Stats also mentioning 2nd and 3rd place on a map.

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Stats also mentioning 2nd and 3rd place on a map.

      EnacheV wrote:

      supremacy medal system is perfect. at some point you play only to see how many 1st/2nd/3rd spots per game joined you get
      Found this among the suggestions from 2015, I think it is quite a good idea. Might stop people from leaving maps and try for a second or third place instead of leaving because they can no longer finish first.

      Good idea or not?
    • If a person hangs on until the end they get 1 gold for every province they own...There is your incentive to hang in there and it doesn't even phase most of them. I think the age of many of the players is the root cause. The younger ones seem to want to write in the newspaper about how great they are and then quit the game in the first week. I know life can sometimes get in the way of a game that takes 30+ days to complete as well.
      When you have 50% of the players in a 100 game that don't care if they win or lose there really is no way to fix it. I know that I win a lot just because I outlast most of the players around me and then I eat up their land without really having to fight.
    • Might still persuade those that give up because they can no longer win a map though. Besides getting 1 gold for every province you have in the end is not a whole lot on smaller maps. Could also give a more accurate view on how capable a player actually is. Some players are really good but never win a map but get a lot of second places. Showing these almost wins could give somewhat of a more ''rewarding'' loss.
    • I guess the other reason that it won't work as well as you would like is the fact that when you are playing, for example, on a 100 map you and your coalition will have to eliminate 80% of the map in order to win. There isn't much room left for others to hang on. I personally will finish people off when I am at war with them because 1) I don't want to lose the 5% morale for the extra war 2) I don't want them building up and coming after me a 2nd time 3) when you have someone down take all their points or someone else will.
      I think the real problem is getting them to fight until they get beat instead of making a few moves and leaving.
    • If players can't get 1st, 2nd or 3rd or a coalition win, they often won't continue. If you expect to be wiped out, there really isn't an incentive to play on.
      Even if you survive, the reward can be quite small. There is no reward at all if the winners kill your country.
      If there is a coalition win, sometimes non-coalition players can get small amounts of gold for making it to the end of the game.
      The exceptions could be in a multi-map event and with Player's League.
    • Well even if it won't keep people from leaving I still think it is a good idea. Making end deals to carve up bounty is a lot easier if there is more to gain then just a few gold. Besides now there is only winning and losing, however, that is often not what things look like. Sure you can mop people up but then still, 20% or 40% is still not owned by you on a map and if that part of the map is owned by someone else, I think credits are due If this player manages to keep this land untill the end of the map in the face of others having 60% or 80%. Yes I noticed your coalition wins and indeed, when 80% of provinces is owned by a coalition than perhaps a second place would be strange. It could still be a thing if a map is being won by a lone wolf though. Then second and third place prizes are indeed quite the achievement from time to time.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Edepedable ().

    • Lawrence Czl wrote:

      Stats by type of map would be nice too. Wins on a 100-player map aren't the same as winning on 22-player map.
      Achievements sort of already do this. But this stops as soon as a gold medal status for a certain map has been achieved.


      Lawrence Czl wrote:

      I'd like to see 2nd and 3rd place stats too. Maybe a player doesn't have a lot of 1st places and/or coaliton wins. If you see 1st, 2nd and 3rd and coalition wins, you get a more rounded picture of the player(s). I'd like to see it for my own stats as well.
      I wholeheartedly agree to everything said by you in this statement.
    • If all these quitters were interested in medals wouldn't they stay and play longer so they could reach other achievements?
      IMO the only way to reduce people from quitting is 1) reduce the number of games a person can have active while their country is still active (this won't help much as when they go bot they will be swallowed up) 2) Pay all gamers 1 gold per day they are active per game. (don't like carrots on the stick myself, either you want to play or you don't) 3) limit some types of games to people who have won a minimum of solo/coalition games! Now to get to the next level in gaming you will have to stick in games and learn and win or you can't play in the other games. That should help develop them into gamers! Or they just keep playing the 22 game forever. (Good riddance)
    • ike53 wrote:

      If all these quitters were interested in medals wouldn't they stay and play longer so they could reach other achievements?
      IMO the only way to reduce people from quitting is 1) reduce the number of games a person can have active while their country is still active (this won't help much as when they go bot they will be swallowed up) 2) Pay all gamers 1 gold per day they are active per game. (don't like carrots on the stick myself, either you want to play or you don't) 3) limit some types of games to people who have won a minimum of solo/coalition games! Now to get to the next level in gaming you will have to stick in games and learn and win or you can't play in the other games. That should help develop them into gamers! Or they just keep playing the 22 game forever. (Good riddance)
      Like me and Lawrence Czl said, appart from maybe, though probably not keeping players to play maps we think it would be a cool feature regardless. Meaning also for players that indeed do sit out entire maps.