Night Capping and Score Modification

Ranger209

SirAndy wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

How do you know it's not pop-locked when you're asleep?
You do realize that your night is someone else's prime time, yes?

How do you know you don't crap your bed when you're asleep? You check in the morning and if you don't find a turd you're ok.
I have played round the clock and have seen what it is like at all hours of the day. You can see trends shall we say. I played both Vivec and Sotha Sil up until 2 months ago where I have gone strictly Vivec. I am straight up DC no faction swapping. The reason I quit playing Sotha Sil was the crazy score imbalance that DC, yes my DC, was able to achieve by running the table every night when they were unopposed. Things like that ruin Cyrodiil for anyone who cares about the alliance war in Cyrodill and doesn't see it as some theme park pvp playground. I now see this happening on Vivec to a lesser degree.

Prime time is not a term that is individual based, it is a term that is collectively based on the population. Prime time TV for instance is the time slot that the most viewers watch TV, not the time that you or I or some other individual watches. In this game, however, I will give you that if there are multiple windows of time that are pop locked, separated by windows of time which are not, then there could be more than 1 prime time.

TL:DR
You want nobody else to play on your campaign when you're asleep because it wouldn't be fair to you. Got it!

No I want it to be full round the clock and thriving, but it isn't, and that's the reality. People want to talk about how they are being penalized because their contributions would be diminished by a weighted system. Right now 20 or 30 people running the map uncontested can sway the score by like 400 points in 4 hours, where as 600 people fighting on a constantly flipping map can maybe sway the score by 100 or so points in 4 hours. So divide your 400 points of influence by 20 players and each player has influenced the score by 20 points. Divide your 100 points by 600 people and each of those individuals has influenced the score by 0.16666 points. So really the people playing Prime Time, the majority of the player base I might add, are currently being significantly penalized as to the amount of contribution they can give to the score as is. This is not to penalize off time players, but rather to remove the already current penalty of being a prime time player.

Rickter

Ranger209

VaranisArano wrote: »

Finally, not all PVDooring is done on empty campaigns. Think about it. On a busy campaign like Vivec, does it make more sense to fight on a keep you know is well-defended, or to focus on a strategic keep that faction didn't defend? If you do it right, you've taken the keep before the enemy shows up to defend - and that's just smart tactics.

No but the amount of pvdooring is inversely proportional to the population. At prime time the odds of you taking the keep before an enemy shows up are significantly diminished vs time when pop is down. The chance of being noticed by a passerby or someone guarding a keep and relaying information is much more likely when pop locked. The response time for a faction to come to that keep is much smaller than during off hours. During off hours you just go from keep to keep to keep meeting little resistance and requiring no strategy.

VaranisArano

Yeah, I get that. That comment was in response to someone suggesting that points for score be lowered if you PVDoored a keep, so I pointed out that not ALL PvDooring is done on empty campaigns.

Ranger209

Rickter wrote: »

I've been the night capper. I don't turn into a pumpkin at midnight. I ran with a guild on Sotha Sil that had a 24 hour presence and have run the map for days on end during low pop hours. All it takes is to have 1 dedicated guild that runs off hours and everything to do with the score gets skewed. I firmly believe this had a very negative effect on that campaign. It wrecked it for me and I was on the winning side.

WaltherCarraway

The topic is about North America server, so no there’s no way someone living on the West call someone down the East nightraider vice versa.

The only problem is oceanic nightraider because PST and EST are most likely midnight or 5AM in the morning while they are playing.

Vilestride

I'll tell you what OP. Let's make scoring during oceanic time worth less and to compensate AP earned during these hours can be doubled to encourage more people to play them. Think of it as night shift rates. K thanks let's go.

SirAndy

WaltherCarraway wrote: »

The topic is about North America server, so no there’s no way someone living on the West call someone down the East nightraider vice versa.
The only problem is oceanic nightraider because PST and EST are most likely midnight or 5AM in the morning while they are playing.

Nice try but the original post said absolutely nothing about which server.

Also, the US has 6 timezones all by itself, so even if there was some sort of rule that only US citizens can play on the NA server, it's still silly to assume that the only valid time to play on that server happens to be the timezone *you* live in.

VaranisArano

WaltherCarraway wrote: »

The topic is about North America server, so no there’s no way someone living on the West call someone down the East nightraider vice versa.

The only problem is oceanic nightraider because PST and EST are most likely midnight or 5AM in the morning while they are playing.

See, my problem with this is you calling the oceanic players a "problem" and "oceanic nightraiders" as opposed to what they are which is players playing the game they paid for at the time they can play it.

Just because they can play at a time when fewer players can play doesn't make them a problem or make them nightcappers. It just means they play at a time with less opposition.

