Ranking issues

[SoggyShorts]

Is there a reason why event buildings give zero ranking points? I don't see why a player that chooses to use an event building that gives better results than a non-event building should have a lower score.

For example:

• In one city I have 6 orc nests that are producing more supplies than having 3 more workshops would, and are saving me space, pop, and culture. How does that equate to having a "worse" city? Should I really have 10,000 fewer points than an otherwise identical city which is producing fewer supplies?
• Another city gets 30% of its population from event buildings, because they give more population per square than a residence would, and I get culture on top of that. It's the smart choice. Why should having a better city make me less desirable to a top FS?

Another scenario:
City 1 has 150% unbuffed culture and 5 workshops.
City 2 has 100% unbuffed culture and 6 workshops.

If both cities are using the same space, but city 1 has better production, and city 2 has a higher score. That shouldn't be.

Just look at these 2 cities: The first one uses less space, makes more supplies, (due to culture) but has 50% lower ranking points

Spoiler: compare

I believe rank should be an indication of your city's strength. A combination of military and goods/supplies production. Results are what matter; choosing a more efficient way of getting that production shouldn't incur a penalty.

Note: I've never really cared about rank before, but since it is in the game, and some fellowships do use it as a measure of a player's city(due to lack of better tools) it is somewhat important when trying to find a FS.

 

[DeletedUser1777]

As far as I remember, the calculation of rankingpoints is based on consumption of culture and population.
All kind of eventbuildings consume nothing, therefore you wont get RP.

 

[SoggyShorts]

As far as I remember, the calculation of rankingpoints is based on consumption of culture and population.
All kind of eventbuildings consume nothing, therefore you wont get RP.

Yep, and that system was created before Event buildings and even AW were invented, needs an update imo

 

[DeletedUser1901]

They might not be able to do the Summer Solstice style events if this was the case, right? They would be rewarding people for getting better rolls on the dice.
Here's a prayer for the Events in either case: Now I click on "small-box" twice, pray RNGesus guide my dice, if I should lose all of these rolls, pray the Relics aren't Scrolls, Pray my KP bar won't fill, I have been Tech-locked at a stand still, and if the Orcs Nest I should win, these bulky Workshops get done in. Amen.

 

[SoggyShorts]

They might not be able to do the Summer Solstice style events if this was the case, right? They would be rewarding people for getting better rolls on the dice.

The ranking points for event buildings wouldn't have to be better than for normal buildings, just close to the same. That way if I get pop from a Glossy Garden, and you get yours from a residence we should still have similar scores.
I don't view rank as a reward, rather it should be a measurement of a players city.

I suppose the question is what do you want rank to represent?
I believe a more useful measure would be goods+troops produced, regardless of how you get them.
There are some obvious issues like rank gained from tournaments, but I think this is worth a discussion.

 

[DeletedUser1767]

I'm of the opinion that the current ranking system worked really well for the version of the game that had the first five chapters, no events, no AWs, and no tournaments, but I don't think this system stands up very well now that there are so many more moving parts and avenues of reaching the same levels of production. @SoggyShorts's cities are models of efficiency, not to mention that he's making the most of the events the devs clearly want us to be excited about, so it is weird that in going that route doesn't seem to "reward" you.

There are actually a number of ways that the current ranking system forces you into a choice between an arguably stronger city on the one hand and rank on the other. The devs have said that we should be tearing down buildings if we don't need them -- but this is counterintuitive when it costs significant points. There are similar issues with guest races -- the devs have also said that many of us aren't giving them enough space, and of course guest race buildings don't give score. AWs didn't use to give score, and I have to wonder if that changed because not enough people were building them when they didn't give you score.

Having both production capacity and overall game progress directly reflected in your score makes sense to me. I'm not sure what to do about the event buildings, score-wise, but I've wondered if maybe the storyline quests shouldn't give a bit of score (or, in the case of big things, like building a guest race portal, somewhat more score).

