Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fair solution for Siege farmers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fair solution for Siege farmers

    Firstly, it would be good to mention that I am playing this game for more than 1600 days and I am experienced enough in the game content. I am also following this forum for 3 years just to read opinions. I am in a G1 guild myself and I am stable C2 rank in arena. The half of the guild is C1 and some of us are C2 the rest F1-F3. From 28 players only one is inactive for more than a month. I was also in a G2 guild before for a month "to test the waters" and saw that I am not ready yet for this level. All the given statistics information are based on my experience in this game as a guild vice master in different rank guilds and you are not supposed to accept them, even though I think they are same for most of the guild ranks.

    Check here the suggestion of *Chow*: https://forum.com2us.com/forum/main-...-siege-farmers

    Secondly, I don't like the suggested solution of *Chow* because:
    1. Guardian players will benefit from this more than other players. Usually the contribution of players in guardian guilds is almost equal (except farming guardian guilds). Since guilds will get extra BONUS reward over the currently mentioned rewards this will increase the gap between guild ranks even more and current G1-G3 guilds will benefit more from a such change. So your solution while preventing farmers will also increase the gap between ranks. This solution is a knife with two blades and a bit selfish for guardian players, isn't it ?

    2. Why should players which don't attack at all in siege or attack sometimes should get near equal rewards to those who fully attack ? Why should they be removed from guild, because they have lives out of summoners war and don't play 24/7 as most of the guardian players ? I won't even mention that It's especially hard to recruit active C1 players for G1 guilds.

    Thirdly, I don't think that other suggestions like making inactive players not be able to fight in siege can be easily bypassed by keeping the alts accounts active every day. Also it's not a good idea to limit players entering different guilds. Everyone should be able to be in a guild with their friends. It's not a bad thing a F2-C3 guilds have a guardian player, the broken part comes when those guardian players get more than 30% of the reward. So fixing the reward amount without increasing the gap among guilds will be fair enough.

    THE PROPOSED PERCENTAGES BELOW ARE FOR BETTER UNDERSTANDING THE PROPOSAL AND THEY MAY VARY ACCORDING TO GUILD RANKS.

    Here is my suggestion using maths and statistics: If the contribution percentage of the top 3 players is more than or equal to the contribution percentage of all other players, then set a maximum contribution reward percentage. In my opinion the right percentage might be 9-10% (the exact percentage should be decided by com2us via testing results to prevent farming guilds without affecting other guilds) and everything achieved over this % should be shared among other contributers in the siege according to their contribution percentage making sure that those other contributers will also not get more than the fixed percentage amount. It sounds complex, so let me explain with an example to make it more understandable.

    Example: Let's think of a G1 guild getting 3400 crystals and assume that top 3 players' contribution is as something like as follows: 25%, 22% and 20% (or even higher which will be worse for them) and the contribution of the rest players is 33% total. Since the contribution of the top 3 players is 67% and this is more than 50% (or just other percentage decided by com2us via testing) then it's obvious that the top players are farming. In this case just limit the maximum reward percentage the players can obtain to the fixed percentage (9-10%). So as a result the top 3 players with 25%, 22% and 20% contribution will receive only 10% (340 crystals or 306 for 9%) and the rest 37% left from them will be distributed to other players according to their contribution and making sure the players receiving thet left percentage wouldn't get over 10% in total receiving.

    Conclusion: Let's be honest usually in guardian guilds where the contribution rate is near equal the top player gets on average around 10-13% contribution and the rest of the players in decreasing order get contribution which is less by 1-2% according to the previous player. Meaning the 2nd player gets around 9-12%, 3rd around 8-11% and so on. Or in some rare cases the top contributor will get 13-17% while the 2nd and 3rd will be around 10-13%. So, as you can see the top 3 players together getting equal to or more than 50% contribution is not usual and if that is happening then it's obvious they are farming. Also other parameters like median of contribution of the guild might be used for better detectecting results.
    ​​
    Median of contribution: Check the contribution percentage/points of the player in the middle. If there are 25 players in the siege battle, check how much contribution percentage/points the 13th player got. The median of contribution of farming guilds will be a lot lower than non-farming guilds. Obviously 0-25% for farming guilds And around 30-65% for non-farming guilds.

