Ashrem
Oh Wise One
This is only valid if the majority of players were visiting fewer than 4-6 FS-and-neighbors in total, Since that's about all it takes most days to get the three chests.
-
Dear forum visitor,
It looks as though you have not registered for a forum account, or are not signed in. In order to participate in current discussions or create new threads, you will need to register for a forum account by clicking on the link below.
Click here to register for a forum account!
If you already have a forum account, you can simply click on the 'Log in' button at the top right of your forum screen.
Your Elvenar Team
DeletedUser2870
Guest
@SoggyShorts
Exactly what I said: no proof.
The number of players on the forum are too few? Well, Inno could in just an hour sent out a poll on every world and get that damn info if they wanted, publicise it and nail me as being wrong. If they do so, I'll be more than happy to publicly state I was. Unlike Inno, I don't have a problem admitting I was wrong when proven wrong.
Point is, I posted the poll because of my own asking around, and both that one and this one may not be enough, at least they are hard facts and are supporting my claim.
Though I often agree with you, on the second point I do not.
Their wording wasn't poor, it was an outright lie. I can't make anything else of it. And again, if Inno wanted the info, setting up a poll would be easy. Once again, I just asked around, going to the people on my map and again, most answered that they did considerably more than 30 visits.
Considering most worlds seem to have something roughly like 25000 players with a score over 0, even if you get only 1% response it should be enough to be statistically viable.
However, it AGAIN is only going to be the more active players responding, not the very casual players in most of the cases, so the results will AGAIN be based on the most active players' answers. And I'm willing to bet $100,- right now that the answers would again be supporting my claims.
A company should in my eyes be heeding their most active players, and think on ways to attract more of them, since those are the ones that make or break a game, and also represent the group providing a steady revenue.
That last part, I might go along on....except that once again, there is no evidence. And even so, that increase might be there because people do visit 4 times now instead of 3. The question is whether that's going to be structural or not. I tend to think not, as players who only played/did visits 3x a week did so for a reason and are likely to revert back to that earlier rhythm. Its human nature. And even if they do keep it up, is it really an improvement to have those people do the 5-10 visits to gain those chests an additional day?
Not to mention another point I made: many of those casual players aren't even far enough advanced to have the CL up yet. So those players are irrelevant to the discussion as they wont be finding goods in the chests and thus can't be enticed by getting them with doing visits one or two more times each week.
(edit) Sorry if I seem passionate about this, but like I said, this AW was part of my strategy. Having it castrated like this is, for me at least, a possible dealbreaker. I've already cut down both playing and forumactivity after earlier changes. This one might just be the last straw, where I'll cut my losses and quit.
Exactly what I said: no proof.
The number of players on the forum are too few? Well, Inno could in just an hour sent out a poll on every world and get that damn info if they wanted, publicise it and nail me as being wrong. If they do so, I'll be more than happy to publicly state I was. Unlike Inno, I don't have a problem admitting I was wrong when proven wrong.
Point is, I posted the poll because of my own asking around, and both that one and this one may not be enough, at least they are hard facts and are supporting my claim.
Though I often agree with you, on the second point I do not.
Their wording wasn't poor, it was an outright lie. I can't make anything else of it. And again, if Inno wanted the info, setting up a poll would be easy. Once again, I just asked around, going to the people on my map and again, most answered that they did considerably more than 30 visits.
Considering most worlds seem to have something roughly like 25000 players with a score over 0, even if you get only 1% response it should be enough to be statistically viable.
However, it AGAIN is only going to be the more active players responding, not the very casual players in most of the cases, so the results will AGAIN be based on the most active players' answers. And I'm willing to bet $100,- right now that the answers would again be supporting my claims.
A company should in my eyes be heeding their most active players, and think on ways to attract more of them, since those are the ones that make or break a game, and also represent the group providing a steady revenue.
That last part, I might go along on....except that once again, there is no evidence. And even so, that increase might be there because people do visit 4 times now instead of 3. The question is whether that's going to be structural or not. I tend to think not, as players who only played/did visits 3x a week did so for a reason and are likely to revert back to that earlier rhythm. Its human nature. And even if they do keep it up, is it really an improvement to have those people do the 5-10 visits to gain those chests an additional day?
Not to mention another point I made: many of those casual players aren't even far enough advanced to have the CL up yet. So those players are irrelevant to the discussion as they wont be finding goods in the chests and thus can't be enticed by getting them with doing visits one or two more times each week.
(edit) Sorry if I seem passionate about this, but like I said, this AW was part of my strategy. Having it castrated like this is, for me at least, a possible dealbreaker. I've already cut down both playing and forumactivity after earlier changes. This one might just be the last straw, where I'll cut my losses and quit.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser7370
Guest
The Facebook live stream they did recently made the idiocy even plainer.
