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.