    I think this is the most effective and fair solution for everyone so far. Let me know what you do not like about this suggestion with logical reasons. Even better if you suggest solutions, if there is a way to bypass this method for unfair advantages. I will re-edit this post continuosly depending on your feedback.

    Peace!

    Update prior to @darlic23:
    "The guild I am in has only 7-8 active players doing siege. It is very easy to get 20% contribution. All it takes is winning 10 attack and a few def win. In this case it means 20,15,15,15,15 ,10,10 and suddenly you are a farming guild."

    ​​​​​​I have a solution for such cases. Another checking parameter might be the gap between players in top 10. If the gaps among top10 players are more than 3-4% this would also be a red flag. Considering so many parameters at once greatly reduces the chances of non-farming guilds to be accused with farming. Also I have mentioned the exacy parameters can be fixed with the statistics com2us has.

    Update prior to @er0L
    "You take 7 top Players and 8 filler accounts - all they do is make 10 attacks and Setting deffs from filler accounts so they don't win any deffs themselve."

    Well, in this case you are right. I should think more about this possibility and edit my post when I come with a solution for this. Usually this would not happen in the case of darlic23 where even the defences of inactive players will sometimes get defence successes. Thanks for your contribution!

    Update prior to @crionic
    "Siege is guild effort. I made discussion in my guild and we agreed to cap contribution at 10% and share rest between all other active members (for example using minimum 20 swords)."
    ​​​
    I like the idea to distribute points among the active members if they have used minimum XX swords to make thinks better for players who have tried their best, but failed. But this still not solves the farming problem. For example only farmers will attack and the reward will be still distributed only among them. I will think how might this work and re-edit my post accordingly. Thanks for your contribution!
    Last edited by skjmjnj; 02-02-2019, 05:56 AM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by skjmjnj View Post
    Firstly, it would be good to mention that I am playing this game for more than 1600 days and I am experienced enough in the game content. I am also following this forum for 3 years just to read opinions. I am in a G1 guild myself and I am stable C2 rank in arena. The half of the guild is C1 and some of us are C2 the rest F1-F3. From 28 players only one is inactive for more than a month. I was also in a G2 guild before for a month "to test the waters" and saw that I am not ready yet for this level. All the given statistics information are based on my experience in this game as a guild vice master in different rank guilds and you are not supposed to accept them, even though I think they are same for most of the guild ranks.

    Check here the suggestion of *Chow*: https://forum.com2us.com/forum/main-...-siege-farmers

    Secondly, I don't like the suggested solution of *Chow* because:
    1. Guardian players will benefit from this more than other players. Usually the contribution of players in guardian guilds is almost equal (except farming guardian guilds). Since guilds will get extra BONUS reward over the currently mentioned rewards this will increase the gap between guild ranks even more and current G1-G3 guilds will benefit more from a such change. So your solution while preventing farmers will also increase the gap between ranks. This solution is a knife with two blades and a bit selfish for guardian players, isn't it ?

    2. Why should players which don't attack at all in siege or attack sometimes should get near equal rewards to those who fully attack ? Why should they be removed from guild, because they have lives out of summoners war and don't play 24/7 as most of the guardian players ? I won't even mention that It's especially hard to recruit active C1 players for G1 guilds.

    Thirdly, I don't think that other suggestions like making inactive players not be able to fight in siege can be easily bypassed by keeping the alts accounts active every day. Also it's not a good idea to limit players entering different guilds. Everyone should be able to be in a guild with their friends. It's not a bad thing a F2-C3 guilds have a guardian player, the broken part comes when those guardian players get more than 30% of the reward. So fixing the reward amount without increasing the gap among guilds will be fair enough.

    Here is my suggestion using maths and statistics: If the contribution percentage of the top 3 players is more than or equal to the contribution percentage of all other players, then set a maximum contribution reward percentage. In my opinion the right percentage might be 9-10% (the exact percentage should be decided by com2us via testing results to prevent farming guilds without affecting other guilds) and everything achieved over this % should be shared among other contributers in the siege according to their contribution percentage making sure that those other contributers will also not get more than the fixed percentage amount. It sounds complex, so let me explain with an example to make it more understandable.

