Changes in the Alliance Score System

[Kal]

There has been a good debate on the forums and on IRC about the alliance score system.

Two things have come out of this, 1) The need for justifications for changes and 2) That any solution must not be abusable.

Theese are the reasons for a change in score system:

1) An alliance can in no way claim to have helped a planet gain the score it gained while in a different alliance, so an alliance should not get the score gained by planets while they were in other alliances.
2) An alliance should not be able to benefit significantly by swapping planets in and out of the tag as this is bypassing the alliance size limit, this is prevent by wiping the score the alliance gained from a planet when it leaves and by setting the "base score" such that an alliance cannot benefit by kicking planets when they are about to loose score.

We believe that a score system based around gain will more accuratly reflect which alliance is the best - not which alliance has the best planets at the end of the round. Some may say that this hurts alliances that recruit and grow over the course of the round, in short yes it will hurt their score - however that is fair as they cannot say that they were as strong over the whole of a round as thoose that did not need to recruit significantly.

The details of the new score system are:

The score that a planet contributes to an alliance is: current score - "base score"
where this contribution must be > 0

When a planet leaves an alliance the contribution the planet made to the alliance's score is removed.

When a planet is deleted from the game the contribution the planet made to the alliance's score is removed.

When a planet joins an alliance the "base score" that is used to calculate that planets contribution to the alliance score is the score the planet had when it was created OR if it has been in an alliance already the score it had when it left its last alliance.

[Wandows]

from what i gather about the new system, i still miss the distinction between value and score (=value+XP). If you really want this to actually reflect the best alliance the system should imho make use of value & XP instead of basing it purely on score, as value is still the most important when it comes to actual strength of an alliance. And whether that value was gained somewhere else has nothing to do with it, as that value will be actively used by the new alliance and thus has to be shown there aswell.

This would mean that a planets value always gets added to the alliance score, where XP only gets added when its gained being part of that particular alliance.

[Kargool]

Just a clarifying question.

Kal wrote:
When a planet joins an alliance the "base score" that is used to calculate that planets contribution to the alliance score is the score the planet had when it was created OR if it has been in an alliance already the score it had when it left its last alliance.

My question.

Is this to interpret that if a 4 million planet leaves an alliance, gets roided to 3,5mill when he joins his new alliance, his score contribution will be 4mill to his new alliance?

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Just a clarifying question.

Kal wrote:
When a planet joins an alliance the "base score" that is used to calculate that planets contribution to the alliance score is the score the planet had when it was created OR if it has been in an alliance already the score it had when it left its last alliance.

My question.

Is this to interpret that if a 4 million planet leaves an alliance, gets roided to 3,5mill when he joins his new alliance, his score contribution will be 4mill to his new alliance?

No it will be Zero when he joins the new alliance and he will have to gain 500k before contributing any score.

This score system though is a mess, it pretty much achieves nothing but to make it even harder for alliances whom are struggling anyway

[JonnyBGood]

however that is fair as they cannot say that they were as strong over the whole of a round as thoose that did not need to recruit significantly.

Will the winning planet be the planet who spent most time at #1 during the round?

[Kal]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Will the winning planet be the planet who spent most time at #1 during the round?

no, but he already can't recruit to maintain his position - we arn't making it possible to dethrone an alliance - but rather forcing this to happen through combat.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Kal

no, but he already can't recruit to maintain his position - we arn't making it possible to dethrone an alliance - but rather forcing this to happen through combat.

I think you better go back to the second carthaginian war and tell Scipio Africanus that he can't recruit the Numidians for the battle of zama because that's not combat.

[The Real Arfy]

Originally Posted by Kal

no, but he already can't recruit to maintain his position - we arn't making it possible to dethrone an alliance - but rather forcing this to happen through combat.

I can't think of an occasion in the past 7 rounds where dethroning hasn't taken place through combat - or taken place at all.

[Veedeejem!]

Originally Posted by wakey

This score system though is a mess

seconded
edit: omg i agree with wakey, what is the world going to

[Rocko]

so when a planet still leaves an alliance, all the score that planet gained whislt in the alliance is lost?... as it has been normally.... ?
For saome reason i had it in my head that the score made whilst in that alliance would stay,..(?)

[paolo]

Originally Posted by Kal

When a planet joins an alliance the "base score" that is used to calculate that planets contribution to the alliance score is the score the planet had when it was created OR if it has been in an alliance already the score it had when it left its last alliance.

