Battle points from support

Discussion in 'The Acropolis' started by Asjo, Oct 17, 2011.

Share This Page

  1. Asjo

    Asjo New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    75
    It has been announced that in the newest update for Grepolis, people who support others will now also get battle points from it:

    "If support troops are involved in a battle their owner will now also receive battle points"

    The change noted is ambigously worded. Therefore, I would like to have it cleared up what exactly these changes entail. Which leaves the following questions:

    1) Can the number of battle points awarded to the defender and the suppoters ever exceed the amount of attacking units killed off?

    2) How exactly is the distribution of battle points among defender/supporters handled? Will the amount of battle points you get depend on how large a portion of your defense your support makes up (in population), how many of your units were killed or will there be seperate calculations for how many attacking units each supporting army killed?

    I like this change, but I just want to make sure it isn't broken. If it means less battle points for the defender and more battle points for the supporters, I think it's a good idea.

    For instance, when big alliances fight each other, it's often a few people who make the most conquest attempts against the other alliances, and in conquest worlds these people get a ton of battle points from having everyone in the alliances defend their siege while everyone in the other alliance tries to break it. A more even distribution of those battle points would be healthy for the alliances, so there members can grow more easily. At the same time, this change might also lead to a lot of abuse, espcially due to the broken morale system. Say that there's a small partly inactive player next to me, who I know is being farmed regularly. He attacker will have 40% morale against the target, so I send a large defensive army to the city. Since 40% morale basically means your units fight terribly, the attacker loses a ton of units while you only lose few defensive units, getting a lot of battle points in the process.
     
  2. jpindseth

    jpindseth New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    34
    This problem can be avoided if you only get BP when defending an allied city.
    ...I can't see any big downside to such a restriction
     
  3. Asjo

    Asjo New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    75
    That'd be really trick. Something which normally has no effect on battle suddenly does. Not necessarily logical, and I'd say it'd be dangerous to have such an inconsistent system. And the same thing still might happen if you're allied with a low point player :)
     
  4. Pythagorus

    Pythagorus New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,434
    Likes Received:
    412
    /me hopes this leads to morale being nerf'd

    /me wakes up from dreamland... :p

    i think jp's idea would work pretty well. people could of course ally with small players, but then that is really accomplishing a double whammy for the morale system, which is meant to help small players. if it can (in a roundabout way) lead to bigger players allying with them that that is a bigger help than a whole lot of morale in their favour!
     
  5. Thrillology

    Thrillology New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    81
    I am excited for the new updates though!
    This is one of the things I look forward to, and another being able to invite players to your island who are friends.
     
  6. gadzooks

    gadzooks New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    30
    asjo has repeated what i've posted in a couple other threads already. The morale system needs fixing if this update is going to work. The problem with making the distribution only apply when defending members of your alliance is of course that you should be able to defend anyone in the game and have the mechanics work the same. What about alliances you are pacted with? What about defending strategically important polises in your territory covertly to prevent enemies conquering them before you do? etc. etc.

    I'm all for the update, so don't get me wrong. This is something I think most players have wanted for quite a long time. But I really don't relish the spiking wars that will arise if this thing goes ahead in morale based worlds without doing something to fix the problem.
     
  7. Tyrion

    Tyrion New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,254
    Likes Received:
    229
    I'm trying to find this out right now actually. As Gadzooks pointed out, he made a similar post about a possible issue with the distribution. I'm trying to get some more information about what the formula or formulae will be regarding the BP distribution.
     
  8. jpindseth

    jpindseth New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    34
    I don't really have a problem with there being a bonus(BP) for defending players in your own alliance.
    It could also gives a more us(the alliance) against them(the world) feeling and thus more aggressive play ;)
    1* Do you send biremes to other pact-members now? You don't get any BP for it so the changes with the rule is very small. Again I don't think an incentive for defending you allies is a bad thing. Also it would not stop you from sending biremes to players outside your alliance if tactical reasons makes it necessary.

    2* Or you could implement getting BP from defending pact-members also, but I think that would be a bad idea. All MRA's (new players) would then make a billion pacts because they don't understand the game mechanics...

    ----unless you made a new rule!--------------
    Within the Alliances: allways "50%" BP when defending members of your own alliance

    Number of pacts
    -> 1-3 pacts : "30%" BP when defending pact-members
    -> 4-9:pacts : "20%" BP when defending pact-members
    -> 10-20 pacts : "15%" BP when defending pact-members
    -> 21- infinite pacts : "5%" BP when defending pact-members

    That would have been awesome :D
    (effect on actual game-play would be minimal, but make new players keep the number of pacts down)
    *The rule would not stop you from doing this.
     