    Example: Let's think of a G1 guild getting 3400 crystals and assume that top 3 players' contribution is as something like as follows: 25%, 22% and 20% (or even higher which will be worse for them) and the contribution of the rest players is 33% total. Since the contribution of the top 3 players is 67% and this is more than 50% (or just other percentage decided by com2us via testing) then it's obvious that the top players are farming. In this case just limit the maximum reward percentage the players can obtain to the fixed percentage (9-10%). So as a result the top 3 players with 25%, 22% and 20% contribution will receive only 10% (340 crystals or 306 for 9%) and the rest 37% left from them will be distributed to other players according to their contribution and making sure the players receiving thet left percentage wouldn't get over 10% in total receiving.

    Conclusion: Let's be honest usually in guardian guilds where the contribution rate is near equal the top player gets on average around 10-13% contribution and the rest of the players in decreasing order get contribution which is less by 1-2% according to the previous player. Meaning the 2nd player gets around 9-12%, 3rd around 8-11% and so on. Or in some rare cases the top contributor will get 13-17% while the 2nd and 3rd will be around 10-13%. So, as you can see the top 3 players together getting equal to or more than 50% contribution is not usual and if that is happening then it's obvious they are farming. Also other parameters like median of contribution of the guild might be used to detect farmers.

    Median of contribution: Check the contribution percentage/points of the player in the middle. If there are 25 players in the siege battle, check how much contribution percentage/points the 13th player got. The median of contribution of farming guilds will be a lot lower than non-farming guilds. Obviously 0-25% for farming guilds And around 30-65% for non-farming guilds.

    I think this is the most effective and fair solution for everyone so far. Let me know what you do not like about this suggestion with logical reasons. Even better if you suggest solutions, if there is a way to bypass this method for unfair advantages. I will re-edit this post continuosly depending on your feedback.

    Peace!
    Going to be blunt here.


    One can get over 30% contribution without attacking. I have woken up several times and checked Siege to discover I have had 20 or 30 successful defenses. In other battles not a single won defense meanwhile guild mates using filler mons just to have something on bases will rack them up.


    Chow made his post because even though he is an upper guardian player, he sits in a farming guild where he is by far stronger than every other guild member combined. S come sieges he would get easily the max reward everytime. While he may not be in a lower ranked guild for guild points or crystals, he is one of those farmer accounts. Which is why he suggested an even spread+bonus for top contributors.


    As to your suggestion, it is very very similar to what I posted a few hours ago. Right down to the reward splits and % for top 3. As for contribution, I don't think it is fair. Just because someone doesn't win offenses or defenses doesn't mean they don't try. If they use all their attacks then they deserve an equal reward. Siege is a guild effort. On the other side, people who don't use all 30 attacks should [B] NOT [B] get any rewards. Even if they don't have 30 well runed mons, using all 30 show they are indeed trying.


    I am always top 3 contributor in Siege. Often top spot. I would prefer a more amicable split for all those who try.

    Comment


    • skjmjnj
      skjmjnj commented
      Editing a comment
      As the darlic23 mentioned the top 4th and 5th will be mad for not getting extra reward while the top 3 players do according to your sugestion. Not fair enough But you are right about the contribution. Monsters amount used in siege should also be a factor instead of just relying on contribution. Because using attacks in siege even by failing will show attemps that they are trying their best.

  • #3
    Originally posted by skjmjnj
    Creating a new thread to suggest something for which a thread is already created is nothing more than flooding... https://forum.com2us.com/forum/main-...-siege-farmers



    https://forum.com2us.com/forum/main-...​​​​

    Comment


    • #4
      Setting arbitrary and artificial points to completely change the reward system that may result in way worse reward is a bad design.

      Take your 50% point as example. Are you saying that if the top 3 contributor each have 16% then the guild is not a farming guild, and they can each receive the 16% reward? Then suddenly they all get a couple def win pushing them to 17% contribution each and they suddenly became a farming guild and should only get 10% reward each?

      Way to piss those players.

      Comment


      • skjmjnj
        skjmjnj commented
        Editing a comment
        darlic23 I know how hard it is to find active and good players, especially for G1 guilds looking for active C1 players. We also try to replace our inactive and less contributing players as possible. Give a like to the main post if you think that the new suggestion for your case will work and it's fair enough.
        Last edited by skjmjnj; 01-30-2019, 01:42 AM.

