned points, you will take away one incentive to leave the comfort zone of your era and go to the next one. In my eyes that would be a very bad idea.

 

[DeletedUser110195]

You think points scored in GE is what makes people move up eras?? Surely you jest, because that was absolutely hilarious logic!

Never once in my coming up on 11 months of playing did I look at the scores in GE and think "Wow, they score so much more than me, I really want to score that high! I'll rush through the tech tree to catch them!" I'm sorry Cardena, usually your points are solid, or at least semi-solid but that was the flimsiest argument I've seen, and I read crap from creationists.

 

[DeletedUser108379]

@Augustavian (you should stop reading crap from creationists, that was the only book I ever throw away, I bought it by mistake)
No, I do not think it a big incentive. But small things count too.
And this thread shows, it probably is an incentive, not because of the points in itself, but because you are than higher up in the list. And according to this thread it is frustrating for lower era players to always be at the bottom of the list and to see the small amount they are unable to contribute to the guild. So I would think, there may be a small incentive here (for the team players) to advance to the next age. I advanced because I wanted to be able to help my guild in GvG in the higher eras that really count, not only in early ages.

 

[DeletedUser111351]

If the list in GE goes according to participation and not according to earned points, you will take away one incentive to leave the comfort zone of your era and go to the next one. In my eyes that would be a very bad idea.

Okay, I'll repeat myself again for the umpteenth time. This proposal DOES NOT ask for REPLACING one with the other. It asks for both to be available in a format that is easy to see. Nothing would change to remove the current information at all. The request is that other information be also easy to see.

Viewing participation is useful for a player to see how much he is doing. Seeing participation is useful for guild leaders to see who is or is not meeting guild quotas, if they have such. Scanning through the participation can be used by other members to see who is possibly struggling and message them to see if they need help with GE in terms of strategy, trades, or simply understanding how it works. Near the end of a GE and close behind another guild in rank the guild can collectively see who has a lot of encounters still available and encourage them to help take the lead and gain a higher trophy. Players with low participation ranks may want to view it to see who has high participation and request tips to doing better. There are a lot of ways the information can prove useful.

This proposal is about encouraging people to do more in GE and, possibly more importantly, to make it easier to see who is doing more and who less.

As for GvG and Inno sometimes forcing people to advance eras through events, I fail to see how these have any relationship to this topic.

 

[Vesiger]

If the list in GE goes according to participation and not according to earned points, you will take away one incentive to leave the comfort zone of your era and go to the next one. In my eyes that would be a very bad idea.

This isn't secret information - it's already available to anyone who is prepared to skim down the list! It's just an alternate sort order to make it easier to see who completes the Expedition and who doesn't, and I honestly don't see how that is going to discourage anybody.

 

[DeletedUser109475]

-1

As it is now it shows clearly that higher age members are more beneficial for the guild as they bring more points.

Incorrect,

The targets & payouts for guild power, and the points per battle are fixed values for each era.. I'm in a guild on one world with an EMA player who does 48 or 64 encounters every week but sits at, or close to the bottom of the contribution table every week while a higher era doing just 4 encounters scores far more points and is several places above them.

Given that their figures are 64/48 and 4/48 who is making the real contribution? Which player is pushing the percentage of completed encounters up? The answer of course is the EMA player but that isn't easy to spot or reflected in the results table in the current format.