Timon said that it is just about the top 5% of people that are seeing a reduction in goods from the change. On Elcy there are about 30,000 cities listed, I got down to about 5000th place in the rankings and could see evidence that that player is in chapter 5. However many of the cities I checked on the way had few if any wonders, and it was around 3000th place that people might tend to have the CL. So is he suggesting that 5% of the 10% of the world that have the CL were active visitors (.5% of the 30K total=150) or did he mean that 5% of the world were active visitors (1500) which would be about 50% of the people that have the CL.
Right after that Rike read off another comment about the change and the person stated that they visited 100 people per day. Timon said wow that is astonishing. If they really checked the data before making this change they would not be surprised by someone visiting 100 people per day. I do that and I am ranked around 2200th place...way outside of that top 5%.
I couldn't watch anymore of it; I was too disgusted.
Timon said that it is just about the top 5% of people that are seeing a reduction in goods from the change. On Elcy there are about 30,000 cities listed, I got down to about 5000th place in the rankings and could see evidence that that player is in chapter 5. However many of the cities I checked on the way had few if any wonders, and it was around 3000th place that people might tend to have the CL. So is he suggesting that 5% of the 10% of the world that have the CL were active visitors (.5% of the 30K total=150) or did he mean that 5% of the world were active visitors (1500) which would be about 50% of the people that have the CL.
Right after that Rike read off another comment about the change and the person stated that they visited 100 people per day. Timon said wow that is astonishing. If they really checked the data before making this change they would not be surprised by someone visiting 100 people per day. I do that and I am ranked around 2200th place...way outside of that top 5%.
I couldn't watch anymore of it; I was too disgusted.
DeletedUser2870
Guest
@TedGrau
I agree. I only watched part of it, but that was because my connection quit on me.
However, I am not astonised at all by 100 visits. Back when I played really regularly I did over 100 visits on at least 3 accounts EVERY DAY.
(edit) On most worlds you'll find the first CL's somewhere around the rank of 5000 or so I think, meaning about 1/6th or 1/7th of the total players (something like 30-35K) , or at about 1/4th of the players who have shown any serious activity.
So where he came up with that 5% is something completely unclear to me.
I agree. I only watched part of it, but that was because my connection quit on me.
However, I am not astonised at all by 100 visits. Back when I played really regularly I did over 100 visits on at least 3 accounts EVERY DAY.
(edit) On most worlds you'll find the first CL's somewhere around the rank of 5000 or so I think, meaning about 1/6th or 1/7th of the total players (something like 30-35K) , or at about 1/4th of the players who have shown any serious activity.
So where he came up with that 5% is something completely unclear to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser10717
Guest
I visited all 223 of my neighbors and the 24 others in my fellowship daily on Arendyll and on Elcyandir 155 neighbors and 24 in my fellowship daily and I know quite a few others that did the same.
DeletedUser7370
Guest
Those numbers could get even murkier if we start trying to figure active/inactive cities. For example I have a neighbor that has been completely inactive since I started playing in February or March, and she was at the end of chapter 6, and another inactive just as long that I believe was in chapter 5.
To do it right each world should be consider only looking at players that are both active and have built or capable of building the CL/BS. Let's be generous and say the qualification for active is logs into the city at least once a week. And for being capable of building the CL it has to be researched and have enough runes to complete the circle. With those 2 qualifications met I think the pool to examine visit behavior would be closer to 2000 players. I am pretty sure they didn't do that, and that 5% figure is based on all the cities in all worlds.
To do it right each world should be consider only looking at players that are both active and have built or capable of building the CL/BS. Let's be generous and say the qualification for active is logs into the city at least once a week. And for being capable of building the CL it has to be researched and have enough runes to complete the circle. With those 2 qualifications met I think the pool to examine visit behavior would be closer to 2000 players. I am pretty sure they didn't do that, and that 5% figure is based on all the cities in all worlds.
DeletedUser4219
Guest
Soggy?...I am losing more than 45000 goods daily since I have always visited ALL my neighbors. Considering all the INNO changes in the last two years they have NO reason continue to nerf the game. It was a different game I signed up for over three years ago and in my opinion they have treated players especially the original players who worked long and hard and spent money to build and progress totally unfairly. They show an arrogant disregard for players and fair play. There is NO excuse or reason for players to try to understand INNO’s motives. So unless you are being paid to be the apologist for INNO’s flagrant disregard of players time and money, I think you would do well to consider the anger of your fellow players which is in fact justified.
