EDITORIAL: Why We Need to Change the Way We View Event Points

Addressed to the Club Penguin army community

BLIZZARD, Shamrock Bulletin Headquarters – Over the course of the past decade and some odd years, the Top Ten has been the most consistent column that the community looks forward to every Sunday. Armies have, and will continue, to use the formula made by Top Ten committees as an influence on the way they schedule their events. There are even many instances where armies have even gone to war over placements on the list (myself included). Philosopher Mokokoma Mokhonoana once said,

It takes wisdom to gain wealth without losing health.

Event Quality

Aside from size, some of the most contested calculations from the Top Ten come from the event points category. Currently the cap for event points is 25. For the week of July 11th, 2021, the only armies to come close to this cap were the Army of Club Penguin, Rebel Penguin Federation, and Templars. In order to do this, these armies have to hold roughly 8-10 events a week. The last couple of weeks at CPAN saw a few armies actually hitting 25 over the course of the last few weeks, ACP being one of the consistent ones. According to the Shamrock Bulletin, the armies who are close (or are) capping on event points are hosting roughly on average 9 events a week.

This is the current break down of how event points is calculated:

“Normal” events = 2.5 Points

Small/Medium vs Major = 3 Points

Small/Medium vs Small/Medium or Major vs Major (Equal Battle) = 4 Points

Meaning, an army could host 10 “normal” events in a week and earn 25 points. Outside the current major armies, most are not scheduling 10, yet even with some battles in between it still has proven to be a daunting task for the major armies to get close to the event points cap. A common critique by army veterans within this current meta of armies is that there are not enough battles occurring, or wars. I would like to propose a change to the event points formula that puts more weight in the type of events held throughout the week rather than the number of events. The future break down could look like this:

“Normal” events = 3 Points

Small/Medium vs Major = 3.5 Points

Equal Battle = 5 Points

Theoretically, with more weight put on the category of events held, an army could easily hold 7 events in a week and cap on event points. 2 equal battles (10 pts) and 5 “normal” events (15 pts) would give an army the cap 25 points. 7 events in a week is still no small feat as it would require armies to hold an event every day, or two on a certain day, so this does not diminish the amount of work that goes into hosting events. The rule of the EQ (event quality) never being able to exceed the total average size score of an army would remain in effect. Therefore, with less events in a week, an army could recruit more throughout the week or generate larger hype for their “bigger” events of the week.

The Reason

Why would we want to change the formula again? As the community continues to grow older, so does the age of the players. During the height of armies on the original Club Penguin server, the average age was a that of a middle schooler (11 through 14). These days, it is not uncommon to be leading armies into your twenties. Naturally, as the age of those leading armies is becoming older, so are their real life responsibilities. It is important that we remind ourselves that we are voluntarily playing a game in our free time that is meant to be fun. Not a chore. People are over scheduling themselves, and their armies, for the sake of Top Ten points turning the focus of size and community to essentially work. A small change to the weight of event points in exchange for one or two less events in the week makes scheduling events a little less stressful.

Again, I would like to stress that a change to the event points could place more of an importance on event size rather than gaining a higher Top Ten position through stacking on events. Ideally, the less events armies have, the higher their average size score will be. For example, Army Y hosts 4 events where they max 20, 20, 10, and 40. The average size score Army Y earned that week would be 22.5. The average size score that goes into the Top Ten is where armies get most of their points. The only exception currently tied to average size score is that event quality is capped at the average size score. For example, Army X hosts 6 “normal” events (18 points) with a size average of 6.67. The EQ earned for Army X that week would be 6.67.

I asked DMT, the Director in Chief of CPAHQ, and Kingfunks4, the creator of the current Top Ten formula and CPAHQ Administrator/Manager, about their thoughts on the matter. Prior to my questions I did not give DMT nor Kingfunks4 the subject matter of what we would be discussing. These are their honest answers.

Question: What is the maximum amount of events you believe armies should be hosting each week? Do you think the Top Ten formula could be improved on to allow for less events to take place but a maximum EQ score to be achieved?

DMT: I don’t think there should be a restriction on events held per week. However, I would say the best spot is 7 for major armies, 5 for s/m armies.

Kingfunks4: I feel that armies shouldn’t be hosting more than 7 events a week, one for each day but covering a range of divisions. Otherwise it can get quite stale and be hard to motivate the troops, therefore leading to lower sizes. In terms of an optimum number, I think five is a good amount of events. I feel the top ten could perhaps increase the scores given for events (maybe five for a battle and three for training), it’s an interesting discussion. On the one hand that would mean armies wouldn’t need to have a lot of events to keep up the competition at the top, whereas on the other it makes it easier to get a higher spot with one-off sizes. Another solution could be to lower the event quality cap from 25 to 20 or maybe lower, so it requires less points to receive the maximum quota.

Question: My proposal is to change the weight of the event categories to 3, 3.5, and 5. This takes the current system we have and buffs it a teeny bit so armies are holding 1-2 less events a week. The EQ cap still would act as a ceiling cap rather than something that is guaranteed to be achievable every week.

DMT: […] EQ exists to encourage armies to battle. What you’re proposing is a good system, but doesn’t really encourage battles [anymore than it does now]. And I think part of the problem with that is everyone looking for loopholes trying to get those battle points. Basically, your suggestion does relieve almost of the issue you are concerned about. I don’t think it would have any negative ramifications. […]

Kingfunks4: Yeah that could possible work.

In conclusion, I humbly ask you all to consider voting to change the Top Ten formula. To be clear, we are voting solely to change event points from the current 2.5, 3, 4 to the proposed 3, 3.5, 5. EQ will still be capped at 25. This will not be the biggest change the Top Ten formula has ever undergone, but in the current meta of armies, it may just help to level the playing field even more.

---

Keep those snowballs coming,

Mchappy

ACP Guardian