So you can still keep your top planets out of tag and let them join near the end of the round? Seeing as their score will be fully added?

[jian_yee]

Originally Posted by paolo

So you can still keep your top planets out of tag and let them join near the end of the round? Seeing as their score will be fully added?

techincally, u can abuse it this way, join at the beginning of the round, that base score is recorded, leave, rejoin at the end of the round and u bank the difference between base and current. Kal, correct me if i'm wrong, but i think it can be abused that way.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by jian_yee

techincally, u can abuse it this way, join at the beginning of the round, that base score is recorded, leave, rejoin at the end of the round and u bank the difference between base and current. Kal, correct me if i'm wrong, but i think it can be abused that way.

if you leave the alliance the alliance looses the score

[jian_yee]

Originally Posted by Kal

if you leave the alliance the alliance looses the score

What i meant was, can u exploit it this way,

1. Join ally at say 50k score (recording a base score of 50k)
2. Leave the ally, say at 75k score (ally loses 25k score when u leave)
3. Rejoin the ally when u have 1 mil score. (adding 950k score to ally as base score that was recorded = 50k)

Thus, from the way the score system is made, from what i understand, ally WILL gain 950 k score as the base score WAS recorded during the first join

[Ali]

you lose the complete score when he leaves so if a planet is with you from 0k score until 500k score leaves then rejoins at 2m score you will only get 1.5m score from him in the end. So would definitely be unwise to leave tag comeback leave and come back etc... since all score is lost when he leaves and his base score reset.

[jian_yee]

Originally Posted by Ali

you lose the complete score when he leaves so if a planet is with you from 0k score until 500k score leaves then rejoins at 2m score you will only get 1.5m score from him in the end. So would definitely be unwise to leave tag comeback leave and come back etc... since all score is lost when he leaves and his base score reset.

yes, thats why, he leaves at 50k score... and rejoins at 2 mil, thus, u still manage to hide the score the ally actually has..which is the whole point of this rule, they want ally scores to be visible and not have members out of tag...

Originally Posted by paolo

Or just don't let him join in the first place. Then you get the full score...

IF he doesnt join, u wont gain anything, cuz u need the base score to be recorded, so if he only joins at 2m, his base score is 2m and u get nothing.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by jian_yee

IF he doesnt join, u wont gain anything, cuz u need the base score to be recorded, so if he only joins at 2m, his base score is 2m and u get nothing.

Originally Posted by Kal

When a planet joins an alliance the "base score" that is used to calculate that planets contribution to the alliance score is the score the planet had when it was created OR if it has been in an alliance already the score it had when it left its last alliance.

So surely if the planet hasn't been in an alliance the score used it's it base score, ie zero?

[Kal]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

So surely if the planet hasn't been in an alliance the score used it's it base score, ie zero?

whether it is zero or not depends on whether score is set during activation as the rolling starts etc would boost the value up - however looking at the current game it looks like yes it would indeed allways be zero - though thats a simple enough change if people think score/value should be set during account activation.

[paolo]

Or just don't let him join in the first place. Then you get the full score...

[jian_yee]

grrr, my point IS

1. Join ally at say 50k score (recording a base score of 50k)
2. Leave the ally, say at 75k score (ally loses 25k score when u leave) BUT base score has been recorded at 50k.
3. Rejoin the ally when u have 1 mil score. (adding 950k score to ally as base score that was recorded = 50k, thus 950 k = the difference between the base score and the curernt score at the end of the round when the planet joins)

[Kal]

Originally Posted by jian_yee

grrr, my point IS

1. Join ally at say 50k score (recording a base score of 50k)
2. Leave the ally, say at 75k score (ally loses 25k score when u leave) BUT base score has been recorded at 50k.
3. Rejoin the ally when u have 1 mil score. (adding 950k score to ally as base score that was recorded = 50k, thus 950 k = the difference between the base score and the curernt score at the end of the round when the planet joins)

its more efficient to leave joining the alliance until right at the end as then the alliance would get the full 1 million

also your point 1 is incorrect the base score would be approximatly 0

[jian_yee]

Originally Posted by Kal

its more efficient to leave joining the alliance until right at the end as then the alliance would get the full 1 million

also your point 1 is incorrect the base score would be approximatly 0

so how about points 2 and 3 then, could it actually be exploited, if it cant, then i have nothing left to debate about . Just trying to make sure it can't be exploited

[sjn]

Why not have it so that the score added to the alliance score is only score thats gained while a member of that alliance, (so it doesn't matter what score you have when you join the alliance whether you have 1k or 1 mill) thereby also making it pointless to leave and re-join an alliance as the only score thats contributed to the alliance score is that that is gained while "in tag" So it would be pointless staying "out of tag" all round and joining with a score of a million as the score wasn't gained while "in tag"

or if thats abusable by bringing people in and out of tag just remove the ability to re-join the same alliance a second time or if you do you don't contribute any score?

sorry if thats dumb but its late :/

[JonnyBGood]

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm saying you could also do it without actually joining the alliance.

