Event Structure Suggestions

murtagon

Reposting this topic I put it in the event section incorrectly.

The current structure of the event rounds causes some issues especially for those in timezones where the event starts when they should be sleeping.

Currently the event starts with the max number of round charges available (5 nodes 3 rounds per node, 4 and 3 nodes 5 rounds per node).
You recharge a round every four hours. So it is possible for many people to miss the first round unless they stay up very late to play their first 2 rounds.

I would like to suggest a change to how the rounds are provided to players.
Option 1
Remove the round timer. Provide all players with the total number of rounds per node. The only requirement is they would need to complete them by the time the event ends. This removes nearly all time bias and allows everyone to play within their schedules.

Option 2
Set the max nodes to 6 (24 hours of charge time) and start players with 3 rounds in each node. This gives players 12 hours to start the event.

I'm honestly not really sure the purpose of the restricted nodes. If I were to guess I would say it is an attempt to force people to keep their rounds somewhat close to each other during the event. However the people already sandbag with the existing structure. Really the attempt to keep rounds synched is not really useful, I suppose some folk feel the current standings accurately reflect the end of the event but there really is no way to prevent sandbagging completely, so I think Option 1 would be better since it would allow more players to be competitive in the events.

majincob

I think either of those options would be great. I would prefer option 1 if they got rid of their current tie-breaking system, not that it works as intended anyway. Otherwise you'd still have the problem of whoever got a perfect score the fastest wins therefore putting pressure on people to interrupt sleep schedules to be competitive.

andrewvanmarle

I kinda like option 2. though 6 nodes is waaay more that I'd'bargain for but the idea that you start with half filled nodes means that it isn't'a must to start immediatly.

Fot both options it's'needed to revisit the shared ranking problem

Pestilence

I love this idea. I was thinking out would be nice if the events started in the afternoon/evening but my afternoon could be other players bedtime or morning. Both suggestions seem much more fair for all players.

malafein

I agree either of those changes would be great. I prefer option 1 and the removal of tie-breaking being the first to score the points.

We can't all start at the same time, and we can't all play around the same schedule. To be a fair competition, I think all players should get the same number of matches regardless of when they start.

The way it's structured now just encourages players that want to be competitive to have an unhealthy balance of time management. People waking up when they should be sleeping just so they don't miss out on matches is not good. People taking "restroom" breaks at work so they can complete some matches and score points before their rivals do is not good..

I like the events and the objectives themselves, just not the timing and node recharge structure.

malafein

Another option, if they want to keep the tie-breaking method, would be to start all nodes with 1 or 2 charges and remove the cap on how many charges (matches) a node can hold. That way, it staggers the beginning of the event to alleviate some of the timezone differences, and everyone regardless of work/life schedules will still end up having the same number of maximum playable matches available to them.

They could make that change with or without the tie-breaking method (rank ordered by whoever got the score first).

As it is now, players that need to sleep or work (most humans) miss out on games.

arNero

Either option is fine, and in fact when I complained about it in a different thread some time back, those were exactly what I suggested as well (full nodes no replenishment timer or non-full starting stock). As I said in that thread, btw, a full, non-replenishing stock may not be applicable for this game since the lack of timer would probably remove the tension of having to play every few hours, which, for this kind of F2P games, is not exactly wanted to some people (not the players, btw).

Pacone

I was about to open a thread about this, and I like your suggested option 1, certainly effective.

I'll post my suggestions:

- Nodes could start with 1 charge (similar to option 2 but no need to increase node charges to 6). This way the maximum number of points would be the same, but it would remove the need to be online when the event starts. One hour missing event start means many people won't be able to make top 10 right from the start.

- Regarding tie breaking, prizes could be awarded not by position on the list, but points obtained instead. If three people got the same number of points they deserve the same reward do they not? Most ties happen in the middle brackets, so it's not like they would be giving away thousands of mythics and fat packs.

- Another way to break ties would be to measure game time, so that whoever got X points faster (not sooner) would get a higher rank.

madoddvibe

+1 for this thread. I'm in Australia, Sydney, and events start and finish at 3am. I'm unable to be as competitive as players based in other timezones which I feel is discriminatory. Something needs to be put in place so that my maximum effort yields the same potential reward as others' maximum efforts and winning is based on skill rather than where you happened to be born.

Another possible suggestion is to run multiple instances of events with staggered start times, e.g. a Nodes of Power event with instances starting and finishing at 3am, 7am, 11am (for example). Users can pick one of the event instances to join, and once joined the other instances are removed from the list to prevent enrolling in multiple instances.

This not only fixes the problem for people in other timezones, but also other target groups such as people who work night shift, and also won't require extensive changes to the way the events themselves work.

PS: please upvote the original post so we get some attention for this issue.