DeletedUser7367
Guest
The more I read, the more I feel nothing but contempt toward INNO.... Angry that I willfully gave them many dollars and many hours over the past 1 1/2 yrs. only to feel violated. I have absolutely no level of trust regarding any future 'balancing' act that they have in mind. As formerly stated, one day they'll wake up, noticing attrition numbers 'gone bonkers' over this delusion that we're all supposed to feel comfortable with..... Before the 'nerfing'...oh yes, 'balancing'? I visited every single neighbor... hundreds of 'em.... Now, none.... Guess what that will do to the INNO 'base'......?? It won't be pretty, at all... Although, as a caveat, P.T. Barnum had a famous expression... "There is one born every minute". [relating to duped fools]
Inspired by LrdEloric>>
Considering all the INNO changes in the last two years they have NO reason continue to nerf the game. It was a different game I signed up for over three years ago and in my opinion they have treated players especially the original players who worked long and hard and spent money to build and progress totally unfairly. They show an arrogant disregard for players and fair play. There is NO excuse or reason for players to try to understand INNO’s motives. So unless you are being paid to be the apologist for INNO’s flagrant disregard of players time and money, I think you would do well to consider the anger of your fellow players which is in fact justified.<<
Inspired by LrdEloric>>
Considering all the INNO changes in the last two years they have NO reason continue to nerf the game. It was a different game I signed up for over three years ago and in my opinion they have treated players especially the original players who worked long and hard and spent money to build and progress totally unfairly. They show an arrogant disregard for players and fair play. There is NO excuse or reason for players to try to understand INNO’s motives. So unless you are being paid to be the apologist for INNO’s flagrant disregard of players time and money, I think you would do well to consider the anger of your fellow players which is in fact justified.<<
Last edited:
mucksterme
Oh Wise One
When I read that and thought of similar comments by others in various threads, it made me wish I knew everyone's age.
I might very well be wrong, but I'm starting to suspect there may be a generational problem here.
Ash, as do I, sometimes uses sarcasm, usually when pointing out hypocrisy.
But when I read his posts, even when directed at me, I never read them as "attacks", "venomous," "hateful," or some of the other adjectives that are thrown around.
Which makes me think I was wrong in just writing people off as "over sensitive."
Perhaps it is just that different age groups communicate differently.
Or, maybe I'm full of poo.
DeletedUser2870
Guest
*grins*
Perhaps we could set up some kind of 'safe space' on the forum where everyone who is overly sensitive to anything anyone says can go to cool off and only encounter fluffy unicorn thoughts or something like that.
I my day (and as I often tell my pupils; I'm not dead yet, so it still is my day, better get used to that.) even young people could handle being insulted or irritated or confronted by different opinions without needing a safe space
But yes, especially the younger generation seems to have a problem with that.
That being said, there are more than enough old coots who also have a problem with that.
Perhaps we could set up some kind of 'safe space' on the forum where everyone who is overly sensitive to anything anyone says can go to cool off and only encounter fluffy unicorn thoughts or something like that.
I my day (and as I often tell my pupils; I'm not dead yet, so it still is my day, better get used to that.) even young people could handle being insulted or irritated or confronted by different opinions without needing a safe space
But yes, especially the younger generation seems to have a problem with that.
That being said, there are more than enough old coots who also have a problem with that.
DeletedUser4699
Guest
Seems like I still need to set a few things straight. Saying that neighborly help hasn't changed for me is not 'speaking for' anyone else. It is stating a fact. It is not a hypocrisy. I could point out the many, many hypocrisies you all have been displaying but I'm not stooping to that level. It's such a shame, I had thought that perhaps some kind words today would be of some help, no matter how trivial. But no, you're not having it. And then to try to use generational gaps as an excuse to be awful to each other? I'm no spring chicken, by any stretch of the imagination. When I was younger, I remember people had to actually take responsibility for their words and actions, not just hide behind a keyboard trolling people for laughs..
Hypocrisy... Some of you need to take a good look in the mirror. No wonder Inno doesn't want to listen to you. I sure don't want to.
Hypocrisy... Some of you need to take a good look in the mirror. No wonder Inno doesn't want to listen to you. I sure don't want to.
mucksterme
Oh Wise One
DeletedUser2870
Guest
*lol*
I could type a nice answer, but I think @mucksterme has done well enough here.
Yes we now all stand soooooooo very much corrected.
I could type a nice answer, but I think @mucksterme has done well enough here.
Yes we now all stand soooooooo very much corrected.
Ashrem
Oh Wise One
The part in italics is true. Sadly, that's not what you said the first time.
"hasn't changed for me" and "there has been no change" are two entirely different statements. One speaks only to your experience. The other absolutely speaks for everyone around you.
The fact that you are claiming to have said one when you actually said the other is less than fully honest, but still not technically a hypocrisy since you've never told us we shouldn't lie.