[Kal]

hows is an alliance using the sytem to lower its score exploiting it...

[Travler]

Originally Posted by Kal

hows is an alliance using the sytem to lower its score exploiting it...

Because of spy's. This system makes bringing down an alliance very possible when planet A leaves his real alliance at 50K score. Then joins the target alliance at 100k. Gains about a million points so now at 1.1 mil and then leaves the target alliance. The target alliance lost 1.05 mil in score when he left. Planet A rejoins his true alliance and gains another mil befoe the round is over. His orginal alliance lost only 50k in score but now the target alliance is 2 million behind.

This is a nightmare IMO. I am really glad that I am not HC and really have to work with this rule. This rule is similar to US tax laws regarding deductions in it's complexity. Would rather live with the uncertainty and shuffeling before the rule than with this game/alliance killing idea.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Travler

Because of spy's. This system makes bringing down an alliance very possible when planet A leaves his real alliance at 50K score. Then joins the target alliance at 100k. Gains about a million points so now at 1.1 mil and then leaves the target alliance. The target alliance lost 1.05 mil in score when he left. Planet A rejoins his true alliance and gains another mil befoe the round is over. His orginal alliance lost only 50k in score but now the target alliance is 2 million behind.

This is a nightmare IMO. I am really glad that I am not HC and really have to work with this rule. This rule is similar to US tax laws regarding deductions in it's complexity. Would rather live with the uncertainty and shuffeling before the rule than with this game/alliance killing idea.

erm this actually makes the tactic u describe less proftiable than last round...

Last round the real alliance would have got the full score of the planet - this round they only get the score since the planet left the fake alliance.

You seem to misunderstand somethign key here - when he leaves the alliance he is spying on his base score is set to the score he has when he leaves that alliance - so the real alliance will still have lost all the score he would have given them by staying in the alliance the whole time.

[Travler]

Originally Posted by Kal

erm this actually makes the tactic u describe less proftiable than last round...

Last round the real alliance would have got the full score of the planet - this round they only get the score since the planet left the fake alliance.

You seem to misunderstand somethign key here - when he leaves the alliance he is spying on his base score is set to the score he has when he leaves that alliance - so the real alliance will still have lost all the score he would have given them by staying in the alliance the whole time.

Yeah, you are right. This tactic would have worked better when there was no alliance score rule so this cuts it down.

Once thing this rules does do is place a higher value on large unallied players especially those that have not been in an alliance during the round. Their entire score would count for the alliance.

[TheShadowMan]

i see this change be bad for top 5 allies near mid end of round when they have paid inactives in tag

It will be worse if they kick em cos they lose their score than recruiting a new active member that may not get same score increase while in tag as lost member.

Thats going to be a tough decision for hc's me thinks

tsm

[jian_yee]

kal, from what i understand, the score system is so that ally's cant hide their score, if it has a different purpose, then nvm. cuz, from my 2 points, the allies, can still hide score until the end

[Kal]

the idea is to allow score hiding, but not to allow cycling of players in and out of tag

[Benneton]

LOL is the best phrase for this one i think

What is it about pateam and tactics, just cos some pa players are brighter than average they get punnished rofl....

Rnd15 Exi used out of alliance Vipers to aid themselves and it won them the round, i was one of the people working hard vs them and they beat us hands down, fair play to them. Pa team on the other hand thought omg what a tactic lets close their supporters rofl, if their enemies can accept it why cant u guys :<

Now this, theyre systematically taking tactics, and personal choice out of the game. What will all the traitors do now i ask? whats next, no 2v1 attacking? omg ^_^

[wakey]

Apart from the fact that the alliance being spied on will struggle to ever get that score back as they cant do what they do now when they lose a member and get hold of someone who will cover most if not all the lost score

[Recluse]