  9. Asjo

    Asjo New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2011
    Messages:
    303
    Likes Received:
    75
    All suggetions of making it necessary to be in the same alliance to get battle points are flawed. Once people get used to getting battle points for supporting others, they will come to expect it, and maybe will not support others when they know they are not going to get battle points. It should not be necessary to calculations to know whether it's "worthwhile" supporting someone (as in the pact suggestion). As it has been mentioned, you have to be able to trust game mechanics to be somewhat transparent, and having a system that only earn you battle points for supporting allies goes against that.

    I have done some testing in regards to the distribution of battle points:

    Test 1 (small ground attack)

    Objective: Attack empty city of alliance-member. City has level 25 city wall as well as tower.
    Attacking units: 80 hoplites
    Supporting units: 46 archers, 30 hoplites
    Result: Defender gets 80 battle points, supporter gets none.

    Test 2 (naval attack)

    Objective: Attack empty city of alliance-member. City has tower.
    Attacking units: 200 light ships
    Supporting units: 309 biremes
    Result: Defender gets 620 battle points, supporter gets 1380 battle points.

    Test 3 (large ground attack)

    Objective: Attack empty city of alliance-member. City has level 25 city wall as well as tower.
    Attacking units: 896 slingers
    Supporting units: 1001 swordsmen, 738 hoplites, 220 archers
    Result: Defender gets 278 battle points, supporter gets 618 battle points.

    Test 4 (naval attack against joint defense)

    Objective: Attack empty city with no tower. The defender leaves 150 biremes for defense, equal the the amount of the supporter.
    Attacking units: 200 light ships
    Supporting units: 150 biremes
    Result: Defender gets 1310 battle points, supporter gets 690 battle points
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2011
  10. .FatLady.

    .FatLady. Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2011
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    46
    results dont look half-bad
     
  11. berserxes

    berserxes New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    31
    for the most part ill get more dbp than i do now other than the odd siege but i can see a few problems with this including losing the ability to selectively hand out my dbp, theres no point giving it to good players unless your sure of rimming them but with this theres no control, the other major one is everybody killing their own troops and getting abp aswell as dbp, plus the obvious issue of mass turtles to deal with but then we ave that now anyway ;)
     
  12. chrss2128

    chrss2128 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,305
    Likes Received:
    267
    Would it be possible for this update to be moved to 1.26 worlds? I know this is something we have wanted for very long.
     
    cb627cb627 likes this.
  13. berserxes

    berserxes New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    31
    please not on xi :Angry: ....if we want to play the 2.0 abomination we would join one of the worlds they seem to be opening every other day, dont wish away what we have :rolleyes:
     
    isajooon likes this.
  14. chrss2128

    chrss2128 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2010
    Messages:
    2,305
    Likes Received:
    267
    The battle points for support part only. Don't you find it stupid how you don't get anything for using many many of your troops to defend another and getting nothing from it but a big rebuild?
     
  15. berserxes

    berserxes New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    128
    Likes Received:
    31
    i find the politics intriguing, its the best thing about the game, if i send defence to anyone its an alliance member so the dbp goes on our stats as a whole anyway and when i need it ill get defence sent to me so ive never had a problem with it

    i do think it will change the mechanics of the game alot, at least as much as morale but it will be the biggest players on the servers that benefit most with them often stacking smaller less active players, it will only be the big one off pay load battles that get the bp spread out
     
  16. Nietha

    Nietha New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    8 days since the last post and we still don't have the formula?? :rolleyes:
     
  17. Pythagorus

    Pythagorus New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2010
    Messages:
    3,434
    Likes Received:
    412
    i think it's safe to say that the formula will not be released (as is the case with virtually all of the important game mechanics).
     
  18. Zachthegreat01

    Zachthegreat01 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    27
    This is a great idea !!

    The formula should not be released.
     
  19. gadzooks

    gadzooks New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    30
    that's kind of pointless unless the distribution varies from battle to battle. Should be quite easy to figure out the EXACT formula otherwise. Guess no one has bothered to do it yet or if they have they're keeping it to themselves.
     
  20. Tyrion

    Tyrion New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    3,254
    Likes Received:
    229
    I can say that the formula is the same for each battle. The BP that each report shows is the total that is distributable between all defenders. What a player receives is based upon the proportion of defensive troops which are theirs at the battle.