Last edited:
SoggyShorts
Mathematician par Excellence
Sigh. It's getting really hard to have a real discussion on these forums. All I pointed out was possible reasons why inno did what they did.
As I have repeatedly said, I personally don't like the change, nor do I approve of how and when it was done. However, to understand your own arguments better, it is always a good idea to at least try and look at things from your opponent's perspective.
I even said multiple times "we don't have enough information"
Not quite, I'll try to be more clear:
If 51% of players that have the CL/BS followed this visit pattern
M: visit entire FS
T:visit entire FS
W: visit entire FS
Th: visit entire FS
Fri: visit entire FS
Sat: don't bother with visits.Now changed to 5-8 visits either in FS or map to get 3 chests
Sun: don't bother with visits. Now changed to 5-8 visits either in FS or map to get 3 chests
Then the conclusion would be that "The majority of players will see an increase of goods."
Majority is 50% + 1 player.
Is this the case? Probably not, I certainly doubt it, but I have no proof either way.
Same goes for "increased visits"
Do the above hypothetical players so vastly out number the late game hardcore players that they will make up for some of them doing 200 fewer visits every day? Probably not, I certainly doubt it, but I have no proof either way.
DeletedUser7370
Guest
Since the AW change, no one in my fellowship has changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in my discovered area has changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in the top 1000 players of my world have changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in the top 5000 players of my world have changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in my world (Elcysandir) has changed visiting behavior.
All of those previous statements are false. And I am certain that my most recent statement is absolutely true.
Since the AW change, no one in my discovered area has changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in the top 1000 players of my world have changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in the top 5000 players of my world have changed visiting behavior.
Since the AW change, no one in my world (Elcysandir) has changed visiting behavior.
All of those previous statements are false. And I am certain that my most recent statement is absolutely true.
The question is whether they ever actually restricted the consideration to only those that have or could have the CL/BS and also restricted the consideration by activity. We have plenty of evidence that the Elvenar team is completely clueless about how to recognize an active city. Why would we assume they can suddenly take activity into account properly?
DeletedUser2870
Guest
@SoggyShorts
Again, that ONLY holds true IF the change in behaviour is permanent and they keep up doing visits on those additional days.
Human behaviour tends to be patterned and those are hard to break, so its very likely they will keep it up for a little while and then revert to their other schedule.
In fact, its questionable whether many will keep up that changed behaviour for a month.
ALSO, it is ONLY relevant for the players who actually have the CL up, or are at least able to build it. OSLMeaning that all players below chapter 5 should not be counted in this since there are no additional goods for them to find and thus the incentive to do the additional visits arent there.
Both of these conditions need to be met
@TedGrau
Oh, I think they can keep track of active cities in the way they track when someone logs on.
Problem is that there are quite a few cities out there hovering in chapters 3-5 with almost nothing going on, but have been built solely to help with tournaments, or to dump kps in other accounts.
So those are 'active' in the fact people log in, but they don't do visits and they don't really count.
But my guess is it is nearly impossible for Inno to differentiate enough, so they count all of them as active.
Again, that ONLY holds true IF the change in behaviour is permanent and they keep up doing visits on those additional days.
Human behaviour tends to be patterned and those are hard to break, so its very likely they will keep it up for a little while and then revert to their other schedule.
In fact, its questionable whether many will keep up that changed behaviour for a month.
ALSO, it is ONLY relevant for the players who actually have the CL up, or are at least able to build it. OSLMeaning that all players below chapter 5 should not be counted in this since there are no additional goods for them to find and thus the incentive to do the additional visits arent there.
Both of these conditions need to be met
@TedGrau
Oh, I think they can keep track of active cities in the way they track when someone logs on.
Problem is that there are quite a few cities out there hovering in chapters 3-5 with almost nothing going on, but have been built solely to help with tournaments, or to dump kps in other accounts.
So those are 'active' in the fact people log in, but they don't do visits and they don't really count.
But my guess is it is nearly impossible for Inno to differentiate enough, so they count all of them as active.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ashrem
Oh Wise One
All right. I see where you are coming from now, and agree that it is possible, for very small values of possible.
SoggyShorts
Mathematician par Excellence
Yep, but I still suspect inno just made a huge mistake in how they figured out the average number of visits either by counting dead cities, or even cities without the CL/BS.
Really I was just trying to wrap my head around innos statements rather than simply hating them.
DeletedUser3468
Guest
A bit off topic but good to find another fan here... and he'd be upset about the changes too!
Inno chose the action of gutting the CL/BS, now they have to accept the consequences of that action: a lot of upset players, many of whom are vowing not to buy any more diamonds until this is modified.