inactive players in premade maps

General conversation and discussion about the game, feedback and suggestions

Moderators: psantos, llandeiro

Posts: 5
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 11:06 am

inactive players in premade maps

Postby Tigger » Mon Aug 27, 2012 8:28 am

Hi!

If you look at the current Hispania game, you will see that it is a complete disaster ... it is practically over after 7 turns (of 60!) Why is this so? Well, there might be many reasons, but one is EXTREMELY frustrating for all participating players. :x In the end, even for the winning side, since there is no big fun/challenge. Except if they are stupid enough just to play for the ranking, no matter the means. :?:

3 of the muslim factions were never actively played (AI ? ... or worse - fake player accounts to weaken the enemy?), Murcia, Evora, Alisbunah never made a single move ... two of them border factions. :(
2 of the muslim factions stopped playing after 2-3 turns, after stupidly running there armies around and letting the fortresses unguarded. Rookie mistakes or sabotage?

However ... this ruins an otherwise very interesting setup.

So I propose 2 things for those big pre-made maps to the admins.
1) Never start the game if not all the factions are selected by human players.
2) Request at least 110 credits for EVERY country. So if someone REALLY wants to set up fake accounts, he at least has to pay for it.

Discussion welcome.

Regards

Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:17 pm

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby Tonic » Thu Aug 30, 2012 2:00 pm

Well, I think this scenario has seen massive cheating.
The suicidal players, a traitor and some completely inactive (so not even AI) factions.

It is obviously to easy to cheat and take out factions of the opposite side with fake accounts. Sad.

Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:13 pm

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby psantos » Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:48 pm

Well, I can tell you that this scenario had no AIs playing. And that two of the best Almansur players I know were playing on the Muslim side. So if you were also playing a Taifa, at least there were three good players :)


So I propose 2 things for those big pre-made maps to the admins.
1) Never start the game if not all the factions are selected by human players.
2) Request at least 110 credits for EVERY country. So if someone REALLY wants to set up fake accounts, he at least has to pay for it.



In this particular game, 1) was followed. This only shows how difficult is to balance these games...

The next deployed version will support Elo /premium account limitation in games, which should account for 2).

Posts: 13
Joined: Wed May 09, 2007 9:31 pm

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby Ulisses » Mon Sep 03, 2012 8:25 pm

I'm playing this game as a christion.
And yes is frustrating for everybody when things as you report occur.
But one thing is unfair.
Everytime someone play bad (rookie, or unluck move, or...) or quit , the fault is always from the other side.
That is not true.
I don't believe that Almansur players want to win at all cost.
Sometimes seems unfair, and i already felt that feeling, but life is the same.

The ELO ranking could be unfair, look at me.
I'm a harder player, mean play a lot, and sometimes i loose sometimes i win, my ELO is not so high,
mean i can't play?

I also propose that the next game, that i intend to participate, should be played by the ones who subscribe but if they not play when game begin, they should be kick off and sent an invitation to the ELO ranking players to replace them.
ELO 1 -to christions
ELO 2 - to arabs
and so on.


Cheers

Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:17 pm

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby Tonic » Fri Sep 07, 2012 8:54 am

Hi!

@Psantos - good that you looked into it. And good that some kind of regulation for future games (point 2) is planned.

Regarding the current game. It is never easy to balance a game ... but I think this time it is not so much about good / bad players.
You ALWAYS have some good & bad players on either side. That's normal. And I agree ... it is not the other side's fault if someone plays honestly but badly.

The main problem is/was that at least 3 muslim factions NEVER MADE A SINGLE MOVE. One left the faith (and the alliance) in the first turn. (Returned after massive messaging ... only to leave again when it became obvious that he wasn't playing for the Almoravid). About the 2 others, you can discuss. Were they just complete rookies playing horribly or set-up accounts who fucked up intentionally? Who knows. In the end, the scenario was completely ruined either way.

And it looked very strange, that much I agree with the initial poster.

Very sad for all the honest players who wanted a good struggle and challenging fight. :-(

I don't care at all for ELO ranking. It was just a waste of my time ... and left a bad feeling of ... hm ... a wasted opportunity for a good and fair game.

Posts: 280
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 3:13 pm

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby psantos » Sun Sep 09, 2012 11:59 pm

In all massive multiplayer games there are those players that prefer to cause grief, or that use any stratagem to win, even planting agents and spies on the other side.

But in fact, that also happened in the historical period that the game intends to portray. The Muslims were defeated in the crucial period depicted in this scenario, because they were not united, and some of them actually helped the Christians. For instance, the Amir of Évora had a treaty with Alphonsus I of Portugal and let the Christians conquer Lisbon.

So, as a game designer of an historical game, I am divided. Should the game try to avoid something that was common at the time?

Anyway, I created a new Hispania game, as a couple of players asked. Please choose your sides and lets try for a more balanced game this time.

Posts: 27
Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 5:00 am

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby Herman Von Salza » Wed Sep 19, 2012 10:55 am

Hi, I have only played a fantasy game so far. just finished. It went ok but we also had some issues with inactive players. So a good AI solution for those situations could help out quite a lot.

As for the historical game. I have not played one yet, I intend this to be my next game. But I have not yet decided either which side am I going to play or if I will stick to religious boundaries. I agree with psantos, people in history did not stick to religious lines. On either side.There were plenty of people who changed sides or worked as mercenaries. El Cid who was instrumental in winning the conflict for the Christians as it turns out was a Muslim. He worked on both sides of the wars as well.

Inside both sides there was also disagreements about the role of the religions, some Muslims prefered to support the Christians rather than more fundamental Muslims. On the Christian side also some places were intensly fundamental wiping out muslim leaders etc in other places they happily accepted the vanquished muslim scholars and leader and used them to improve their own technology, sciences etc.

The same things happen in all conflicts, scientists from countries that loose wars commonly are to be found in the victorious countries in a short while working for universities and the military.

So in judging who I would play and how I will look at the situation on the ground I intend to look at what is good for that country and not simply stick to a religious side. This is important, dont look at it as your personal gain, try to get into the spirit of the country you are playing. But also keep in mind the leaders of those countries were usulally much more concerned with their own safety and their childeren's prospects than with sticking to a side or a religion. There are after all reasons why the Muslims at this point were no longer one united country. And the same reasons stand behing Christian europe ripping itself apart for most of the next 1000 years.

Posts: 27
Joined: Sun May 13, 2012 5:00 am

Re: inactive players in premade maps

Postby Herman Von Salza » Wed Feb 13, 2013 5:34 am

Hi, a fresh note on the issue. Last time we were complaining about inactive players in the historical scenario. To fix this the scenario (hispania) waited until all territories were filled. But this backfired as well, because some people who picked early were plain bored out of the game before the game started (it took around two weeks I think to fill all slots). The result was that almost half the land was at some point in the game unoccupied. The game is still going, will be over in a couple of turns I think. But the question remains: how to avoid inactive players in the game?

Given the experience I think that holding up a scenario for a long time is not good. The acceptance period for a scenario should be limited to 3-4 day max. After that all remaining slots should be filled with AI players (who are set to active play not just defence if attacked). AI always has the limitation of not being able to communicate with them but its better to have an ally who is at least active than a silent land waiting to be taken over next to you. Same with enemies, its boring to attack and take over lands which hardly defend themselves.

Return to The Round Table

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest