Questions About Net Zero KP Swap Method

[Kekune]

Since the net zero is net zero and nobody makes anything what is it to anybody if a few players dominate it?

You do make something, just *not* on the chests. You get a 20% discount on leveling your AWs. It's not a "no profit" system - it's an equal profit system. Everybody gets the same 20%, because that's how the game structures AW chests.

 

[ajqtrz]

You do make something, just *not* on the chests. You get a 20% discount on leveling your AWs. It's not a "no profit" system - it's an equal profit system. Everybody gets the same 20%, because that's how the game structures AW chests.

Thanks. I was a bit confused in the "profit" aspect and the name "net zero." The "zero" is that nobody makes anything more than anybody else. Of course, it could be the same in and FSO. If everybody participated and put in the required amounts (which are a lot less and thus, easier for smaller players), then everybody would make a lot more than 20% since they would be paying a lot less than the chest was worth. In this case the FSO would be "net zero" with the benifit of raising the actual profit of everybody who participated.

AJ

 

[Kekune]

it could be the same in and FSO. If everybody participated and put in the required amounts (which are a lot less and thus, easier for smaller players), then everybody would make a lot more than 20% since they would be paying a lot less than the chest was worth.

Not quite. There is only 20% profit to be had, because each AW's chests contain 20% of the kp required to level it. If an AW costs 1000 to level, the group is dividing 200kp in chests one way or another. That's it - it's finite.

If one person makes more than 20%, someone else got less. In your example, the people taking the chests get a better profit, BUT the person leveling the AW had to pay a lot more to level their AW. That increased profit from the chests comes at the expense of the AW owner.

So it would be possible for someone to actively participate in the group shout-out system, listing their own AWs for others to profit, but if there are always 6-7 people faster than they are at taking available chests they'd make diddly-squat.

In net zero the full 20% profit goes to the AW owner, every single time. So it's straightforward: list an AW, get 20%. No speculation or speed required.

 

[DeletedUser29356]

Just an alternate opinion from a member within an FS that uses net0, I opted out and am fine with it. I prefer the old fashioned 10,20,30... swap threads and that allows me to respond to others with KP for Wonders I may need a rune on or just to help them grow. I do not think it matters which system but that all members have the same options. When I get a wonder close I will let the FS know there are open Chests and be happy they get taken.

 

[Iyapo1]

In your example, the people taking the chests get a better profit, BUT the person leveling the AW had to pay a lot more to level their AW. That increased profit from the chests comes at the expense of the AW owner.

I think this right here is the heart of the issue. In net0 the chests on my wonder are mine. I have a hard time viewing it that way. Not saying it is wrong just saying I have difficulty seeing it that way. I view them as a reward for assistance.


Edit to add: Hypocritically I have no problem being offended and viewing the chests as mine when anyone drops a tiny KP claim on my top chest. I roll them off on the kp swap threads every single time.

 

[Darielle]

Other players don't just put in the kp with the AW threads, the player still pays those kp himself/herself. The difference is in the payback and the "small" player get's less back on average in the swap thread system.

Yes, I can see that. Most of the time fellowships help smaller players without payback, but you're obviously right on that.

 

[Darielle]

Just an alternate opinion from a member within an FS that uses net0, I opted out and am fine with it. I prefer the old fashioned 10,20,30... swap threads and that allows me to respond to others with KP for Wonders I may need a rune on or just to help them grow. I do not think it matters which system but that all members have the same options. When I get a wonder close I will let the FS know there are open Chests and be happy they get taken.

That is the method I like best as well. I guess we're oddballs on this thread, but I think every method has its advocates and detractors, so I say, whatever works for your fellowship is the one you should use.

 

[ajqtrz]

@Kekune

As you said, correctly -- "In net zero the full 20% profit goes to the AW owner, every single time. So it's straightforward: list an AW, get 20%. No speculation or speed required."

So the difference between a net zero and an FSO is between insuring nobody "loses" and a large gain in profit for everybody who participates in a timely manner. The profit on the net-zero goes to the AW owner.

One does wonder though, if the same sort of speed aren't needed in net zero as FSO. Here's what might be true. Suppose I put up my AW in an net zero and 6 players go in and fill it up. My profit: 20%. Now you put one up and I lay back. I put in for the last chest. I keep doing that, maybe intentionally, maybe by accident. Doesn't matter. How is the profit to me balanced in this scenario? It would appear I'd make 20% each time I put one in up but nobody has any guarantee that I will put in what I took out, and nobody is checking.

On the other hand, in and FSO, since the profit is to the contributors directly, and the cost so low, does it matter if a player decides to "lay back?" No, because they are just causing themselves less profit. And if they jump in and go for it? They get a large profit no matter if they are first or last! Yes, there is a danger of some players being always around getting a lot of profit, but if a slow player wishes to participate and gets in on only one out of ten, that's still more than 20% profit. Say I manage to capture the last chest one out of ten FSO's. I get 500% profit! -- 50% over the ten! How does that hurt me? Only if I look to see that I could have had 667%!

And finally, you are right that the AW owner has to pay about 19% more, but that's their service to their fellowship. Instead of seeing the FSO as a benefit to the individual AW owner ( and thus a profit to them) you need only switch perspective and see that offering and FSO is saying: "hey everybody, how would you like a LOT of profit? I'll put in 19% more in my AW and you will receive several times that in profit by contributing a lot less!"

The FSO can be seen then, as a way for the AW owner to contribute directly to the contributors and the fellowship overall.

AJ

 

[Killy-]

One does wonder though, if the same sort of speed aren't needed in net zero as FSO. Here's what might be true. Suppose I put up my AW in an net zero and 6 players go in and fill it up. My profit: 20%. Now you put one up and I lay back. I put in for the last chest. I keep doing that, maybe intentionally, maybe by accident. Doesn't matter. How is the profit to me balanced in this scenario? It would appear I'd make 20% each time I put one in up but nobody has any guarantee that I will put in what I took out, and nobody is checking.

You can lay back all you want as long there are enough active players for the system it doesn't matter if you ever fill a chest. You can do the net0 system for all wonders with 9 active players. Even if you never fill a chest you can get your 20% discount on your wonders without anyone losing anything.

On the other hand, in and FSO, since the profit is to the contributors directly, and the cost so low, does it matter if a player decides to "lay back?" No, because they are just causing themselves less profit. And if they jump in and go for it? They get a large profit no matter if they are first or last! Yes, there is a danger of some players being always around getting a lot of profit, but if a slow player wishes to participate and gets in on only one out of ten, that's still more than 20% profit. Say I manage to capture the last chest one out of ten FSO's. I get 500% profit! -- 50% over the ten! How does that hurt me? Only if I look to see that I could have had 667%!

You have to compare the right numbers. In your case you would have to compare the won kps with the kps you spend in the meantime in your own wonders to dertermine your percentage gain. Like mentioned many times, no system can create additional kp over the other systems. You can only distribute all chests (or less of course if you want to waste kps) and that is the maximum there is to gain.

 

[Kekune]

I think this right here is the heart of the issue. In net0 the chests on my wonder are mine. I have a hard time viewing it that way. Not saying it is wrong just saying I have difficulty seeing it that way. I view them as a reward for assistance.

Yes, I think you're right. It's hard to stop thinking of the chests as the reward. Now, I think of the help itself as the reward: you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours (as someone already said above). So instead of me giving you a direct reward from my AW chests, I'll reward you by also buying your chests at face value even though buying them doesn't directly benefit me. It's a deeply cooperative system at heart.

you are right that the AW owner has to pay about 19% more, but that's their service to their fellowship

Again... not quite. They're not serving their fellowship, they're serving the 7 people fast enough to profit on those chests. Which is fine, if that's how you want to structure your system... but it's important to recognize that such a system strongly favors some people over others. It sounds like you are philosophically ok with that, but many are not. Many folks don't want to compete against their fellows for rewards.

Now, if you truly want "service to the fellowship" then what is better service to the entire group than helping everyone on the team get an equal return on leveling their AWs? (Which is net zero, btw...)

 

[Mykan]

I am not getting the comparison.
Affected by timezones? yes for Net0 no for Wonder society? please explain.


Every member can participate? no for net0 yes for wonder society
Anyone can help a fellow by filling chests at other members when you unlocked the tech tree. (and therefore get runes) I also do not see why this is a benefit of any systemn anyway.

And compound earnings? what is that? and why would Net0 not compound and wonder society does?
Whats the compounding about anyway. you cannot create KP out of thin air.

Net0 and wonder society are effectively the same thing, but without the need for spreadsheets.
Just the fact it requires a spreadsheet (or some fancy coding for an auto generated spreadsheet) means you have to get out of the game for it.
So member effort is already too high for my taste. effort of members in Net0 is almost as low as self level.


Also how can self level have guaranteed KP rewards lol. the argument agains self leveling is no KP rewards.

Also hard for snipers, how is only wonder socieety hard for snipers?
Any system other than self leveling is hard for snipers, Swap threads? hard for snipers as people fill the chests, net0 decently nasty for snipers as you cannot snipe at all, you can try to snipe but you will never have a profit and possibly always have a loss, the wonder looks like self level but when you put 6 points in it, you will at least loose 1 point. is't more like a snipers trap than a snipe.
Rotation if not mistaken people also pick the chests so hard to snipe, but I am not really familiar with it.

In your list Net0 should always be rated higher than WS, as it's easier to use. and has exactly the same benefits. it's what WS should have been.

In relation to net 0
Affected by timezones? you are reliant on others to contribute so you are reliant on them being online. If you rely on others being online you rely on their timezone and playtime. Granted far less reliant than an endless thread as you can be patient with net 0 to get the donations required.

Every member can participate? A person without an available wonder (or any wonder) is unable to participate, for example a tech locked person is forced to find another arrangement or give away the kp.

And compound earnings? It comes in the methodolgy of the kp sharing. the WS works a little like a bank and I don't have the capacity to explain it as the original creator did. Best to find their thread and read through their maths and methodology

Guarenteed KP - If one argues self levelling has no kp return one has to apply the same argument to net 0. Both are working on the KP reward in the reverse, the benefit is in the kp given to my wonder.

Net 0 you can snipe but it is less profitable (nil kp but cheap runes), I could tweak the criteria from a hard yes no to scalable as net 0 is better than most because of this. But a person who is sniping for runes will eat up a net 0 and push the donations out of alignment. with a ws snipers are frequently looking at 50 if not 100+ KP to get a chest, invariably this is a benefit to the society not a loss.

Rotation has a few variations, this one was based on information from a person actively involved in a specific method, mentioned in another thread (a while ago)

If net 0 had the same benefits as a WS it would rate the same. There are some criteria it just doesn't but for many people that criteria is minimal to irrelevant and that offsets against a need for a spreadsheet. For example if you FS is all in the same timezone you aren't going to care about that, play on an international server with people all over the world and barely 3-4 in the same time zone and that criteria becomes very important.

If your playing with a group of experienced players net0 has a lot of appeal.

Thanks. I was a bit confused in the "profit" aspect and the name "net zero." The "zero" is that nobody makes anything more than anybody else. Of course, it could be the same in and FSO. If everybody participated and put in the required amounts (which are a lot less and thus, easier for smaller players), then everybody would make a lot more than 20% since they would be paying a lot less than the chest was worth. In this case the FSO would be "net zero" with the benifit of raising the actual profit of everybody who participated.

AJ

Net 0 is just a self level (FSO) but by a different name. It relies on every contributor understanding the game mechanics. Like your FSO it also requires them understanding the contribution method. The key difference I see with it compared to the FSO is they are trying to keep the "rewards" (received in different ways in each method) as equal between members. If everything works well in net 0 everyone gets a 20% return, with FSO the returns will vary based on which chest you get, size and type of wonder. While unlikely if a person always got the first chest or highest return chest (if it isn't first chest) then they get a higher return than the person with the lowest retun chest.

Maybe the maths might prove FSO is even but I doubt it and ain't doing the maths. FSO would likely be a bell curve on returns where most people get a good return and some outliers get more or less than the average.

