Advertisement
by Cormac A Stark » Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:00 am
by Ballotonia » Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:01 am
by Ballotonia » Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:07 am
Cormac A Stark wrote:I actually have a question related to this but not actually about the update time display. Ballotonia says that regions will no longer be guaranteed to update in the order found in the XML Dump -- does this mean that a region like Kyzikos will no longer always update last, but may update far earlier in the update?
Cormac A Stark wrote:And another question if the answer to the above is yes: Will regions created during update still not update at all during that update, allowing them to be used as Instant Jump Points to avoid updating before your target region does?
by Tlik » Sun Sep 01, 2013 6:31 am
Ballotonia wrote:Just to explain a bit why removing the ability to trigger is part of this topic in the first place:
Imagine the following hypothetical scenario, with numbers absurdly high to make things really clear:
Take two consecutively updating regions in the game, let's call them region1 and region2, each containing 10 nations. Imagine the game will predict one update in advance when region2 will update. It sees only 10 nations before it and will estimate them updating one second apart. Imagine some (small) uncertainty window of unknown size around both published update times.
After this prediction is published someone dumps 2000 nations in region1. Then, an invader wants to invade region2, and decides to trigger using the 1500th nation in region1.
Then the update starts. All the way until region1 the update has gone smooth without any surprises. But then the update hits region1. So... what should the game do in this case? If it updates region1 and region2 at their promised times, the ability to trigger is lost: by the time the 1500th nation in region1 updates (and no, we can't update them all in 1 second without rewriting close to the entire game), the time to update region2 will have passed. And if the game has kept its promise to update region2 at its designated time, it must have done so before the moment the chosen trigger activates.
Similarly, if the game maintains the ability to trigger then it cannot update both regions at the published times.
Ballotonia
by Mahaj » Sun Sep 01, 2013 7:12 am
Ballotonia wrote:Just to explain a bit why removing the ability to trigger is part of this topic in the first place:
Imagine the following hypothetical scenario, with numbers absurdly high to make things really clear:
Take two consecutively updating regions in the game, let's call them region1 and region2, each containing 10 nations. Imagine the game will predict one update in advance when region2 will update. It sees only 10 nations before it and will estimate them updating one second apart. Imagine some (small) uncertainty window of unknown size around both published update times.
After this prediction is published someone dumps 2000 nations in region1. Then, an invader wants to invade region2, and decides to trigger using the 1500th nation in region1.
Then the update starts. All the way until region1 the update has gone smooth without any surprises. But then the update hits region1. So... what should the game do in this case? If it updates region1 and region2 at their promised times, the ability to trigger is lost: by the time the 1500th nation in region1 updates (and no, we can't update them all in 1 second without rewriting close to the entire game), the time to update region2 will have passed. And if the game has kept its promise to update region2 at its designated time, it must have done so before the moment the chosen trigger activates.
Similarly, if the game maintains the ability to trigger then it cannot update both regions at the published times.
Ballotonia
<Koth> I'm still going by the assumption that Mahaj is Unibot's kid brother or something
Kandarin(Naivetry): You're going to have a great NS career ahead of you if you want it, Mahaj. :)
<@Eluvatar> Why is SkyDip such a purist raiderist
<+frattastan> Because his region was never raided.
<+maxbarry> EarthAway: I guess I might dabble in raiding just to experience it better, but I would not like to raid regions of natives, so I'd probably be more interested in defense and liberations
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 9:26 am
Ballotonia wrote:Just to explain a bit why removing the ability to trigger is part of this topic in the first place:
Imagine the following hypothetical scenario, with numbers absurdly high to make things really clear:
Take two consecutively updating regions in the game, let's call them region1 and region2, each containing 10 nations. Imagine the game will predict one update in advance when region2 will update. It sees only 10 nations before it and will estimate them updating one second apart. Imagine some (small) uncertainty window of unknown size around both published update times.
After this prediction is published someone dumps 2000 nations in region1. Then, an invader wants to invade region2, and decides to trigger using the 1500th nation in region1.
Then the update starts. All the way until region1 the update has gone smooth without any surprises. But then the update hits region1. So... what should the game do in this case? If it updates region1 and region2 at their promised times, the ability to trigger is lost: by the time the 1500th nation in region1 updates (and no, we can't update them all in 1 second without rewriting close to the entire game), the time to update region2 will have passed. And if the game has kept its promise to update region2 at its designated time, it must have done so before the moment the chosen trigger activates.
Similarly, if the game maintains the ability to trigger then it cannot update both regions at the published times.