      • darlic23
        darlic23 commented
        Editing a comment
        skjmjnj

        I liked your post, not that I agree with your proposal, but that I agree that Com2Us should look into siege farming.

        Your and most people on this threads that thinks to cap contribution at 10% only works in large guild, but there are in fact many smaller guilds that tries to survive and hang around with friends. We already had enough thread about how laby is unfair to smaller guilds already. We don't need to penalise smaller guilds even further in siege.

      • skjmjnj
        skjmjnj commented
        Editing a comment
        If you do not like the proposal, then do not like the post. Keep things clear, so we can see if the proposal is really good or not. As it comes to cap contribution at 10% - this is just an example percentage to make things clearer for understanding. I have repeated many times that these percentages can be changed according to com2us' decision to keep things fair for everyone. I do not have many statistics about guilds do find the ideal percentage, but they do.

    • #5
      I agree with all possible changes who can stop siege farmimg.
      Are already many posts like this with plenty of possible solutions. The decision of when , haw, stay at Com2us.
      If u guys want to stop siege farmers press the like button on this tipe of topic , indiferent of solution asked , make this changes possible.

      Comment


      • #6
        "and everything achieved over this % should be shared among other contributers in the siege according to their contribution percentage"
        Every Idea is welcome to solve this Problem.
        I think you could still Bypass this by the right amount of players and controlling the contribution - there should still be a "punishment" for just filling your Guild with alt accounts
        Other Option: in the Moment g1 is from place 100 to place 1200+ (depending on the Server). And it doesn't matter if you're currently place 100 or place 1200 you still get the same rewards for a win.
        But there is a large gap in strength from 100 to 1200, so Maybe when Splitting the g1 area in slower Groups and additionally changing the reward System would make the farming guilds Play more competetively.
        The best Thing would be that only the high g1 guilds would get the 17 % Crystals while the low g1 guilds only get 11 % per win.
        That already make a difference of 360 Crystals (30 % contribution) between high g1 and low g1
        But this should only be the first step. Another redistribution-mechanism would be great or make the max. contribution even lower then before (20%/25%)
        Last edited by er0L; 01-30-2019, 01:26 AM.

        Comment


        • skjmjnj
          skjmjnj commented
          Editing a comment
          How exactly can you bypass this when there will be always a limit of 10% for each single player if a farmer guild parameters are met ? Please explain and give proper example, so I can give proper fix if possible and update. Please also don't forget that if they keep increasing the contribution rates of their alt accounts in that process their main accounts won't get that much crystals as it is by now, because the contribution rate of their mains will drop. They cannot rig the contribution rates with such parameters. Prove me wrong by example.

          Why should G1 guilds get different amount of rewards ? This is not fair. Why should we fair G1 guilds suffer, because of scammers trying to break the system ? The gap between G2-G3 and other guilds is very big why, should we make it even bigger ?

          Also it's hard to prove if someone has alt accounts in the guild or not. Keep in mind that they greate new accounts in the same server which means that the newly created alt accounts are registered with different e-mails in that case. If they login with their alts every day and use all their swords to lose just in order to simulate activity on their alts ?
          Last edited by skjmjnj; 01-30-2019, 01:48 AM.

        • er0L
          er0L commented
          Editing a comment
          skjmjnj

          i read your post now a few times, as I understand it better now I would call it to complex to implement. What will happen to your median contribution if players leave/join the Guild?

          "​​​I have a solution for such cases. Another checking parameter might be the gap between players in top 10. If the gaps among top10 players are more than 3-4% this would also be a red flag. Considering so many parameters at once greatly reduces the chances of non-farming guilds to be accused with farming."
          I don't understand this part? how does the System know if this is a normal farming Guild low on members or g1 Players "Simulating" a normal farming Guild?
          You take 7 top Players and 8 filler accounts - all they do is make 10 attacks and Setting deffs from filler accounts so they don't win any deffs themselve.
          They all do around 15 % contribution and still get around 500 Crystals. For the same amount in g2 you would need 13% contribution.

