Hello,
First of all please forgive some unavoidable mistakes as I'm not a native English speaker, but I chose to write in this language anyway since Google translate can be confusing
Some misfortune recently happened to me and my teammates, and I think it shows that the rule about push could be slightly modified in order to not be an obstacle for teamplay.
I'll present you a short version of the case then how I propose to enhance the rule, if you want to dig further into the pointless details (such as precise numbers) here's a topic on the french board where I tried to get some opinions from the community (but damn, our community is so dead
)
TL;DR, we played in team but as we destroyed some additional unexpected fleet, we couldn't consider the gains as something to split equally.
I have heard the same kind of situations from other players, with team efforts ending up in moderate (or tremendous) losses for some players because they were not allowed to consider their operations as a teamplay, but as a bunch of solo operations (and YES, I know, we could have just attacked together for the first impact instead, but we did not for safety reasons).
In my opinion, the rule about push should leave some room for interpretation to the operator. It should not be impossible to create a template for a "team operation ticket" for such "edgy" situations (that involve to attack multiple fleets on their way back / multiple attempts when several speeds were plausible, or to attack a fleet moving towards a planet then attack it again when it's recalled), in order to collect all the required information and be able to judge whether the players are splitting the gains in a fair way. It could look something like this :
1/ Such things doesn't happen that much, especially on dying universes
2/ I'm quite sure it's faster to collect some data than to face players trying to question why the decision has to be unfair.
Pros :
- Making teamplay slightly easier (at the moment, to split the rentability we have to "group a significant amount of fleet in the fight", that's not always possible)
- Generate less frustration (also to the operators that have to face players triggered by a decision that feels unfair
)
- Giving a less rigid role to the operators ? (Maybe it's me, but some points really seem to be boring)*
Cons :
- Analyzing the cases could take about 5minutes instead of just quoting a rule (however it shouldn't occur that often, even on young universes)
- Unfair decisions due to flexible rule? *
* I realise the rules are "blindly" applied because they leave no room for interpretation, probably on purpose ("everybody gets treated the same way", even when it's obviously stupid from every player point of view). However, being given a detailed case, I think there is no reason to fear that unfair decisions could be made. A way to avoid this could be to double or triple check theses cases, or some sort of tribunal? I'm just opening ideas...
Thanks for reading me, I hope I made it clear and, also, I hope you agree with me
First of all please forgive some unavoidable mistakes as I'm not a native English speaker, but I chose to write in this language anyway since Google translate can be confusing
Some misfortune recently happened to me and my teammates, and I think it shows that the rule about push could be slightly modified in order to not be an obstacle for teamplay.
I'll present you a short version of the case then how I propose to enhance the rule, if you want to dig further into the pointless details (such as precise numbers) here's a topic on the french board where I tried to get some opinions from the community (but damn, our community is so dead
)
TL;DR, we played in team but as we destroyed some additional unexpected fleet, we couldn't consider the gains as something to split equally.
I have heard the same kind of situations from other players, with team efforts ending up in moderate (or tremendous) losses for some players because they were not allowed to consider their operations as a teamplay, but as a bunch of solo operations (and YES, I know, we could have just attacked together for the first impact instead, but we did not for safety reasons).
In my opinion, the rule about push should leave some room for interpretation to the operator. It should not be impossible to create a template for a "team operation ticket" for such "edgy" situations (that involve to attack multiple fleets on their way back / multiple attempts when several speeds were plausible, or to attack a fleet moving towards a planet then attack it again when it's recalled), in order to collect all the required information and be able to judge whether the players are splitting the gains in a fair way. It could look something like this :
I'm aware it would require some time to examine butProposition of a "teamplay ticket" wrote:
- Actors of the operation (+ proportion of points engaged in the operation, either roughly or accurate) in my situation, roughly 33% each
- Impact calculations + API codes for all impacts <= there would be some explanations about how the fleet was spotted, and when it was planned to strike. Of course the API timecodes should match the calculation. So that if player A and player B try to attack a fleet on its way back and respectively strike 20% and 10% speed, it can be proved they are both involved
- API codes for recycling <= Of course
- Eventually other losses <= i.e moonbreaks with API, or deuterium consumptions (i.e if A forces a fleet to recall and B attacks it when it goes back) if provable
- Rentability of the operation and fair splitting (using the proportions of points) <= in our situation, it would be around 220m each instead of +700/-40/-40
- Any more detail you could think of, I'm open-minded
1/ Such things doesn't happen that much, especially on dying universes
2/ I'm quite sure it's faster to collect some data than to face players trying to question why the decision has to be unfair.
Pros :
- Making teamplay slightly easier (at the moment, to split the rentability we have to "group a significant amount of fleet in the fight", that's not always possible)
- Generate less frustration (also to the operators that have to face players triggered by a decision that feels unfair
)- Giving a less rigid role to the operators ? (Maybe it's me, but some points really seem to be boring)*
Cons :
- Analyzing the cases could take about 5minutes instead of just quoting a rule (however it shouldn't occur that often, even on young universes)
- Unfair decisions due to flexible rule? *
* I realise the rules are "blindly" applied because they leave no room for interpretation, probably on purpose ("everybody gets treated the same way", even when it's obviously stupid from every player point of view). However, being given a detailed case, I think there is no reason to fear that unfair decisions could be made. A way to avoid this could be to double or triple check theses cases, or some sort of tribunal? I'm just opening ideas...
Thanks for reading me, I hope I made it clear and, also, I hope you agree with me