 

[DeletedUser1833]

The way I view Event buildings is that they are Prime buildings that you have the opportunity to win instead of having to fork out $ for them.
How would you want the treatment of Prime buildings to be changed (wrt ranking points)?

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'm not sure what to do about the event buildings, score-wise

How would you want the treatment of Prime buildings to be changed (wrt ranking points)?

Maybe the answer isn't to give event culture/pop buildings ranking points, but rather to remove rank from all pop buildings to level the field.
If ranking points were given based on production, how or where you get your pop from could be irrelevant.
So we could get ranking points from

• Wonders
• Production (goods)
• Production (troops)
• Mainline quests
• Tournaments
• Clearing map provinces (like we do now)

Some sort of change needed for

• Workshops AND orc nests(level 1-7 as well as 8+)

and remove ranking points from

• Anything that gives population other than AW

and of course guest race buildings don't give score.

Something should probably be done about this. If a player is devoting a huge chunk of land to guest race goods, their score could suffer despite being a very good city that progresses quickly.

 

[DeletedUser1767]

Something should probably be done about this. If a player is devoting a huge chunk of land to guest race goods, their score could suffer despite being a very good city that progresses quickly.

Agreed. The tricky part with the guest races, of course, is both how they don't require pop, culture, or KP investments, and also how ephemeral they ultimately are. That's one reason I think getting score from mainline quests would be good; you'd get some points for guest races without a need to figure out what to pin the points to. It would be a relatively small adjustment.

I'm not sure I agree with removing score from Workshops, because they eat up population, culture, and (eventually) orcs, all of which cost more as a resource investment than, say, cycling through repeating quests does. I definitely agree about removing it from residences, though.

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'm not sure I agree with removing score from Workshops, because they eat up population, culture, and (eventually) orcs, all of which cost more as a resource investment than, say, cycling through repeating quests does

Ahh good point about cycling quests... I guess we can keep the workshop ranking points, as long as orc nests give rank as well. I'll edit my list
The problem with workshops is the culture surplus bonus. If you go from 10 workshops down to 7, but bring your culture(unbuffed) up from 100 to 170 you make more supplies, but you lose rank. That makes no sense.

 

[DeletedUser1388]

In the first round I would separate the ranking list in two: one for the builders and one for tournamenters. Currently we see a global ranking without knowing nothing why is a person where it is. There is no cumulative tournament ranking list, which for hard-fighters is bad, having no direct feedback on their achievements. But this is true as well for builders. Later we can think how to refine these lists.

 

[DeletedUser283]

a residence gives ranking points because it uses culture
a workshop gives ranking points because it uses both culture and manpower
an orcs nest (or an orc strategist you-name-it) gives culture, like a culture building, and the supplies are only if you get the building before having researched orcs;
so it is not comparable to a workshop on that level, even though both give supplies at lower game levels
I remember someone once complaining about the premium snail thing not giving ranking points;
what those event buildings (or premium buildings) give is an opportunity to use them to save space somewhere else in your city, on residences or workshops, so that you can accomodate for more manufactories or more guest race huge buildings (faculties, anyone ?)

 

[SoggyShorts]

@Philplessis
Yes, I know how ranking works, and it's very flawed.

• The problem is that making your city "better" by using more efficient buildings can make you lose rank. That makes no sense.
• The problem with workshops is the culture surplus bonus. If you go from 10 workshops down to 7, but bring your culture(unbuffed) up from 100 to 170, you will make more supplies, but you lose rank. That makes no sense.
• AW ranking is also off. My level 2 Prosperity towers gives me more supplies than my max level workshop, but only gives me 158 rank instead of 2,346. That makes no sense.

The whole system of rank being based on culture and pop consumption was created when all buildings consumed culture and pop, so it made sense. Now many buildings don't, and it should be changed.

Spoiler: city 1

Spoiler: city 2

City #2 has produces more supplies, and goods, and coins. It also has 14 expansions available for guest race buildings.
So city #2 is better, right? Then why does it have a lower rank?

