Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Couple of suggestions
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedCouple of suggestions

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Wuzzel View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 605
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 10:09
The ranking page looks nice now SC :).

Another suggestion:
Maybe setup a page where you can see what you are producing ie Spears / Cows / Leather Armour etc.
A production page to see all production?


Edited by Wuzzel - 03 Mar 2010 at 10:10
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3626
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 10:37
Originally posted by Wuzzel Wuzzel wrote:

The ranking page looks nice now SC :).

Another suggestion:
Maybe setup a page where you can see what you are producing ie Spears / Cows / Leather Armour etc.
A production page to see all production?

Yup, that's in the pipeline too.  It'll also cover multiple towns as well etc.  Further down the priorities list though!

Next up:
a) filtering and sorting Trade Offers in the marketplace, and making each individual offer a bit more compact, followed by
b) Trade History,
c) Diplomatic History,
d) Military History pages

These history pages are so you can review, filter, and sort what you've done in that past and what you know about a particular town.  They'll also be accessible from the map view (so you can click on a town and see all your (eg) historic scouting reports etc).  Finally, members of an alliance will have all their data pooled - so that if Alliance Player 1 scouts a town, Alliance Player 2 will be able to retrieve that information.

Alliance members will also have a "real time" view of all the trade, diplomatic and military activities, inbound and outbound, for all members.  Unless, of course, the sneakier alliance members are using Covert Operations to hide their military movement from the alliance.  There will be 2 new technologies to hide trade and diplomacy actions from the alliance view (Black Marketeering and Stealth).

This should be going live today / tomorrow.


GM Stormcrow | Twitter | Facebook | G+
Back to Top
Wuzzel View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 605
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 21:53
Would be neat if you could see eachother ranks in the alliance page.
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3626
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 22:54
Originally posted by Wuzzel Wuzzel wrote:

Would be neat if you could see eachother ranks in the alliance page.


Not a bad idea, though most players aren't in alliances atm, so I'm putting most of the alliance stuff (that isn't completely borked) further down the list than the stuff that effects globally (Alliance or non-alliance, such as History pages and marketplace filtering).

Here's a question, though. At the moment all the points you generate in each category (population, tech, attack, magic, quests, trade etc) feed into a common pool, and are applied pre-defined weightings to make the "Overall Score" (ie Attack, Defence, Population etc are weighted higher than eg trade or quest scores).

I'm dissatisfied with this, currently.  I think the overall score should be some kind of aggregate of all the other scores, but applied a weighting index on the *relative* total player base score for each category.

So, for example, if trade is something that isn't practiced by the majority of the player base, it should weigh less heavily relative to a score category that is practiced by the majority (eg Population or Technology, which every player - regardless of which game path they take - has rankings in).

This isn't a comment on the relative importance of trade or quests vs attack or defence or whatever - people who do lots of trade or quests will still rank very highly within their own category.

I just think the overall ranking should be an alpha of the relative weighting of *all* the categories, weighted by the individual's score (relative to the total score) in each category.  ie what "we" as Illyriad/GMS/devs etc think is important and should contribute to the overall score may *not* be what the playerbase thinks is important.  And the overall score should be weighted by what the playerbase does, in some formulaic way. <-- GM ThunderClap, sirrah, help me out mathematically with what I'm trying to say here. I know you can!

Thoughts?
GM Stormcrow | Twitter | Facebook | G+
Back to Top
GM Gryphon View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster

GM

Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 23:07
How about:
 
Total of category points/number of players = Category average.
 
Sum of category averages = game total.
 
Category average/game total = % weighting. and That's what you drive the relative importance of that category from.
 
(so therefore, if many many players do lots of trading, the trading category, as a whole, gets weighted more heavily).
 
Work?
 
(trying to avoid you getting thunderclapped...:))
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3626
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 23:09
My braing hurtz.

Actually, that looks reasonable to me, anyone want to poke holes in it?

And yes, Gryph - I try to avoid ThunderClap like the... er... what's the word..?
Back to Top
Braque View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster


Joined: 27 Feb 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 24
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 23:17
Originally posted by GM Gryphon GM Gryphon wrote:

How about:
 
Total of category points/number of players = Category average.
 
Sum of category averages = game total.
 
Category average/game total = % weighting. and That's what you drive the relative importance of that category from.
 
(so therefore, if many many players do lots of trading, the trading category, as a whole, gets weighted more heavily).
 
Work?
 
(trying to avoid you getting thunderclapped...:))
 
Sounds fair to me!
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3626
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 23:25
Hum, thinking further about it...

The points you get for each category are weighted themselves when they get calculated.

For example, attack and defence points are basically the sum of the unit gold upkeep that you killed during the engagement.

Or, as another example, the trade points you get are (arbitrarilty) weighted as:
Wood, Clay, Iron, Stone, Food = 1 point per unit traded
Gold, Horses, Livestock, Books, beer = 2 points per unit traded
Swords, Bows, Spears, Leather = 4 points per unit traded
Saddles, Chainmail etc = 8 points per unit traded

So a single successful trade might give you a heck of a lot of trade points, and you might leap up the trade rankings.  Whereas a single combat might only give you a small amount of combat points.

In your formula, you're assuming that single point in one category has the same relative weight as a single point in another category, which isn't the case.

I still think relatively "easy" (by which I mean, "relatively risk-free") ranking points like trade get over-emphasised in that formula.

Or I might just be being dense...
GM Stormcrow | Twitter | Facebook | G+
Back to Top
GM ThunderCat View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 11 Dec 2009
Location: Everywhere
Status: Offline
Points: 2150
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 23:25
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:



I just think the overall ranking should be an alpha of the relative weighting of *all* the categories, weighted by the individual's score (relative to the total score) in each category.  ie what "we" as Illyriad/GMS/devs etc think is important and should contribute to the overall score may *not* be what the playerbase thinks is important.  And the overall score should be weighted by what the playerbase does, in some formulaic way. <-- GM ThunderClap, sirrah, help me out mathematically with what I'm trying to say here. I know you can!

Thoughts?

Hmm... I'll put together a gfx of a mathematical formula post it here shortly then just for you I'll let you take a peak at and have a mild scare at the code. Should be fairly easy though.

Just tarting up the main site pages atm...
Back to Top
GM ThunderCat View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 11 Dec 2009
Location: Everywhere
Status: Offline
Points: 2150
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Mar 2010 at 23:27
Originally posted by GM Stormcrow GM Stormcrow wrote:


So a single successful trade might give you a heck of a lot of trade points, and you might leap up the trade rankings.  Whereas a single combat might only give you a small amount of combat points.

In your formula, you're assuming that single point in one category has the same relative weight as a single point in another category, which isn't the case.

I still think relatively "easy" (by which I mean, "relatively risk-free") ranking points like trade get over-emphasised in that formula.

Or I might just be being dense...

We can have the categories auto balance based on the levels - might confuse the players why they go up and down though...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.