Change HOF criteria

#1

I know historically we have judged fams based on NW and planet-size. However, I think these options only encourage saving and eco’ing all round. I propose a change in standards.

I think a change in criteria may change how people play this game
Fam HOF: 1) family production in resources (either each can have a category or each item could have a point total labelled for each resource). 2) Planets won from other fams.

I don’t care much for NW cause I think most of us here would say that is a fairly hollow number. However, I think these measures would push people into more conflict if families were judged based on their planet counts MINUS those they explored themselves.

Individual HOF: Should be broken down into 3 categories 1) bankers and rezzies, 2) Oppers, 3) attackers

  1. should be pretty obvious
  2. award for most ops and success rate
  3. attackers - most fresh planets taken, most planets retaken, (maybe other conflict categories)

Something interesting, is that each category of player could have also ranked against each other. Hence, a banker could could also have a category of most attack of fresh planets, or ops etc.

0 Likes

#2

Ranks:

If codeable - on your profile (when you click your name in the game) you could have award image (the little trophy that is there already looks good!). Lets add the Gold Silver Bronze for 1-3.

Why not expand the profile rankings to include all of these things.

Production:
Gold
Iron
End
Food
Oct

Planets explored (on it’s own as a rank, can mean to many things)

Conflict:
Planets taken from another family.
Spells / Operations done to another player.

Family rank:
Size
NW

You have 10 easy metrics.

Much like the NFL Quarterback rating (wich like never fails to pass the eye fuck test)
Divide all that shit by 10 and poof you have individual overall rankings.

Seeming the game is already capable of figuring out most of that already (or it deffy used too before it was correctly pointed out to be free info) in real time - just add a column that does the current “Single player ranking” in real time in the Gala rankins that currently show NW and Size.

Would also work for families! I would think in real time as well.

@I_like_pie - Poof size isn’t the only metric anymore.
Sure some old buggers might keep their “size is the only win” line going (and I might be one of them) Meanwhile, the rest of the players can dance off into the sunset with their dope ass profile bling and new rankings.

I would love to see my “SS” play get tossed into that blender.

Shiiiit.

1 Like

#3

I like these ideas. The question is do we want to make it a rating or straight numbers.

SS could be a good category as well. Only issue is how would one know someone is an SS :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

#4

@I_like_pie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating

The pro one, the college on is dumb.

They divide the total by (I think “6”) to get a number around a hundred.
HoF seasons are over 110.
Worst passer rating to win a super bowl in the modern ear was 80.6 (best statistical defense of all time, and only the 5th player to have 2000 years running the ball on that team - 02’ Ravens)
Good rookies, and lifetime backups hit about 75%
Bad QBs drop into the 60’s.

1 Like

#5

You can’t, and it’s next to impossible for someone to be “Completely SS”.
At some point you or your family will want something.

1 Like