 

[DeletedUser1901]

I feel like one of the problems is also that the devs have messed up and are giving us broken buildings in the events. There really should never be a building (besides an Ancient Wonder) that not only gives you enough supplies to replace workshops, but also gives Culture! That's a pretty glaring mistake if you ask me. You also have to be in the right place at the right time to gain this version of the Orc Nests, and have enough to gamble to gain enough of them. Penalizing people for being in the wrong chapter or for trying to win other Event buildings that they want besides the Orc Nests seems pretty iffy. If the Orc Nests give Ranking Points, do people that won them that were in Chapter 8 or higher get Ranking from them? They are not gaining Supplies from the Orc Nests, so why would they get RP for that? Should we be asking for ranking points on broken buildings, instead of asking them to kindly not negate the need for basic structures?

 

[SoggyShorts]

@Letheia Orc nests are a bit of a special case. From chapters 1-7 they are far better per square than workshops at making supplies (due to not requiring pop/culture) so their value can easily be measured by comparing their output to a workshop.

At chapter 8+ they serve a similar purpose in that they make orcs for free instead of costing you supplies. Their value then must be measured on an assumption that you would be making orcs in your breeding grounds 24/7.

Based on chapter 8:
3 orc nests produce
+543 orcs/day
+1380 culture

Level 23 armory produces
+520 orcs per day
-1,338 pop
-3,116 culture
-16,700 supplies
+166 training size
+4,454 rank

The only advantage to an armory is the training size increase, but the cost to your city in pop, culture, and supplies goes against this.
The questions we have to ask, are
"Should that be worth 4,500 more ranking?"
"Is a city with 3 armories and 3 orc nests 4,500 points worse than a city with 4 armories?"

Maybe comparing Breeding grounds and orc nests is too different, so how about we go back to workshops?

A chapter 8 orc nest saves you 5,500 supplies per day.
A level 17 Workshop makes 5,600 supplies on 24h, and gives 1,000 rank.
Granted, you can run your workshop on a 9h/3/3/3/3/3 schedule, making double that, but you also lose almost 700 population and culture compared to an orc nest, and the workshop takes up double the space.

Imo, at the very least, an orc nest should give ranking equal to a workshop producing the same amount of supplies that an orc nest saves you.
A penny saved is a penny earned

 

[SoggyShorts]

Here's an example of where AW ranking no longer reflects their value:

Mainhall level 23
2x Level 23 Workshops
Set to 3h productions 8x per day (no sleep for you!)
170% culture bonus
+108K supplies
+4,700 rank
-40 squares
-3,000 population
-1600 culture


Mainhall level 23
Endless Excavation level 11
+122K supplies
+3,000 rank
-20 squares

No way should the workshops that take up double the space give 50% more rank, when clearly the city with the level 10 EE is better.

 

[Heymrdiedier]

I don't see a problem at all with ranking points.

Event building are usually more efficient in give you culture/population in a smaller space. Which mean you can use that space to build more buildings that do give you ranking points. A culture building, even a big premium one like the snails or the marlo of the new toad, they dont give any ranking points either (altho they cost a lot of real money), but they give you room to put other buildings in because they are more efficient per tile.

A workshop has never been a a good building for ranking points, if you want to have a high ranking score, you have as few as possible of those. In fact they are just a necessity to be able to keep your city running. With the wonder updates, the tome of secrets, endless excavation and tower of prosperity are now very good buildings to be able to get supplies. If you get them high enough you can probably remove all your workshops.

Ranking points of a workshop has always been 50% or less then that of a production factory. There's a reason some of the high ranked players (used to) have a lot of production factories that are sometime not even connected to a street (they don't need the production and cant even afford it because they don't have enough supplies to keep them running).


Your last calculation comparing EE with workshops also doesnt make sense to me, a wonder is unique, the workshops should be addition to your wonders if you dont get enough supplies out of your wonders. Why compare then as get one or the other. If you want to be efficient you have both (actually you hope to get only wonders and no workshops). If you can replace your workshops with orc nests or other supply producing event buildings (and there are a lot more coming according to game files) then that is great! you save space, and you get culture instead of using culture.