Ballotonia
by Cerian Quilor » Sun Sep 01, 2013 9:31 am
by Superfinity » Sun Sep 01, 2013 9:53 am
Cerian Quilor wrote:The best solution would be to either keep current predictive methods in existence but also add this
by Cerian Quilor » Sun Sep 01, 2013 9:56 am
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:07 am
Superfinity wrote:The game has always valued the hard work and creativity of players, creating update systems to specifically be less skill-based and more luck-based undermines the competitive nature of R/D. For these reasons, I hope the admins reconsider the plan to change how update works in favor of simply adding a Estimated Update Time without changing update.
by All Good People » Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:13 am
by Eist » Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:26 am
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Superfinity wrote:The game has always valued the hard work and creativity of players, creating update systems to specifically be less skill-based and more luck-based undermines the competitive nature of R/D. For these reasons, I hope the admins reconsider the plan to change how update works in favor of simply adding a Estimated Update Time without changing update.
That's very well said.
Unibot III wrote:Frankly, the lows that people sink to in this game is perhaps the most disturbing thing about NationStates Gameplay.
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:29 am
Eist wrote:Mallorea and Riva wrote:That's very well said.
The problem is that beyond the physical calculations of update time (which once you've learnt how it's pretty straightforward), there is not any skill beyond clicking the move nation button at the correct time. You naysayers are making the old system seem as if it is as complex as hacking into the NASA flight systems, but in reality a monkey could do it once taught how.
by Cerian Quilor » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:12 pm
by Astarial » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:36 pm
Tlik wrote:The problem with this is, as others have said, the fact that knowing when a region updates is an important part of Gameplay these days, and preventing larger organisations from having that information on the grounds that younger orgs don't have it isn't the right way to go about it. From that same argument, we might assume that no organisation is allowed to use "sneaky tactics" such as clean puppets and sleepers, on the grounds that younger orgs don't have the know-how to be able to use them effectively. The obvious answer to the latter suggestion is "no, that's ridiculous, anyone can learn to set up a sleeper, there's enough GP guides around" - why can't that be the answer to this conundrum?
Superfinity wrote:Ballotonia is clever enough to code an Estimated Update Time feature that works like FriarTuck, Uniboot or Halcones's calculator, so that newbies and less professional R/Ders can have access to a tool that will guess an estimated update time. But if players want to figure out update works more than what the game has figured out for them -- they should be allowed to work to gain this advantage.
All Good People wrote:Adding the display would be a help to less experienced players, and players that don't want to be bothered with the process of triggering. And isn't the entire intent to increase the availability of gameplay to more players ?
Why penalize the players that have enhanced gameplay by their own talents and skills in the process ?
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:39 pm
by Cerian Quilor » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:45 pm
by Kanaia » Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:58 pm
[violet] wrote:Never underestimate the ability of admin to do nothing.
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:02 pm
Kanaia wrote:I think there should be a degree of uncertainty to the order of update.
As it stands now, even with variance, update can be calculated to a very small window, making it nearly impossible to defend. Variance only decreasess the chance for success, it does not increase the chance for defense. The game is still raiders vs the clock, rather than raiders vs defenders.
by Kanaia » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:13 pm
[violet] wrote:Never underestimate the ability of admin to do nothing.
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:18 pm
Kanaia wrote:Link to study on tag raids?
My knowledge is only anecdotal, but I found that after variance was implemented defenders still rarely made it in fast enough to update, mostly it was just raiders failing to get in fast enough to take the delegacy, and defenders following after update to secure the region.
by Kanaia » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:31 pm
Mallorea and Riva wrote:Kanaia wrote:Link to study on tag raids?
My knowledge is only anecdotal, but I found that after variance was implemented defenders still rarely made it in fast enough to update, mostly it was just raiders failing to get in fast enough to take the delegacy, and defenders following after update to secure the region.
Isn't that a success? There is no difference between raiders moving too early and too late, we either miss or lose to defenders. We respond to defender pressure by cutting our move times shorter, increasing our risk. Our inability to precisely pinpoint update anymore forced us to choose which way to lose we would prefer, should our estimates be off.
[violet] wrote:Never underestimate the ability of admin to do nothing.
by Tim-Opolis » Sun Sep 01, 2013 2:38 pm
Kanaia wrote:Mallorea and Riva wrote:Isn't that a success? There is no difference between raiders moving too early and too late, we either miss or lose to defenders. We respond to defender pressure by cutting our move times shorter, increasing our risk. Our inability to precisely pinpoint update anymore forced us to choose which way to lose we would prefer, should our estimates be off.
Success for defenders, as I would define it, is spotting a raid, moving into a region, and preventing a raider from taking the delegacy.
<Koth - 06/30/2020> I mean as far as GPers go, Tim is one of the most iconic
by Kanaia » Sun Sep 01, 2013 3:51 pm
[violet] wrote:Never underestimate the ability of admin to do nothing.
by Mallorea and Riva » Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:21 pm
Kanaia wrote:The idea, as I see it, is to change R/D so that triggering is not the Number 1 deciding factor on success or failure.
As it stands today, triggering is the be all and end all of successful raid/liberation. I believe there is a problem with that, and this would change it.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Burkettson, Trotterdam
Advertisement