New Conquest System Feedback & Suggestions

[NGSpeed]

The clan history is pretty large and some information just make it harder to have an overview on the events that are logged to the clan history.
Those 5 logs could be summed up like this:

"Your clan was rewarded with 9 Gravitons for winning the Conquest on Iga."
1) If you hover your mouse cursor over "9 Gravitons" then an infobox appears, containing how many Gravitons of each were paid out as a reward.
2) Instead of "9" there could also be "(1|3|3|1|1)".

These will shrink the amount of logs to give the history a better overview and introduce some colors aswell.
Here the amount of cryonite rewarded for CQ could also be included:
"Your clan was rewarded with [(1|3|3|1|1) Gravitons and] X.XXX.XXX cryonite for the victory/defeat on Iga."

Speaking of overview there is a way to make it even better by using History Areas.

Here they could appear over "Newer" and "Older", just like in the ladders:

History Areas would be:

General

Singularity

Conquests

Donations/Assignments

Members/Positions

General: All logs as now.
Singularity: Jumpship sent to XYZ, Clan Mission done on FGH. Purchased Jumpship, Jumpship destroyed.
Conquests: daily mining ticket, Win/Lose against Clan JKL, mining tickets consumation when CQ starts, selected for conquest, assigned mining tickets
Donations/Assignments: Y donate X cryonite to the clan fund, A assigned Y cryonite to B
Members/Positions: X has been approved as a Member by Y, X's rank was changed to A by Y

This means each log gets an addition attribute so it can be filtered.
Hope you have a nice weekend

 

[NGSpeed]

We would like to talk about the mining tickets (MTs).
In our point of view getting -10 MTs after not participating to a selected Conquest is a bad idea.

Many PVE players on Korell as an example register a Conquest with 10 MTs and get after the 2 days -10 MTs, because they try to collect them for the achievements.
The highest of those achievements is collecting 75 MTs which are worth 50 achievement points.

E.g.: A clan has 4 active members who want to have these achievement points.
All of the 4 members need to collect 75 MTs so 75*4 = 300 MTs so 15 conquest are wasted for other clans who want to play a regular Conquest.

1) Our idea is to get locked for 10 days as each player of the clan (to avoid clan jumping also for people who left a clan within 3 days) which is encouraging players to play Conquests instead of emptying their MT storage to collect new ones.
2) If the MTs are less than 0 the collected MTs don't count for the achievements.

Also the achievement milestone is set way too high - this means for us e.g.:
14 active players = 14*75 = 1050 MTs / 365,25 = 2,87 years if everyone wants to complete this.
For 25 active players it would be 5,13 years...
and for 60 active players 12,32 years so in 2033 they would all have this achievement xDD
please consider this.
I would change the amount of needed MTs for achievements to 1 ; 5 ; 15/20.
Because with 15 it would take for a clan with 25 active pilots about one year to feed everyone for being active with this achievement. One year being fully active as a clan is quiet a lot

 

[Vesperion]

We would like to talk about the mining tickets (MTs).
In our point of view getting -10 MTs after not participating to a selected Conquest is a bad idea.

Many PVE players on Korell as an example register a Conquest with 10 MTs and get after the 2 days -10 MTs, because they try to collect them for the achievements.
The highest of those achievements is collecting 75 MTs which are worth 50 achievement points.

E.g.: A clan has 4 active members who want to have these achievement points.
All of the 4 members need to collect 75 MTs so 75*4 = 300 MTs so 15 conquest are wasted for other clans who want to play a regular Conquest.

1) Our idea is to get locked for 10 days as each player of the clan (to avoid clan jumping also for people who left a clan within 3 days) which is encouraging players to play Conquests instead of emptying their MT storage to collect new ones.
2) If the MTs are less than 0 the collected MTs don't count for the achievements.
[...]