IxSTALKERxI

As someone who plays during between the hours of 2am-8am EST (I'm a 'night caper' lel) I've always wanted to see something added whether it be more AP the lower your population in comparison to other factions, dynamic pop caps etc. I also wouldn't mind scoring slowing down if my timezone failed to have an active player base. It's not aimed at oceanics or anyone in particular, heck it could impact americans if they couldn't log in for some reason or another during primetime.

Also they should make it so no one can capture emperor if one of the factions is at 1 bar population.

VaranisArano

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

Also they should make it so no one can capture emperor if one of the factions is at 1 bar population.

So the answer to preventing an emperorship or keeping one becomes getting all your friends to log off in order to keep the population at one bar? You can laugh and say that's ridiculous or that the faction would lose too much to do that, and all that is true. But this is Cyrodiil, faction politics can be just that nasty and ridiculous, and this would totally happen.

Besides, not only would that take ZOS being transparent about what bars mean in terms of actual boots-on-the-ground faction population (isn't going to happen), taking the emperorship is complicated enough even on a nearly dead server that it doesn't need more complications. Not when you consider what those complications would do on the servers that aren't nearly dead but still see periods of low population.

IxSTALKERxI

VaranisArano wrote: »

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

Also they should make it so no one can capture emperor if one of the factions is at 1 bar population.

So the answer to preventing an emperorship or keeping one becomes getting all your friends to log off in order to keep the population at one bar? You can laugh and say that's ridiculous or that the faction would lose too much to do that, and all that is true. But this is Cyrodiil, faction politics can be just that nasty and ridiculous, and this would totally happen.

Besides, not only would that take ZOS being transparent about what bars mean in terms of actual boots-on-the-ground faction population (isn't going to happen), taking the emperorship is complicated enough even on a nearly dead server that it doesn't need more complications. Not when you consider what those complications would do on the servers that aren't nearly dead but still see periods of low population.

Yeah true fair point. Well maybe it can be low pop over a duration. Idk, I just think it's silly the amount of players that get crowned emp with literally 0 opposition.

VaranisArano

I can't speak for any other servers than what I've played on, PC/NA Trueflame and Vivec, Haderus and Shor. I've helped crown emperors on all of them, and emperors from my guild on three of them, I don't think I helped crown a guildmate on Trueflame before it ended. Trueflame and Vivec are obviously quite hard to crown an emperor, as it takes an awful lot of dominoes falling in exactly the right order to pull it off. Haderus and Shor still takes effort, I don't think I ever saw a emp crowning were we had zero opposition, though there was one or two times the only opposition was the current emp and his/her small band of buddies trying to defend the emperorship.

As for Kastav and Xarxes, I've of the opinion those campaign should have been shut down after the Midyear Mayhem event, so I haven't paid much attention to them, and I can't speak for the no CP campaigns at all.

Crom_CCCXVI

THE ANSWER is simply to have scores modify by overall population.

You can still flip a map at 5am , but you won't get much for it.
Then Fri night when the server is full, points are worth much more.


that simple

VaranisArano

Crom_CCCXVI wrote: »

THE ANSWER is simply to have scores modify by overall population.

You can still flip a map at 5am , but you won't get much for it.
Then Fri night when the server is full, points are worth much more.


that simple

So, again, devaluing the efforts of players who can only play at times that don't match the majority population such as oceanics on the PC/NA servers, and overvaluing the efforts of primetime players. 5 am your time is someone else's time to play when they get home from work.

Can anyone figure out a solution that doesn't penalize people by time-zone?

The actual answer is to have a balanced population at all times, but that can't be enforced without excluding players or forcing players to play.

Maryal

VaranisArano wrote: »

Crom_CCCXVI wrote: »

THE ANSWER is simply to have scores modify by overall population.

You can still flip a map at 5am , but you won't get much for it.
Then Fri night when the server is full, points are worth much more.


that simple

So, again, devaluing the efforts of players who can only play at times that don't match the majority population such as oceanics on the PC/NA servers, and overvaluing the efforts of primetime players. 5 am your time is someone else's time to play when they get home from work.

Can anyone figure out a solution that doesn't penalize people by time-zone?

The actual answer is to have a balanced population at all times, but that can't be enforced without excluding players or forcing players to play.

Even when the "population" is balanced, there will still be cross-faction agreements between 2 or more guilds regarding emperorship farming and these can adversely effect campaign scores. Sometimes it's pretty obvious (if you know what to look for), sometimes it's not. Emperorship farming isn't something that occurs all the time every day of the week. When it occurs is erratic and can happen on any day of the week and at any time of the day, populated campaign or not.

