So I had this idea of mitigating night capping based on the amount of defenders/attackers online (for both sides). So if, for example's sake, imagine only 2 defenders are on in comparison to 10 attackers and vice versa, reduce the amount of points gained by one capper depending on the ratio, and the amount of points gained by kills by the outnumbering side (unless the outnumbered side *somehow* cap and gain increasing number of points, at which case the normal boosted kill point numbers apply). Interested in how this could play out.
Yes but it’s just your nations fault that you don’t recruit any players from different time zones ? If you guys r very eu based that means you guys would have a time zone where you outnumber the other nation in cappers by far. If this suggestion goes through , it will affect you more than it does affect us?
Yes please, there's litterally our siege for example, when we have even numbers, we litterally came back from 40k, we go sleep they get 40k again, night cappers are the biggest rats on ccnet, I hope U see this turtle
No it won't make it any boring, with this current night ass capping nations will just quit because any time they try to do any siege, skill, planning won't even matter, because the enemy can just nightcap
yeah ur right peti planning nor skill makes any difference if people can call 30 people who never held a sword in their entire lives and send them to banner when everyone is asleep, literally easy win for a siege. This literally is happening for years example 2021 Paris siege one night they got 40k points instantly and we had to stay up and nolife ourselves to get point cap back down in one and a half days.
Going by your example (2 defenders, 10 attackers), the attackers would gain 5x (10/2) less points from capping.
This raises two questions. Firstly, how would this work if there were 0 defenders online? Secondly, doesn't this incentivize the outnumbered side to simply log off rather than gain a reversal?
Night capping will always exist in some capacity because it is a consequence of people living in different timezones. We could reduce the number of battle sessions during "quieter" hours, but that hardly seems fair to Asian and NA players.
What we *can* prevent is people staying up for unusual, excessive lengths of time in order to win a siege. SiegeWar has a simple solution for this - a battle session "attendance limiter" that prevents you from participating in more than X battle sessions a day. This seems reasonable (and indeed, beneficial for player health) and I have yet to see a convincing argument against this. Suppose this limit was 4 battle sessions a day - that is, 6 hours. If you need to go over this (yikes!) in order to win, it is probably a good indication that you are "supposed" to lose a siege. This does not resolve the fundamental issue of differing timezones, but it does mitigate night-capping from "no-lifing".
Alright Zaify, about that first point, the outnumbered side logs off regardless because of cannons, and there are clear hours where they cannot attempt to reverse because of sheer numbers.
Secondly, I know that night capping will exist in some form, that is why I said its to mitigate it not remove it, and yes, asians and NA players don't only play 2 hours for example per day, most of them stay entire days across multiple timezones to pvp. If they were online only for a small period of time that would have made sense, but most don't, and we cannot address the one or two players who come to sieges for a couple hours because that really doesn't happen since the majority DO spend the entire day fighting.
Attendance limiter is a meh idea, since its more about logging fresh people in who can cap (again). A better way is a general ratio (not necessarily 5x less points obviously) of gaining less points, and especially when no defenders/attackers are on. About 0 opposing side members being on, I really cannot think of a very effective solution (could discuss over on discord with some ideas), but allowing night capping to exist in this extent is just killing off new nations, not in the sense of some random new people making new nations, but also in the sense of capable nations being killed off immediately by mass numbers alone.
"Secondly, I know that night capping will exist in some form, that is why I said its to mitigate it not remove it, and yes, asians and NA players don't only play 2 hours for example per day, most of them stay entire days across multiple timezones to pvp. If they were online only for a small period of time that would have made sense, but most don't, and we cannot address the one or two players who come to sieges for a couple hours because that really doesn't happen since the majority DO spend the entire day fighting."
For example, Asian players play from late NA to EU evening (early NA morning) so its spanning multiple timezones so its not really unfair for neither Asian nor NA players (who are vice versa to Asian timezones).
These all sound like good reasons for an attendance limiter. It would precisely prevent individuals from "no-lifing" their way to victory. This ratio idea doesn't sound awful, but I can imagine strategic warlogging becoming even more of a problem were it to exist, with both sides preferring to log out if they lose banner control.
Not really zaify, rn if u just lose banner control, you just keep coming back, for example yesterday I think ccnet's biggest banner reversal series happened after the new point cap multiplier update with it going to x21 and x24 multipliers. Attendance limiter, as I said, just forces people to bring MORE people to the siege which is again more prone to similar results (aka log more people in timezones where enemy is asleep, it doesn't matter if they can't pvp, just log them in and once their daily banner cap limit is done, send them away).
Like, it just doesn't make sense for either side to just log off to reduce enemy point cap numbers when that side clearly needs points to win the siege, like it has never happened unless a fort is getting bombed or one side is horribly outnumbered, and even then they play on ganks
yea bro like its crazy we pushed 54k points in 3 sessions, with plans, startegic, and so many other things. We woke up today and see, that they night capped to 40k points back, it just doesnt give me any motivation again to start any siege ever again, because if i do, they will just do the same night capping again, which makes a lot of people just let the towns, nations die.
I personally dont have much playtime available. During summer I play morning only,school night only but I still think it would be unfair for say a Korean to get restricted because an European is sleeping or the other way around. I've had sieges were our timezones completely contradicted each other and we never even fought,just capped when everyone was off (this applied for both sides) and I had to get out of my way sometimes to play at like 3 am for like a last session
i've played servers with the attendance limiter and it usually just gives the side with more players a bigger advantage, and it's a pretty unfun mechanic. it's super frustrating when u see a bunch of people capping banner at ur town and u can't do anything about it and just have to sit and watch. it will also incentivize players even more to invite players from other servers to cap while enemies are on their limit which is always unfun :/
night capping is smth that happens to all players cuz of timezones. what is night capping for europe is the time i (and other na players) can play the most. i woke up on the second day to my side losing 50k points cuz a lot of our players were asleep, so it's not just a one side issue, but something both sides have to plan for and work with. in a perfect world, we would all be one timezone and night capping could be easily solved, but sadly we live all across the world so a solution is hard to find
lot of you players were asleep, because u wanted them to cap at night its your fault, this suggestion should be definetly added for the fair sieges, or from now there wont be a single siege, and nations will die. Nations with not a lot of amount of people cant win a siege against 30 guys. Even if they outnumber heavily, players should have a chance to win a siege. Of course u dont want this suggestion, all u do is ratting your own teammates, making them stay up to 4-5 am, and you expect them to log on at 9am-1pm. Solution is really easy to find, its right infront of us, you just dont want it, because u already know with even numbers, u guys dont have any tactics, planners, and in even numbers u guys will lose, all u want to do is just night cap, and win sieges just like a rat.
Turtle since it is an issue for both sides, that is why my suggestion addresses both sides, and I am an asian player and they have the most number of quieter hours in playtime in a siege from morning to past noon until EU people wake up, and for NA people it is vice versa, so a ratio could help.
But, suppose if the ratio only applied if the opposing playercount is below a certain threshold, for example, less than 5 people or a percentage (of population with soldier rank), and then when it is low, the penalties starts applying. The second option has potential to be bypassed by people with soldier rank so if the ratio applies after the opposing side gets a lower playercount it is better. Because, regardless of reasoning, if the current state of affairs continue to exist, it won't go anywhere, because as peti said, regardless of how skilled or how much of a comeback you make its all over once you go to sleep. People saying that "hurr durr its timezones" is not a good excuse to NOT address this issue.
The night capping meta is too prevalent, regardless of how many players pull the "timezone" excuse, we all know it isnt the thing because literally 30000000+ people log onto just to cap banner for one or two sessions when the enemy is asleep.