          There must be a simple solution which works for every Guild (farming/non-farming and large guilds/small guilds)

          "Why should G1 guilds get different amount of rewards?"
          because G1 at place 100 is much harder than g1 at place 1200 - and thats exactly the Problem, the normal c3+ Players farm low g1 because they get more rewards as the g2 guilds since they can do 1 vs 3 and win more deffs. Why in the world would they play g2 when they easily get more or the same amount of Crystals after your balancing.
          You get 380 Crystals for 10% in g2 but with your Change they would still get over 500 Crystals when they aim for 15 % contribution in low g1
          i Suggest that guilds 100-200 get at least 1% more Crystals than place 200-350 and so on. So that when you're low g1 you only get 1% more Crystals than high c3. Even with 15% you get max. 360 Crystals.

          at the moment they don't even took the trouble to take active lvl. 50 accounts and Play them - they use accounts lvl. 1-49 with last online xxx days, they are just there to hit the 15 Player Minimum for siege

        • skjmjnj
          skjmjnj commented
          Editing a comment
          I don't understand this part? how does the System know if this is a normal farming Guild low on members or g1 Players "Simulating" a normal farming Guild?

          This is not as hard as you might think. Let's consider our last siege's contribution rates just to make things better for understanding and not pretending like the distribution is same in each guild:
          1. 13.2% 2. 12.5%
          3. 10.1% (I stand here, and usually second place with average 12%)
          4. 7.9% 5. 7.8%
          6. 6.6% 7. 5.7%
          8. 5.1% 9-11. 4.4%
          12-15. 4.3% 16. 2.1%
          17. 0.3% 18-27. 0% (from which 7 are excluded from battle)

          Let's assume the parameter percentage is 3-4% (or any other better fitting parameter percentage decided by com2us)

          As you make a comparison in the difference between each neighbour (1. vs 2.; 2 vs 3 and etc.) count how many differences you have over that parameter percentage in top10 or even better in top15.

          "You take 7 top Players and 8 filler accounts - all they do is make 10 attacks and Setting deffs from filler accounts so they don't win any deffs themselve."

          Well, in this case you are right. I should think more about this possibility and edit my post when I come with a solution for this. Thanks for your contribution!

          "i Suggest that guilds 100-200 get at least 1% more Crystals than place 200-350 and so on. So that when you're low g1 you only get 1% more Crystals than high c3. Even with 15% you get max. 360 Crystals."

          I mean why would any guild at the same rank should get different rewards if they are at the same rank ? I see your point, but maybe just changing the ranking system can be fair enough to consider your proposal. Adding another level between Conquer and Guardian with help with the distribution better. Those on Guardian will be in 100-500 instead of 100 to 1200 and those from 500-1200 will be split into another rank between Conquer and Guardian ?

      • #7
        I don't think we should implement algorithms checking, if guild is farming. Siege is guild effort. I made discussion in my guild and we agreed to cap contribution at 10% and share rest between all other active members (for example using minimum 20 swords).
        Sharing contribution additionally would have positive result, because players choose opponents in siege thinking about guild interest and will not choose always easiest.
        10% is fair, because we think guilds with less than 10 active players in siege and gw are in my opinion almost in "farming zone". Even if all players are similar level, lowering numbers of them in guild make better individual rewards. We often meet guilds with 5-7 g2 players in middle of g1, where we struggle with active 20-25 players. Both in siege and gw.
        Last edited by Crionic; 01-30-2019, 03:58 AM.

        Comment


        • skjmjnj
          skjmjnj commented
          Editing a comment
          I like the idea to distribute points among the active members if they have used minimum XX swords. I will think how might this work and re-edit my post accordingly. Thanks for your contribution!

      • #8
        I don't like these suggestions at all. I'm in a semi-beginner guild, started 8 months ago. I play hardcore so I got way ahead most of my guild mates. We can't clear the labyrinth, we are not good at guild war, siege is the only place where I as an individual player can influence the performance of my guild. We have 3 very active siege players (about 20-25%) and about 4-5 casuals (30-40% total), but this is enough to win siege wars and currently we are in C1. We are not farming, we plan our wars, what to attack when, who attacks which target so we have defeated some strong guilds (at our level). The suggested changes would hurt us badly without a reason. I don't want to leave my guild because they progress slower, but changes like this would force me to.