Emperorship farming has existed, and has been complained about in the forums, for as long as I've played this game (over 2 years). Not only as it relates to the position itself, but also regarding the effect it has on the campaign (faction scoring). People involved in emperorship farming agreements have a different set of priorities and will sacrifice their faction's status in the campaign in order to achieve their own goals.

Emperorship farming guilds 'help' guild members to become emperor, guild members usually know when they are helping a fellow guild mate get this achievement (but may not have been told the guild is doing this as part of a cross-faction agreement). If you don't know about the cross-faction agreement you obviously won't know when it's your guild's turn ...., ummm....stay busy farming AP at the bridge (metaphorically speaking ) ... guild mates unaware of the agreement will not experience a good day in Cyrodiil that particular day ... they may wonder where everyone went to, or not understand why people don't seem to be willing to coordinate to do much of anything other than farm AP at one particular place or another, etc.


Note: I'm not saying "all" guilds helping a fellow guild mate get the emp achievement are involved in cross-faction agreements. I'm just pointing out that the problem exists, it can adversely effect campaign scores, it can occur anytime day or night, prime time or not, "balanced campaign" or not, and not all guild members will necessarily be privy to such agreements (especially the ones that might "talk")

dodgehopper_ESO

You really need to recognize that not everyone lives in NA or EU. There are actually Asian, African, Australian and Kiwi players among some of which are friends. I'd feel really badly if their efforts were meaningless. Does it mean they're on at less active times? Sure. So what. You aren't meant to dominate a campaign unless you have full coverage at all times. Make friends with some people who either burn the midnight oil or live around the world for a change.

dodgehopper_ESO

@Maryal makes a good point. I'd like to point out that I caught some people cheating recently outside the gate of a Keep. There was like 20+ rival players and one guy playing whack-a-mole on them. Either somehow they all simultaneously crashed, or it was a setup. When I got there the guy in my faction logged out. They are lucky I didn't get a chance to take proper screenshots or filmed footage. I should really get my video capture back up and running. This kind of behavior though is reprehensible and really kills the point of the game. Emperorship is stupid. I've gotten Emperor and yet I've stated all along that it is stupid and pushes bad kind of behavior. Players end up not getting enough sleep. It creates artificial gameplay that has nothing to do with the joy of victory. It can be fun but the weird behavior it causes in the player base is toxic and really draws away from the fun of the game. I think this is part of why many players wanted Battlegrounds so badly, or prefer IC.

VaranisArano

As much as I agree with both of you about the fact that Emp-flipping happens and that its not a good thing for PVP, I'm not sure its germane to the topic of "night-capping" or adjusting the score to account for times of low population, which is the topic of this thread.

That was what my solution was in reference to, btw. The actual, though not easy, solution to one faction scoring bunches of points on servers during low pop times (usually at night for the more populated parts of the servers) is to have a balanced population at all times (which can't actually be enforced without excluding players who want to play or forcing players to play).

That won't solve every problem in PVP, far from it, but its a better solution than punishing players from less populated time zones for playing when they can.

Vilestride

Would revisiting the ideas around dynamic pop lock be a better solution than score adjustment? If the issue is simply a matter of population imbalance leading to night capping?

Sanct16

Less populated times should count less towards the score than more populated ones. Wether this be duration or score adjustments doesnt matter that much.

The argument that such a system would punish players from other timezones is simply wrong, as in fact the current system is simply highly rewarding those players. Currently the amount of points you get ler evaluation is the same wether there is 10 or 100 people playing. If we break this down to points per player - to measure how much impact a player has during that time - it's obvious that during offhours the value is much higher. So a person who is nightcapping has much higher score influence than someone in primetime.
If for some reason this still isnt clear to you, think about this: If I make a 12 man raid during lowpop times I can probably flip the whole map with little resistance - during primetime I can maybe hold 1 keep for some time. Which will have more impact on scoring with the current system?

Maryal

Instead of having points tied to the number of people in a campaign (which I am against for many many reasons), what if the number of points to take a keep depended on the number of people there actually defending it? I actually didn't come up with this idea, I saw it in another thread a while back. I wish I could give credit where credit is due.

The only bad thing about '[night capping' as it were, is the effect it has on the alliance scoring. But, on the other side of the coin, during primetime, especially zerg primetime, isn't it simply the same situation in reverse?

VaranisArano

Players have a greater impact on the score during low population times because they have less opposition. Players have less of an impact on the score during high population times because they have more opposition. This is not surprising. In fact, I dare say, its obvious.

I still have yet to see a solution that doesn't penalize players for playing during low population times (for many that's the time they can play, their "primetime" as it were) with having their efforts count for less simply because players who play during the most populated server times feel like their efforts for a couple of hours should carry more weight.

