I put this on another Topic, but I’ll put here as well:
4: Balance PPT. Or more Accurately put, dealing with Capping during gaps in Coverage, and being Outmanned.
This would require a massive overhaul in how PPT worked, but I think it would do wonders for the game.
4-A Borderland PPT. Each Team, on their own Borderland, would get 5 PPT for any Camp They Controlled, 10 for Towers, 20 for Keeps.
On an Enemy’s Borderland, they would get 1PPT per Camp for each Active Defender on that Borderland. , 2 for a Tower, and 3 for a Keep. (Note: You can only be a Defender on your OWN borderland) up to a max of 20 Defenders Counted (IE: Max Gain for a Camp would be 20 PPT, if there were 20 Active Defenders On the Borderland) this number would be Divided by the Number of Invaders on that Borderland that Controlled said Camp/Tower/Keep.
IE: (Point Value* Defenders (max 20)) * (Defenders / Controlling Invader)
Note, every Borderland would have by Default 1 Active Player counted at all times. So, no one could get Zero Points. IE: If no one was on the Borderland, it would sill count as if there was 1 Active Player from all Sides.
To explain that: If Red owned one of Greens Keeps, they would get 3PPT per Active Green Player on Greens Borderland, Divided by the Number of Active Red players on Greens Borderland.
IE: Red Owns Greens Keep, Green has Default 1 Active Player, on the Borderland (No one), but Red, has 4 Active Invaders on the map. 3*(1/4) is what they would get for the keep, put another way, 3*.25 = 0.75 PPT.
Using another Example.
Red owns a Camp on Greens BL. There are 10 Active Green Defenders, and 2 Active Red Invaders. That camp is worth 10 (1PPT per Defender) *(10/2) = 50. Now that camp is worth 50 PPT to the Red Team, but they are also 2 people defending against 10 Defenders, it stands to reason that camp is not going to last long.
One more analogy to understand the Math a Bit More.
Green Owns Red’s Camp. There are 5 Red Defenders, and 1 Green Invader
Blue Owns Red’s Keep. There are the same 5 Red Defenders, but there are 12 Blue Invaders.
Camp = 1 PPT / Per Defender, Total Base 5
Keep = 3PPT/Per Defender, Total Base 15
Green gets 5*(5/1) = 25. So that Camp is worth 25 PPT to the Green Team
Blue gets 15*(5/12) = 6.25. So that Tower is worth 6.25 PPT to the Blue Team.
That means that the Camp to Green is worth 4 times what the Keep is worth to Blue. This means the game changes from sheer capped points to playing a game of strategic capping.
This would eliminate the whole problem of winning through coverage gaps, or winning by sheer volume of players. Which is really the main problem with PPT, is how it can be exploited, and doing this would close that loophole in the PPT problem we have right now, especially with the low and mid population server, that simply don’t have the coverage.
4-B Eternal Battlegrounds.
The Battle grounds are divided up by 3 sections and Stone Mist castle. This creates a very special situation.
To do this, Each Team would have Declared “Home Lands” that would provide them a Flat PPT if they Control it, exactly like their own Borderland. This would include their 20 for their, Keep, 10 for their 4 Towers, and 5 for their 2 Camps.
If they took another Teams Homeland, it would function as if they entered their Borderland. IE: (Value) * (Defender/Controlling Invader).
IE: If Green took Blues Keep. They would get (Keep*Active) * (Defenders/Controlling Invader) in this, Red’s active players do not come into play.
So, the Same Keep could be worth a lot More to one team over another.
For Example, if there are 20 Red, 27 Blue, and 7 Green.
Blues Keep is Worth 81 PPT to Red but worth 231 PPT to Green.
The Keep is only worth so much, because of the 27 Active Blue Players on the map, giving the Keep a value of 3PPT* Active Blue, Max 20. So only 20 of the 27 Players are counted, but the Keep is still worth 60PPT Base.
In Contrast, Geens’s Points are not Worth as Much, since there are only 7 active players, their Keeps base is a Paltry 21 PPT.
And Since they are vastly outnumbered, Greens Keep is only worth 7.3 PPT to Red, and 5.4 PPT to Blue.
It works pretty much the same as if you tied to take a Borderland, just in a smaller scale, but we can see how smart play, over simply brute force and capping can win the day with this kind of system.
Moving on.
The Mack Daddy – Stone Mist!
Stonemist, would and should be a prize. As Such Stonemist would Net a flat 100 PPT * (Both Active Teams/Controller)
IE: If there were 20 Blue Players, 35 Red Players, 40 Green players, and Green owned Stonemist.
100 * ((20+35)/40) = 137 PPT.
Now Imagine, if Blue Flips it.
100 * ((35+40)/20) = 375 PPT.
This idea would remove the sting of Night Capping, or Coverage Gaps, as well as the whole issue of getting rolled by a larger servers. It would reward smart play vs what we have now.
Now, Notice I have said Active Players this needs to be a way to distinguish between active and just on the map. Which happens, IE: What about the people there for crafting or banking, or whatever.
Any player with the “invulnerable” buff you get for being in the “Safe Area” would NOT be counted as Active.
There are two kinds of gamers, salty, and extra salty