Another option for this would be to give those MT a 2ndary purpose where a more PvE oriented clan (either cus they only play PvE or never get enough people together at the same time) can spend them to send some sort of probe out and it returns after a certain amount of time. Let´s say for each mining ticket you spend the Probe is away for 90 Minutes (so 2 times as long as a CQ takes place) so 10 MT = 900 Minutes and when it returns i has Cryo that "could be counted as CQ Cryo but at a much lower rate (maybe just 10% of the absolute top possible payout of a CQ)

Also the achievement milestone is set way too high - this means for us e.g.:
14 active players = 14*75 = 1050 MTs / 365,25 = 2,87 years if everyone wants to complete this.
For 25 active players it would be 5,13 years...
and for 60 active players 12,32 years so in 2033 they would all have this achievement xDD
please consider this.
I would change the amount of needed MTs for achievements to 1 ; 5 ; 15/20.
Because with 15 it would take for a clan with 25 active pilots about one year to feed everyone for being active with this achievement. One year being fully active as a clan is quiet a lot

Another issue is here that each day only 1 Ticket can be collected and if a player always thinks that "someone else in the Clan may still need it for the achive" stands on a whole different paper. If like me during my shifts i´m not able to login early someone else in the clan could collect the MT and so i and the others are locked out of making progress until the next day where the cycle may repeat and even continue when the player has the achives already done.

 

[Naycko]

Hello people! How are you? // Hola gente, como estan?
I want to talk about a specific subject: clans constantly paying conquests and not going to them, all along the servers.
This could seem innocent, and a lot of times it is. However, it may also be used to "cheat" on conquest ladder. For example, if a clan is going to win the skulls, but another clan is about to get to him or get ahead of him on points, and the first clan uses one or two afk or pve clans to pay conquest, and they dont go to them, the intention is to block the second clan to get ahead of them.
Why i think about this scenario? Because it has nearly ocurred on Gaia. Clearly, its not my intention to talk about that case here, i have already sent a ticket to support, and finally, the clan trying to block the other clan did showed up. But what if the clan had not showed up? That could have been an unfair way of getting first at conquest ladder.
I know this is difficult to control, but at least there should be some sort of "rules" to avoid this, or at least a good penalty for clans intendedly blocking other clans. I know its difficult to decide when its intentional and when its not, but i am sure that we could find a way.
Another problem is clans paying conquest versus alliance clans, to farm and get points for the ladder. This is easier to solve: prohibit conquest between alliances. For example, if 2 or more clans of the alliance pay with same amount of tickets, they get sorted out between them, randomly, and then they get an enemy picked.
Thanks, i hope that you find this as important as i find it. I post it here because its the most active thread, if not, tell me otherwise and i copy it to other thread.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resumen rapido en español: ultimamente, en todos los servers, se estan pagando conquistas con flotas AFKs, o de PVE,que no asisten a la conquista. Estaria bueno una mayor reglamentacion de esto, ya que si bien aveces resulta inocente, otras veces esta pensado estrategicamente para bloquear a flotas en la clasificacion de calaveras. Yo soy de Gaia, pero lo he visto suceder en varios otros servidores tambien.
Saludos, y espero que les interese opinar sobre esto.

NAYCKO -

 

[Iron Black]

Hello people! How are you? // Hola gente, como estan?
I want to talk about a specific subject: clans constantly paying conquests and not going to them, all along the servers.
This could seem innocent, and a lot of times it is. However, it may also be used to "cheat" on conquest ladder. For example, if a clan is going to win the skulls, but another clan is about to get to him or get ahead of him on points, and the first clan uses one or two afk or pve clans to pay conquest, and they dont go to them, the intention is to block the second clan to get ahead of them.
Why i think about this scenario? Because it has nearly ocurred on Gaia. Clearly, its not my intention to talk about that case here, i have already sent a ticket to support, and finally, the clan trying to block the other clan did showed up. But what if the clan had not showed up? That could have been an unfair way of getting first at conquest ladder.
I know this is difficult to control, but at least there should be some sort of "rules" to avoid this, or at least a good penalty for clans intendedly blocking other clans. I know its difficult to decide when its intentional and when its not, but i am sure that we could find a way.
Another problem is clans paying conquest versus alliance clans, to farm and get points for the ladder. This is easier to solve: prohibit conquest between alliances. For example, if 2 or more clans of the alliance pay with same amount of tickets, they get sorted out between them, randomly, and then they get an enemy picked.
Thanks, i hope that you find this as important as i find it. I post it here because its the most active thread, if not, tell me otherwise and i copy it to other thread.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resumen rapido en español: ultimamente, en todos los servers, se estan pagando conquistas con flotas AFKs, o de PVE,que no asisten a la conquista. Estaria bueno una mayor reglamentacion de esto, ya que si bien aveces resulta inocente, otras veces esta pensado estrategicamente para bloquear a flotas en la clasificacion de calaveras. Yo soy de Gaia, pero lo he visto suceder en varios otros servidores tambien.
Saludos, y espero que les interese opinar sobre esto.