Ranger209

VaranisArano wrote: »

Players have a greater impact on the score during low population times because they have less opposition. Players have less of an impact on the score during high population times because they have more opposition. This is not surprising. In fact, I dare say, its obvious.

Here you say it is obvious that players have a greater impact on the score during low population times

I still have yet to see a solution that doesn't penalize players for playing during low population times (for many that's the time they can play, their "primetime" as it were) with having their efforts count for less simply because players who play during the most populated server times feel like their efforts for a couple of hours should carry more weight.

Here you say doing something to equalize that is penalizing them.

It's not. Our efforts should carry equal weight toward influencing the score and they don't, not even close. The efforts of people who play unopposed during off hours carry much more weight, they shouldn't. You said as much above, and you said it was obvious, and it is. Then you turn around and say that if you aren't allowed to have greater impact because you have less opposition that you are being penalized. Why should anyone have greater impact on the score than anyone else? Aren't the people who have a lesser impact already being penalized?

In any war, which is what this is albeit in a high fantasy environment, the number of casualties normally dictates the impact on the campaign. Having a scoring system weighted on the number of people engaged at any given time is a way to normalize the peaks and valleys in population over the course of the campaign. I play plenty of times when the server is not pop locked. I have no issue with only having the score accumulate at an adjusted rate which is lower at those times based on how populated the server is at any of those given times.

VaranisArano

You aren't having a lesser or greater impact on the campaign because you play at different times - objectives are worth the same amount of points at all times.

You are having a lesser or greater impact on the campaign when there are more or less players to oppose you. At more populated times, more players oppose you making it harder to achieve greater score differences. At less populated times, less players oppose you so its easier to focus on objectives and achieve greater score differences.

What the majority of this boils down to is players who play for a few hours during primetime when the populations are more or less equal wishing they made more of a difference in the campaign.



Here's a solution that could work, but it requires ZOS to be transparent about what those population bars actually mean.
Alliance scores increase during times of balanced population. 1v1v1 bars, 2v2v2 bars, and 3v3v3 bars. If the population is equal-ish across the board, alliance scores go up. Problems: we have no idea what the numbers are for each bar and this is very vulnerable to manipulation by cross-faction players, of which there are many. This doesn't punish any time zone, but it does lower the impact in times of imbalanced population by comparison with times of balanced population.
Unfortunately, ZOS has shown little desire to be transparent about the population bars, and even this suggestion has plenty of opportunity for groups to cheat the system. (IC would have to removed from the Cyrodiil population, low pop campaigns having players just sit at the gates to "balance" the population, etc.)

Vilestride

You're all arguing that there is less opposition in off peak times but forgetting there is also less support.....

It's a matter of whether or not the population is equally lower.

Sanct your entire analogy of capping a map with 12 people is irrelevant if the opposing 2 factions have a 12 man doing the same thing. And if you're 12 is over powering the other 2 then that's the point, you deserve the extra points.

Vilestride

The issue that needs to be solved is equalizing population when its lower. Not simply that it is lower. That distinction has to be made.

Ranger209

Vilestride wrote: »

You're all arguing that there is less opposition in off peak times but forgetting there is also less support.....

It's a matter of whether or not the population is equally lower.

Sanct your entire analogy of capping a map with 12 people is irrelevant if the opposing 2 factions have a 12 man doing the same thing. And if you're 12 is over powering the other 2 then that's the point, you deserve the extra points.

It goes beyond less opposition and less support. There is less activity. Say one alliance runs the map at 2 am cst, and after that population is 1v1v1 for the next 3 hours. The map doesn't change because no one is on to change anything. The population is equal but nothing is happening. So the score continues to reflect activity that transpired 1, 2, 3 hours ago. I have given the balanced vs unbalanced population much consideration before i made the OP, but there are too many scenarios where it just doesn't do anything.

code65536

Vilestride wrote: »

I have to disagree. In essence you're saying the work people do in 'just not American prime time' is worth less than it is during.

It's not a timing issue, but a population issue. The OP made the unfortunate mistake of calling it "night capping", so people immediately think of this in terms of time. But think of it in terms of population.

Specifically, when the server is full and pop-locked, the effect that any one individual can have on the score is pretty low. You're just a drop in the bucket. But on a dead server, one person can have a pretty significant impact on the score.

So instead of making this about your primetime vs. my primetime, think of it as "Player A's contribution to the score is highly diluted by the fact that the population is high, so it makes sense to ensure that Player B's contribution to the score when the population is low through is similarly diluted via an adjustment system that tries to mimic and match the dilution effect of a full population."

Qbiken

Rickter wrote: »

Daywalkers??