 

[Kekune]

Every member can participate? A person without an available wonder (or any wonder) is unable to participate, for example a tech locked person is forced to find another arrangement or give away the kp.

This is only partially true for net zero. Somebody who is tech locked without an AW can still buy up fellows' chests, converting kp from the bar into instants. It's not as easy to do as it would be in WS, but it's not totally off the table.

 

[SoggyShorts]

I found my old analysis

Having been part of recording over 10,000 wonders via Wonder society I have to say your "med" for leadership effort is WAY off.

In relation to net 0
Affected by timezones? you are reliant on others to contribute so you are reliant on them being online. If you rely on others being online you rely on their timezone and playtime. Granted far less reliant than an endless thread as you can be patient with net 0 to get the donations required.

Since you announce your wonder well in advance of filling it (24h is fine) AND you can have more than 1 wonder at a time then timezones are a zero issue in net zero. Unlike WS where if there is no person online to record wonders and they are all full you're screwed.

Every member can participate? A person without an available wonder (or any wonder) is unable to participate, for example a tech locked person is forced to find another arrangement or give away the kp.

In the very odd case of a player having no wonder of their own at all the only participation would be grabbing chests and converting to AW KP packs:
"Hey guys I'm stuck and would like to convert a bunch of KP this [week], please message me your next planned wonders"

 

[SoggyShorts]

Net-0 , by the very name says you stay even.
I don't see a ROI of 20%

If it only takes you 800 KP to fill a 1,000 KP wonder, then you are getting a return on your 800 KP.

 

[SoggyShorts]

For those of you wondering why or even if players would buy chests at face value if there's no direct benefit:

• We have a player who doesn't want to be a part of our Net0 for an unspecified reason.
• Today she posted a shout-out in chat.
• All 5 chests got taken by FS members...for face value.
• She's in the Net0 whether she wants to be or not!

Ultimately Net0 is excellent for those who are happy with everyone getting a guaranteed 20% return with very little administration and effort.
IF however, you want a chance to get more than a 20% return (which will cause other FS members to have less than a 20% return) then some other methods will allow that.

Another benefit of Net0 not mentioned yet is the crazy speed of fly-byes, wonder badges and event quests. Forget even having to open messages or a spreadsheet, just click your own wonder, dump and done. Soooooooo nice.

Regarding shout-outs:
I'm curious: when a FS member says "There are 4 chests open in my Wonder" and they are worth 40,20,10,5, how much KP do you put in as the first one there? 1 KP? 40?
How much do you hope/expect them to put in yours when the situation is reversed?

 

[Deleted User - 1178646]

You are right that the difference between the two is incentive, as I think I pretty much said. So I do understand it. The point I'll make here though, is that it's not an either/or. You may put KP on a fellow players AW because you want some profit AND you may also want to help out. Both can be your motives. The thing is though, as you become more motivated you are more likely to do something. And profit just adds to the motive.

As for the "fairness" of helping the "weaker" players, I can see that. If you think it's your job to help the weaker players (which I and most of us do) you might like one system over another. But from what I can tell, most players aren't too concerned with the distribution of runes so much as the system working and nobody getting hurt. The "hurt" seems to be in when some players "dominate" the various methods and thereby force the others to have fewer opportunities to contribute. Since the net zero is net zero and nobody makes anything what is it to anybody if a few players dominate it?

So, in the end you would leave a fellowship in which some players "take advantage" of the system and profit from it while other players do not?

@Darielle and @Killy- And if it's more difficult for a small player to put in the amounts needed for a swap thread or net zero when they are at 10, 20, 30, 40 and so on up to 100KP, wouldn't it make sense to have them put in no more than 7 instead? 7, 6,5,4,3,2,1 is a lot less than 10 or more and thus, the small player would have a better chance at full participation in an FSO as described. This was not something of which I had thought before, so, thanks!

AJ

the incentive this is a pointless duscussion.
simply if you refuse to help me I refuse to help you. that way you also can't profit. there is your incentive.
Also I do not want to be your friend in RL, look like your the type of person who refuses to assist your friend with anything unless he or she dangles something in front of you, some payment in some form.
Because without incentive, why would you ever help someone. Right?