NAYCKO -

Naycko this is easily solved, what you should ask the developers is the following: That the Fleet that is present carries the 1,000 battle points of the conquest. Currently this is not the case, that is why by not presenting a fleet directly affects the ranking, before if a fleet was not presented you would win the points and I don't really understand why they modified something that is fair.

 

[Iron Black]

ESPAÑOL: Naycko esto se soluciona facil, lo que debes de pedir a los desarrolladores es lo siguiente: Que la Flota que este presente lleve los 1.000 puntos de batalla de la conquista. Actualmente no es asi, es por eso que al no presentarse una flota afecta directo al ranking, antes si no se presentaba una flota ganabas los puntos y en realidad no entiendo porque modificaron algo que es justo.

 

[Naycko]

Yes Iron, but that could not be a solution, i have already thought about it. The problem is the next one: Clans will pay with AFK clans to get the 1000 points for free its not a solution, but a way to change the way to "cheat"

Maybe, at least when a clan does not show up, the enemies may get some points, idk, 300/400, but i dont think its a good solution, and 1000 points its clearly a lot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Si Iron, lo pense, pero las flotas principales podrian organizar para pagar con su flota secundaria, no presentarse, y llevarse 1000 puntos gratis... no es una solucion, sino mas bien un cambio de forma de hacer la trampa

A lo sumo,si uno de los dos clanes no se presenta, el otro podria llevarse 300 o 400 puntos, pero 1000 es demasiado por que da una ventaja muy grande en la clasificacion, no me parece una solucion del todo correcta

 

[Iron Black]

Yes Iron, but that could not be a solution, i have already thought about it. The problem is the next one: Clans will pay with AFK clans to get the 1000 points for free its not a solution, but a way to change the way to "cheat"

Maybe, at least when a clan does not show up, the enemies may get some points, idk, 300/400, but i dont think its a good solution, and 1000 points its clearly a lot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Si Iron, lo pense, pero las flotas principales podrian organizar para pagar con su flota secundaria, no presentarse, y llevarse 1000 puntos gratis... no es una solucion, sino mas bien un cambio de forma de hacer la trampa

A lo sumo,si uno de los dos clanes no se presenta, el otro podria llevarse 300 o 400 puntos, pero 1000 es demasiado por que da una ventaja muy grande en la clasificacion, no me parece una solucion del todo correcta

Ese es el mismo problema que teniamos anteriormente en las conquistas pasadas, pero por lo menos con llevarse los 1.000 puntos es un problema menos si va su flota contra otra flota que quiere detenerlos. Claro existe la posibilidad de que salgan 2 flotas aliadas y se regalen puntos, pero no es tan facil actualmente si quieren que eso pase deben meter de 7 archivos a 10 y eso les dejara cortos para el pago de otra conquista, en resumen pueden llevar 1.000 puntos pero puede ser sancionable como tambien pueden tener menos conquistas mensual ya que en vez de tener 5 conquistas solo alcanzaran a tener 4 a 3 y ademas no es seguro que salgan igual juntos.

That is the same problem that we had previously in past conquests, but at least taking the 1,000 points is one less problem if your fleet goes against another fleet that wants to stop them. Of course, there is the possibility that 2 allied fleets will come out and give each other points, but it is not so easy currently if they want that to happen they must put from 7 files to 10 and that will leave them short for the payment of another conquest, in summary they can take 1,000 points but it can be punishable as they can also have less monthly conquests since instead of having 5 conquests they will only reach 4 to 3 and also it is not certain that they will come out the same together.

 

[Naycko]

No, because in past conquests the 1000 points were almost insignificant, since in tau ceti or sirius you could farm 6000 or 7000 in a single conquest. In this system, 1000 points is TOO MUCH, look at the ranking, nobody reaches 4000 this month on gaia. In addition, only the clan that does not show up receives the sanction, the other clan takes the 1000 points, which is a lot, and also receives their tickets to pay another CQ. With this being done only once a month, the clan would already have a huge advantage. It does not seem correct to me, but hey, the devs and gms will read it. Maybe, this could be a solution, but with less points, between 200 and 400.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, por que en las conquistas pasadas los 1000 puntos eran casi insignificantes, ya que en tau ceti o sirius podias farmear 6000 o 7000 en una sola conquista. Aca, 1000 puntos es DEMASIADO, mira la clasificacion, nadie llega a 4000 este mes. Además, la flota que no se presenta recibe la sancion nadamas, la otra flota se lleva los 1000 puntos, que son un monton, y ademas recibe sus tickets para pagar otra CQ. Con que esto se haga 1 sola vez en el mes, la flota ya tendria una ventaja enorme. No me parece correcto, pero bueno, los devs y gms lo leeran. Esto puede llegar a ser una solucion, pero con menos puntos, 200 a 400, pero 1000 me parece un abuso.