Also a building that give you 3000 culture and xx supplies, also gives you 3000 ranking points. not instantly(active ranking) but when you spend that culture on upgrades of another building(passive ranking).

For me everything seems perfectly fine, building a workshop is a choice of building not the most ranking effective building because you need the supplies.
If a workshop would be highest ranking building, then everyone would have nothing but workshops and we would all be swimming in supplies so much that the wholesalesman would go on strike.

 

[SoggyShorts]

I'm very surprised that you don't see the problem.
Ranking should reflect how good your city is. Better buildings should give better ranking. It's kinda that simple.

With the wonder updates, the tome of secrets, endless excavation and tower of prosperity are now very good buildings to be able to get supplies. If you get them high enough you can probably remove all your workshops.

Ok, and you think that a player who does manage to make more supplies with wonders than workshops should have a score 20,000 points lower than a player with workshops instead of wonders? Why?

There's a reason some of the high ranked players (used to) have a lot of production factories that are sometime not even connected to a street

I think that is ridiculous. Having a building that does nothing should give zero ranking points. Simple fix is that any building that needs a road gives zero rank without a road.

Your last calculation comparing EE with workshops also doesnt make sense to me, a wonder is unique, the workshops should be addition to your wonders

Take the example one step further, and compare 2 nearly identical cities. The ONLY difference between the 2 cities is
City 1 has 10 workshops
City 2 has 8 workshops +level 11 EE.

Why should the one with 10 workshops be considered better? City 2 is a better city by every measure except ranking points.
Having to choose between a good city or rank makes no sense.

An easy way to tell if the ranking is fair is to ask yourself "If ranking points didn't exist, and I was offered both cities, which one would I take?"
If one of them produces more goods, pop, culture, troops, supplies, coins, and has more free space for guest races you'd be crazy not to pick it. And that city should have the higher rank.

 

[Heymrdiedier]

An easy way to tell if the ranking is fair is to ask yourself "If ranking points didn't exist, and I was offered both cities, which one would I take?"
If one of them produces more goods, pop, culture, troops, supplies, coins, and has more free space for guest races you'd be crazy not to pick it. And that city should have the higher rank.

well that city currently has the most points. Except you dont utilise all of its potential points by leaving free space open. Fill that space with more productions or armories and you will see you have the higher rank. You cant expect the devs to rewards you with ranking points for having empty space. Same goes a bit for having free population (or culture) why be rewarded for having a big unemployment rate? put those lazy people to work

You use the event and wonder buildings to make room for more buildings in your city. using that free room to place more other buildings give you ranking points. I was number 5 ranked player on the dutch server without ever spending any diamonds on a building (except buildershut).
I could only do that because i invested heavily on event buildings (had 20 glacier gardens). That allowed me to spend a lot more space on other buildings and end with a high score, being able to compete against heavy diamond players. (and no i don't even have a throne wonder yet, which is only about ranking points).
Those glacier gardens gave me 0 ranking points actively, but loads more passively by giving me free room for other buildings.
(And then wizards guest race came and the diamond players just spend loads on magical buildings so i dropped a lot. Just recently i finished with the wizards tech tree which allows me finally start upgrading and gain points)

 

[SoggyShorts]

I can understand your point about possible "passive" RP gains from event buildings.

You cant expect the devs to rewards you with ranking points for having empty space.

Actually in a way I do. Perhaps it's my aversion to being techlocked, but I tend to use that extra space for guest races. So what I end up with is a city that is producing the exact same as someone else, but I have more room for guest race stuff, and yet they have higher rank.
That doesn't feel right to me. I think if 2 cities have the exact same production, culture etc, they should have the exact same score, or close to it.
I lost over 20% of my score when I switched to orc nests and wonders to get more supplies, making my city better than it was.