Clan Warfare (in General)

QBRanger March 22 2005 9:07 PM EST


Im just throwing stuff against the wall.

Right now there is no real clan warfare. Yes, we fight others to get a better bonus but there are not real clan vs clan or "ganging up" to knock a clan down. Basically its every clan for itself. Earlier something was brought up about knocking the then #1 clan out of the first spot. But some moaning occurred and it quickly ended.

What about something like this:

Instead of 1,2,3 points for clans what about the following:

1,2,3,5,7 or something like that.
1 for non clan
2 for non bonus clan
3 for bonus clans
5 for top 5 or top 3 clan
7 for top clan

This way the top clans are worth lots more than the lower bonus clans.
Then others will actively try to knock the top clans out of their positions. More strategy can be used to attack the stronger clans. It may take more than 1 battle but that will be a 2 edged sword. That is the attacker will get 5 or 7 points but the defender will get some free xp from it. But it would be worth it to get 7 points once than 3 twice.

Also, one thing that does get my goat is this clan alliances. Right now we have Brimstone and Hellfire never attack each other. Same with all the Valinor clans. Im sick of it. This way if Hellfire is in the top 5 or 3 or whatever the top bonus Brimstone would be "forced" to attack them to get good points. I personally would like to see Steve attack Nardo Polo and vica versa.

Now since I am relatively new to the cb community, (only started playing in Novemeber) I do not know if something like this was ever brought up there.

Let the flaming begin!

Eternal March 22 2005 9:13 PM EST

I like that idea. It would make clan fighting more competitive, and competition is a lot of what clans are about.

Warchild March 22 2005 9:32 PM EST

Why should the clan that does the best be penalized by not being able to get the max points (7) from their attacks?

golgotha March 22 2005 9:35 PM EST

i like your idea ranger

vendo March 22 2005 9:39 PM EST

It's supposed to be tough to stay on top.
That's one of the advantages of rangers plan.
You have to work to get there and it's even more difficult to stay there.

In this clan system the bonus for the top 3/5 clans should be much higher than the lower clans as I see a high turnover rate.
This also gives the lower clans a chance/incentive to get to the top.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] March 22 2005 9:43 PM EST

I'm with Warchild......Whats the point of being #1 if you cant get the highest bonus.

QBRanger March 22 2005 9:49 PM EST

Its like Vendo said, its tough to stay at the top. You can still get 5 points max for attacking the next tier down. It would make it a real feat to stay on top for a prolonged time.

Also, it would bust the Clan alliances that seem to pop up. Lets say Hellfire was number 1 and Brimstone number 2, then to stay on top, there would have to be some attacks across those clans. Right now, either of them can attack anyone in any bonus clan for 3 points. No incentive to go after the big guns. But is there were only 3 or 5 clans getting 5 or 7 points, they would have to cross attack each other for the points.

[EG] Almuric March 22 2005 9:51 PM EST

You do get the highest bonus - 15% to your XP and $. Why would you also get the most clan points per fight? So it's easier to stay at #1? What would be the point of that?

Becoming March 22 2005 10:11 PM EST

This is a very interesting idea, although I think your point progression is much too high. 4 points for top 5/10 and 5 for #1 might be workable.

Another thing to think about is point generation in the long run. Let's say that someone does nothing but hit the #1 clan every hour for an entire day at 7ba/10min. And this person also stacks BA as much as possible.

This gives us a theoretical max of 1840 BA in 24 hours * 7points = 12,880 points for one person in a 24 hour period. Even at 5pts for the #1 clan it still adds up to 9200 in a day.

While I think this idea has merit, it would throw a giant monkey wrench into the machinery of Clan fighting. Why would anyone kill a 3 pt'er when they could get 4/5/7 points per BA?

Evil March 22 2005 10:12 PM EST

Ranger.. that is an interesting idea I agree with ... a truly brilliant idea... and I'm not just saying that because my clan is always at the bottom of the barrel for bonus's (averaging about 4% :-\) but anyways.... great idea... i hope jon implements it

sasquatchan March 22 2005 10:19 PM EST

I'm intrigued, but not sure I see all angles (pros and cons) so I'll just babble a bit ..

It seems there is much churning at the lower rankings. The handful of top clans are well established -- players who buy enough BA to maintain 2-3k points/day etc. (well, I've gotten 2k/day w/o buying BA, but playing as such isn't normal for me).

So those top clans are dedicated -- that's why they are top clans.

Now, you go down the rankings, and there's what, 16 clans (currently) in the 2000-2999 point range, most all earning a bonus. That's a tight range. And it's frustrating to me -- I'm giving ~1500 points a day, clan leader more like 2-3k points a day, and each hour we bounce from no bonus, low (like 0.6%) or sometimes a nice 8.7% (or so)..

(Of course, I'm bummed a great points producer that kept us more in the 10% range was lured away by Todd :P)

So I feel like the higher guys may still manage to stay high, and this may just cause more ping-pong in the lower bonus realm. But I'm babbling.

Mem March 22 2005 10:55 PM EST

I'd just like to say to Becoming that the number of points awarded is not relevant, but instead the ratio of points awarded in any system. Basically what I'm trying to say is that if we are all subject to the same rules then what does it matter if we score 12,000 points or 5,000 points (unless of course, you are worried that you won't be able to compete with this and are worried that your yearly clan ranking will be sullied...).

I would welcome the challenge of such a setup. Well thought out ranger.

deifeln March 22 2005 11:00 PM EST

I like the idea, but agree with some of the feedback. This might be more balanced if it were like crazy rewards time...maybe a day a week of clan warfare.