 

[Iron Black]

No, because in past conquests the 1000 points were almost insignificant, since in tau ceti or sirius you could farm 6000 or 7000 in a single conquest. In this system, 1000 points is TOO MUCH, look at the ranking, nobody reaches 4000 this month on gaia. In addition, only the clan that does not show up receives the sanction, the other clan takes the 1000 points, which is a lot, and also receives their tickets to pay another CQ. With this being done only once a month, the clan would already have a huge advantage. It does not seem correct to me, but hey, the devs and gms will read it. Maybe, this could be a solution, but with less points, between 200 and 400.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, por que en las conquistas pasadas los 1000 puntos eran casi insignificantes, ya que en tau ceti o sirius podias farmear 6000 o 7000 en una sola conquista. Aca, 1000 puntos es DEMASIADO, mira la clasificacion, nadie llega a 4000 este mes. Además, la flota que no se presenta recibe la sancion nadamas, la otra flota se lleva los 1000 puntos, que son un monton, y ademas recibe sus tickets para pagar otra CQ. Con que esto se haga 1 sola vez en el mes, la flota ya tendria una ventaja enorme. No me parece correcto, pero bueno, los devs y gms lo leeran. Esto puede llegar a ser una solucion, pero con menos puntos, 200 a 400, pero 1000 me parece un abuso.

A nosotros nos paso eso de que pago OV7 vs Tropa de Elite y no se presentaron, ellos llevaron sancion de -10 y nosotros nada ni los 1.000 puntos ni crio, nada. Y la verdad es cierto lo que dices referente a que afecta bastante al ranking si una flota no se presenta. . . Por lo menos creo que la flota que va debería de llevar 80% a 60% de los puntos mas un bono de crio de 50% algo como recompensa por asistir. . . Eso me pareceria algo razonable que dices a eso.

What happened to us is that OV7 vs. Elite Troop payment and they did not show up, they took a -10 sanction and we did not receive the 1,000 points or cry, nothing. And the truth is true what you say regarding that it affects the ranking a lot if a fleet does not appear. . . At least I think that the fleet that goes should take 80% to 60% of the points plus a 50% cryo bonus something as a reward for attending. . . That would seem like a reasonable thing to say to that.

 

[Naycko]

I dont thinks its reasonable, it seems like a lot of rewards, and thats not the purpose, the purpose is to avoid people cheating to get advantage, and paying to not show up on purpose. But well, the devs and Gm will read our opinions and maybe they get to a reasonable option

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No creo que sea muy razonable, me parecen un monton de recompensas, y esa no es la idea, la idea es evitar trampas y que las flotas pagen aproposito y no se presenten. Pero bueno, todo suma para que los devs y gms lo lean y llegen a una mejor conclusion.

 

[Water]

well , i think those clans who has reported and dont fly the CQ ,should get back theyre mining tickets and get a report lock for 10 days , so that they cant cheat the achievments !

last saturday we had a cq and the opponent clan doesnt fly but there was about 10 players online ....

 

[nemesis1900]

Good night.

I have a possible solution to the problems that you are discussing and I want to communicate the problems that I observe.

Currently, on the Aurora server, there are only 5 royal clans participating. If you look at the classification you will see 10 clans but this is not authentic because they are alliances that the planets take turns to pay. The clans want to participate in conquests every day. I would like the clan enlistments to be free. Eliminate the registration crystals.

In case a clan pays to participate, but then no one enlists or does not reach 5 players, they must punish it with 10 days without participating in conquests. In addition, the conquest must be rescheduled the next day, one hour after normal hours with another fleet.

For me the classification is not functional. The only thing that causes is that the clan that already has the percentage that interests them to win the golden skull begins to hide on the planet to avoid losing crystals and thus obtain their skull. This makes the conquest boring. We must continue looking for a way to modify this.