What can I say. I never post here, and I've been away for a round, was considering coming back, but now just don't know. It seems every round PAteam keeps pandering more and more to the newbs of the game. Every time a person, group, or alliance comes up with a truly unique way to play this game, a way which, by all means, is available to everyone, not abusive of some cheat, and just takes common inginuity to come up with, PAteam makes it against the rules and/or impliments a block in the code. I give it 5 rounds before we're no longer able to attack a planet with more then 1 fleet at a time and we can't build anything but pods and PDS. Getting pretty silly at this point.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Strider2k

What can I say. I never post here, and I've been away for a round, was considering coming back, but now just don't know. It seems every round PAteam keeps pandering more and more to the newbs of the game. Every time a person, group, or alliance comes up with a truly unique way to play this game, a way which, by all means, is available to everyone, not abusive of some cheat, and just takes common inginuity to come up with, PAteam makes it against the rules and/or impliments a block in the code. I give it 5 rounds before we're no longer able to attack a planet with more then 1 fleet at a time and we can't build anything but pods and PDS. Getting pretty silly at this point.

This system actually tends to benefit the bigger alliances more than the smaller alliances. All it realyl does is give a perhaps better reflection of an alliances overall capabilities.

[Recluse]

I guess it should be "morons" instead of "newbs" becuase I was speaking of the larger alliances and individuals whom complain enough about something that PAteam changes it to suit them. In the last 6 rounds I played (doesn't include this round just gone over) No single change in the game has been implimented that was not, in some way, brought about by a large group or alliance. The support planets fiasco is a perfect example.

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Strider2k

I guess it should be "morons" instead of "newbs" becuase I was speaking of the larger alliances and individuals whom complain enough about something that PAteam changes it to suit them. In the last 6 rounds I played (doesn't include this round just gone over) No single change in the game has been implimented that was not, in some way, brought about by a large group or alliance. The support planets fiasco is a perfect example.

I think if you read all the various threads on this then its hardly popular with anyone, so I dispute that we have listened to a vocal group.

I think that this is a fairer way of measuring score than it has been measured previously, I am concerned about the effect it will have on the top5-15 alliances and this will be watched in order to plan for the next round.

[Gio2k]

You just gave the top alliances the chance to recruit over 65 players with this system. Thx

[Recluse]

Originally Posted by Kal

I think if you read all the various threads on this then its hardly popular with anyone, so I dispute that we have listened to a vocal group.

I think that this is a fairer way of measuring score than it has been measured previously, I am concerned about the effect it will have on the top5-15 alliances and this will be watched in order to plan for the next round.

They probably don't like your solution to the problem, but I bet $$ they were the ones vocalizing about the problem to begin with. They just wanted a better solution then what you guys came up with.

[Djdom32]

Can someone explain to me if anyone actually knows whats going on with the alliance score system or if its just a huge mess that only the people who created it really understand

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Djdom32

Can someone explain to me if anyone actually knows whats going on with the alliance score system or if its just a huge mess that only the people who created it really understand

The simple explanation of it is:

The score of an alliance is the score its current members gained since they joined the alliance*


*This is a gross simplification its actually the score the members gained since either they created their accounts or left their last alliance.

[Judge]

Question?

Does this mean that an alliance that hides its memebership (either by not tagging or by being in other alliances) can towards the end of the round suddenly Tag up (create the tag) and members join getting a massive score as they previously had 0 and all joined with planets that have been around for most of the round possibly all with big scores ?

Hello 1up

[Kal]

Originally Posted by Judge

Question?

Does this mean that an alliance that hides its memebership (either by not tagging or by being in other alliances) can towards the end of the round suddenly Tag up (create the tag) and members join getting a massive score as they previously had 0 and all joined with planets that have been around for most of the round possibly all with big scores ?

Hello 1up

yes by not tagging, no by being in another alliance.

And this is on purpose as if an alliance wishes to risk not being able to properly defend its members then it is free to do so. But we don't want them swapping them in and out of tag.

The onus is on the enemy of an alliance using this tactic to spot it and take advantge of the alliance not being able to properly defend.

[Judge]

Just as I suspected

I bet you (anyone) a pound to a pinch of snot that 1up will suddenly appear 3 weeks before round ends and take top alliance spot.

[K-W]

Originally Posted by Judge

Just as I suspected

I bet you (anyone) a pound to a pinch of snot that 1up will suddenly appear 3 weeks before round ends and take top alliance spot.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Judge

Just as I suspected

I bet you (anyone) a pound to a pinch of snot that 1up will suddenly appear 3 weeks before round ends and take top alliance spot.

I'm not too sure about your pinch of snot but will you offer odds of 10 to 1? I could always do with some free money.