        Comment


        • skjmjnj
          skjmjnj commented
          Editing a comment
          Thanks for your opinion! I think my suggestion is more about C2-G3 guilds and I have also mentioned that the percentages given from me are there only to make the proposal easier for understanding. In your case for C1 the total crystals reward is 1400. Even if top players are at 30% they will get 420 crystals in total. This is not as broken as getting around 1K crystals each siege. My suggestion can vary according to different guild ranks so to give opportunity for lower level players grow without break the unfairnes that much.

      • #9
        @Dovahkiin i need approval

        @dovahkiin

        Comment


        • #10
          1. Guardian players will benefit from this more than other players. Usually the contribution of players in guardian guilds is almost equal (except farming guardian guilds). Since guilds will get extra BONUS reward over the currently mentioned rewards this will increase the gap between guild ranks even more and current G1-G3 guilds will benefit more from a such change. So your solution while preventing farmers will also increase the gap between ranks. This solution is a knife with two blades and a bit selfish for guardian players, isn't it ?


          well if thats the case, by youre logic if youre over 10% then youre farming and need to move onto a stronger guild....

          Comment


          • skjmjnj
            skjmjnj commented
            Editing a comment
            I see, from the whole post you've understood only this ? Maybe reading again might help. Stop playing straw man, thanks!
            Last edited by skjmjnj; 01-30-2019, 09:04 AM.

        • #11
          "2. Why should players which don't attack at all in siege or attack sometimes should get near equal rewards to those who fully attack ? Why should they be removed from guild, because they have lives out of summoners war and don't play 24/7 as most of the guardian players ? I won't even mention that It's especially hard to recruit active C1 players for G1 guilds."

          because theyre part of your guild, your team, youres using their def. if you dont want them to, BENCH THEM you DONT HAVE TO register people that opt to not do siege and STILL have them in the guild...

          Comment


          • *Chow*
            *Chow* commented
            Editing a comment
            what does me sharing my guild as anything to do with this? again for the millionth time since youre too dumb to read, my suggestion literally nerfs my crystal gains but youre so focus on projecting to me to protect your own personal crystal gains...hmmmmm

          • skjmjnj
            skjmjnj commented
            Editing a comment
            Sharing your guild will show how exactly you are "nerfing" your gains. Ignorant.

          • *Chow*
            *Chow* commented
            Editing a comment
            are you stupid? many here already claim im a "farmer" so any solution is a direct nerf in crystal gain for me.... how dumb are you that you cant connect 2 dots?

        • #12
          "So fixing the reward amount without increasing the gap among guilds will be fair enough."

          geeze kinda like MY suggestion of an even distribution+% bonus? hmmmmmm sounds like youre top 3 and dont want your crystal income hurt too badly...

          Comment


          • darlic23
            darlic23 commented
            Editing a comment
            What I believe skjmjnj is saying is that the total amount of crystal in chow’s suggestion is increased and the crystal gap between G1 guilds and say C3 guild is thus increased.

            Chow proposal is;
            total crystal earned / number of members in siege * (1 + contribution%).

            Since contribution adds up to 100%, the total crystal given out is doubled.

            The solution is actually very simple. Just half the current crystal given out in chows formula. Then the total crystal given out to a G1 guild in chows suggestion is same as the total crystal currently given out to G1 guilds.

          • *Chow*
            *Chow* commented
            Editing a comment
            darlic23 or bump up conq crystal rewards, either way works. a much simplier equation and rule that is to understand that his multiple x y z scenario for crystal rewards...

          • skjmjnj
            skjmjnj commented
            Editing a comment
            darlic23 you got my point very fast. Some people were not able to do it for hours, because it takes some simple mathematical calculations...

            "The solution is actually very simple. Just half the current crystal given out in chows formula. Then the total crystal given out to a G1 guild in chows suggestion is same as the total crystal currently given out to G1 guilds."

            Yes, that way it will be fair. Now just a minimum requirement of contribution is needed. For example in lab you need a total of 300 points contribution to get the final box reward. But it's hard to decide what kind of minimum requirement should be set, because setting minimum amount of contribution points is still not working for farming guilds and they will again easily bypass it.
        Working...
        X