Consider modifying the time on the aurora server, analyze the time where there are more connected. The conquest is very early. On this server there are a large number of Latin American players and Europeans themselves got used to playing in Latin time and they are hurt by the lack of players in the conquests.

They must satisfy the users. Allow more than one conquest on the same day. For example, if 4 clans join a conquest, allow all 4 to participate. For example, Wednesday, registration date, 4 clans are registered, Friday, first conquers 20hs server and second conquers 22hs server. In case the number of registered clans is odd, a random draw is made. In case there are 6 clans registered, it could be 6pm - 8pm - 10pm.

Once these changes are implemented, I recommend moving the restriction from 72 hours in exchange for clans to 30 days. This will reduce the number of fleets that distort unauthentic draws. In this way, the conquest would be concentrated in a few fleets, allowing conquests of a greater number of people, because it is very unfortunate the small number of players who participate in conquest on the Aurora server. You can rarely see more than 12 players vs 12 players.

Best regards.

 

[Poowerwolf]

Once these changes are implemented, I recommend moving the restriction from 72 hours in exchange for clans to 30 days. This will reduce the number of fleets that distort unauthentic draws. In this way, the conquest would be concentrated in a few fleets, allowing conquests of a greater number of people, because it is very unfortunate the small number of players who participate in conquest on the Aurora server. You can rarely see more than 12 players vs 12 players.

Best regards.

i think 30 is WAY too much.imagine getting kicked/leaving a clan and then for 30 days u cant reach sirius.Thats way too big of a cooldown

 

[nemesis1900]

i think 30 is WAY too much.imagine getting kicked/leaving a clan and then for 30 days u cant reach sirius.Thats way too big of a cooldown

Good morning.

The restriction applies when you change clan. It does not apply when you are expelled or you leave.

If you want to change clan there is no problem, but if you later want to return to the previous clan or create a new one there you must apply 30 days.

They must also increase the amount of cryonite that is obtained in conquests of greater number of participants to motivate the unification of clans.

The restriction was the last proposal, the idea is that they debate to reach a common agreement.

Best regards.

 

[MidnightStorm]

Good morning.

The restriction applies when you change clan. It does not apply when you are expelled or you leave.

If you want to change clan there is no problem, but if you later want to return to the previous clan or create a new one there you must apply 30 days.

They must also increase the amount of cryonite that is obtained in conquests of greater number of participants to motivate the unification of clans.

The restriction was the last proposal, the idea is that they debate to reach a common agreement.

Best regards.

Hopefully they will

 

[NGSpeed]

ATTENTION PUSH for this idea.

View attachment 48718
The clan history is pretty large and some information just make it harder to have an overview on the events that are logged to the clan history.
Those 5 logs could be summed up like this:

"Your clan was rewarded with 9 Gravitons for winning the Conquest on Iga."
1) If you hover your mouse cursor over "9 Gravitons" then an infobox appears, containing how many Gravitons of each were paid out as a reward.
2) Instead of "9" there could also be "(1|3|3|1|1)".

These will shrink the amount of logs to give the history a better overview and introduce some colors aswell.
Here the amount of cryonite rewarded for CQ could also be included:
"Your clan was rewarded with [(1|3|3|1|1) Gravitons and] X.XXX.XXX cryonite for the victory/defeat on Iga."

Speaking of overview there is a way to make it even better by using History Areas.
View attachment 48719
Here they could appear over "Newer" and "Older", just like in the ladders:
View attachment 48720
History Areas would be:

All

Singularity

Conquests

Donations/Assignments

Members/Positions

General: All logs as now.
Singularity: Jumpship sent to XYZ, Clan Mission done on FGH. Purchased Jumpship, Jumpship destroyed.
Conquests: daily mining ticket, Win/Lose against Clan JKL, mining tickets consumation when CQ starts, selected for conquest, assigned mining tickets
Donations/Assignments: Y donate X cryonite to the clan fund, A assigned Y cryonite to B
Members/Positions: X has been approved as a Member by Y, X's rank was changed to A by Y

This means each log gets an addition attribute so it can be filtered.
Hope you have a nice weekend

ATTENTION PUSH for this idea.
Clan History is a big heap of data.
So confusing to find what you want.
At least consider using more colors to mark a member, planet etc. if you are not a fan of reworking clan history.
@Gruni