Becoming March 22 2005 11:11 PM EST

Yeah, that's it memnot. I'm never up to the challenge. On the contrary, I'm sure it would just widen the gap between the true top clanners and those without the time or dedication.

Before reading my comments, please know that my clan is never #1, so I'm not out to save my own butt in the clan ranks or anything. :)

The top clan(s) are at the top for a reason: they're dedicated and consistent. To be #1 you need a solid team of people working together every single day of the week. If lower clans are allowed to earn significantly more points than the people at the top, what would that do to the system? You're punishing those that work hardest and rewarding those in the lower ranks. To me, that's totally backwards.

However,awarding an extra point for top 10 kills might not be horrible, since it doesn't single out any particular clan. Everyone in the top 10 would have 9 other clans to choose from, except for those allied clans - and yes, I'm a Valinorian.

It's an interesting idea, but Jon has a better understanding of his game's dynamics than the rest of us. Maybe he'll grace this thread with a response. ;)

QBsutekh137 March 22 2005 11:18 PM EST

Almuric, I believe ranger is proposing that a lower clan would GET 7 points for beating the top clan, but the top clan would only get 3 points (for example) for beating those below. Or something of that nature. Top clan would not receive higher bonuses -- they would lose out to them.

Right now, a clan outside of bonus gets 3 points for beating a clan IN bonus, while the in-bonus clan only gets 2 vice versa. Same idea here, only have more variance to the ranges of clan accelerated scale.

I like any idea that makes taking two fights to win have some worth. Right now, it's, "Gee, I can't beat this guy every time in one fight, off my list he goes!" It's lame. Everyone fights "safe", even me, and that's saying something (I usually don't give a good rat's hindquarters about such matters). If two wins could be beneficial, more people will "mix it up", score ladder will be tighter, and everything might be that much more interesting.

One issue would be administration...will we expect Jon to add nifty links to our favorites page to help us manage the ever-cycling clans as they rise up and down the ladder? I doubt it. So there's going to be a LOT of inspecting going on to maximize clan point generation. I am not all that thrilled about that, but some folks live for that kind of thing.

In any case, it is an interesting idea.

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] March 22 2005 11:38 PM EST

Pretty much agree with Becoming, good idea, I like it in principle but am not sure about your points suggestions, my intuition says less extra points.
If memnot could enlighten us as to the ramifications if this were to be implemented along the lines you give maybe that would ease my concrens ;)

Definately think this idea has potential in some from tho.

Tribute March 23 2005 12:24 AM EST

Of course I personally like the idea especially if the increments were smaller. But does anyone see this happening at all?

Mem March 23 2005 12:48 AM EST

Important note: this was not my idea. When I addressed becoming I was merely trying to say that it doesn't matter the amount of points scored, just so long as the rules for scoring are the same for all. That would mean that pointing out the fact that with such a clan scoring system someone could, with overlapping, score 12k points in a day is not a valid arguement against ranger's suggestion. That is not to say that he can't disagree.

Important aside: it was not my intention of incurring any hard feelings. It is often hard to discern any type of tone via such postings. The statement made about people who care a lot about clan rankings and such stats was merely a friendly razzing, without any kind of disrespect behind it. Forgive me if you had taken it so.

Lastly, I have no clue how such a system would work. I have next to no clue about computers in general. I can, however, say that I know that I would be in favor of a system like ranger has proposed simply for the fact that it makes it so hard to stay on top. Really though, when it all comes down to it, it's just a game and I'm just going to have fun regardless of what happens. Hope you will too.

chernobyl March 23 2005 3:13 AM EST

In the abstract, this is a good idea. As stated, this is a very good idea. As suggested by others, this is an excellent idea.
Seriously? If nothing else, make it 6 hours on Wed. and 6 hours on Fri. and make it just 5 points for the top clan and no other bonus. Doesn't matter. The fact is, the top clan stays on top because they have more 3-point opponents accessible than any other clan member due to their power. If top clan members were worth more there would be more incentive to defeat number 1 clanners and upset the clan dominance. This leads to a rapid increase in inter-clan competition.

So much for 'flaming', seems like everyone likes it :-)

Arorrr March 23 2005 10:44 AM EST

This is good idea. Make clan fighting more competitive and the top clan harder to retain the top spot.

Majestik Moose March 23 2005 11:11 AM EST

I think this will lead to 3-4 clans with high PR chars, shifting position in top. Low PR chars will be punished, the big gets bigger, and so on....

QBRanger March 23 2005 11:21 AM EST

And thats a change from now?

The same 3-4 clans are on top. But if Hellfire would attack Brimstone, and vica versa, then each would lose points. Right now one of the reasons Hellfire and Brimstone are in the top is that they do not lose points from cross attacking. So their score is raised up a bit (less points lost). All the clans at the top do have characters that are low enough to be attacked by a great deal of people.

But I do not understand the statement that low PR characters will be hurt by this.

But as I said, my plan of 5 or 7 points makes it worthwhile for people to attack members in the top clan 2 times to defeat them.

Did not say my idea was perfect, just an idea to think out.

Majestik Moose March 23 2005 11:31 AM EST

I'm just analyzing, not flaming.
If people starts to attack high PR chars twice, to get a 1.4% increase in battle rewards, the high PR chars will get a HUGE advantage to their PR (from their wins).
But.. think a bit lower than top 3-4... What will those clans consist of???

Most likely clans with moderatly clan-warfare-interested high PR chars.

Clans with dedicated, new people will have a hard time to get into even top 10.
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001G1L">Clan Warfare</a>