In relation to net 0
Affected by timezones? you are reliant on others to contribute so you are reliant on them being online. If you rely on others being online you rely on their timezone and playtime. Granted far less reliant than an endless thread as you can be patient with net 0 to get the donations required.

Every member can participate? A person without an available wonder (or any wonder) is unable to participate, for example a tech locked person is forced to find another arrangement or give away the kp.

Sure you can, you can just ask / grab some chests in advance, I do this so often during events where I have those annoying spend x KP quests.

And compound earnings? It comes in the methodolgy of the kp sharing. the WS works a little like a bank and I don't have the capacity to explain it as the original creator did. Best to find their thread and read through their maths and methodology

If WS compounds, then so do all other methods as well, as for netzero the compounding is different and is with the wonder owner, instead of the investors. it still compounds in the same way. as said no KP come out of thin air. any system is about reducing losses, you cannot "make" KP by using wonder societety, like Netzero.

It might be hard to see so let me give a simple example:
I have a 1000KP wonder, I invest 1000KP in wonder society and het 200 back. I can now invest those 200 again.
I have a 1000KP wonder, I invest 800KP in my wonder and 200 are filled by my fellows, I now have another 200 KP left to spend before I reach 1000 points.

See it's 100% the same. but in a reverse way. guess thats why it hard to see for some.

Guarenteed KP - If one argues self levelling has no kp return one has to apply the same argument to net 0. Both are working on the KP reward in the reverse, the benefit is in the kp given to my wonder.

No in self leveling you get nothing, you have a 1000 KP wonder and you spend 1000kp in it (or a tiny bit less)

But with netzero, you spend 200 less, so you have a guaranteed 200KP more to spend.

Net 0 you can snipe but it is less profitable (nil kp but cheap runes), I could tweak the criteria from a hard yes no to scalable as net 0 is better than most because of this. But a person who is sniping for runes will eat up a net 0 and push the donations out of alignment. with a ws snipers are frequently looking at 50 if not 100+ KP to get a chest, invariably this is a benefit to the society not a loss.

Yes someone could get a rune for nothing. but there timing has to be impecable.
In general players fill up there wonder most of the way, before shouting out the fill-up where I play.
I indeed do not like to fill the chests first and then fill up the wonder in your own pace for exactly that reason. so we dump most of it first and then shout it out. the window of opportunity at that time is so small it never happens. and if people pick up chest before that moment they risk to be kicked into losses

And of someone really needs the rune and spends 50kp for first place. well good for them, it's netzero.
I highly doubt anyone past the beginning stage realy cares about runes.
Fot the wonder owner it doesnt matter who spends the 50 KP in the 50 chest.

If net 0 had the same benefits as a WS it would rate the same. There are some criteria it just doesn't but for many people that criteria is minimal to irrelevant and that offsets against a need for a spreadsheet. For example if you FS is all in the same timezone you aren't going to care about that, play on an international server with people all over the world and barely 3-4 in the same time zone and that criteria becomes very important.

If your playing with a group of experienced players net0 has a lot of appeal.

Guess the US server is unique in that regard as it's the default app player dump location. so you get players from all over the world (no clue why the app doesnt default to international but to US instead)
Still, is it that rare to have ~8 players online in a 2 hour window?

Netzero is WS but without the burden of administration, and external out of the game sources.
Guess someone at some point said... why are we bothering using a sheet? if we do it this way we dont need one.

I hate WS, I like Netzero and the only reason is it's simplicity while giving the same benefits. I always ignored WS because of the administrative burden of difficulty of using a sheet. (yes I am aware there is a bot made for WS sheets, but the fact you need to use a bot relieve the burden of administration should say enoug. if it wasn't a pain in the a$$ nobody would have even bothered making a bot for it. because making a bot also takes a lot of time.

 

[ajqtrz]

@CrazyWizard
"the incentive this is a pointless duscussion.
simply if you refuse to help me I refuse to help you. that way you also can't profit. there is your incentive.
Also I do not want to be your friend in RL, look like your the type of person who refuses to assist your friend with anything unless he or she dangles something in front of you, some payment in some form.
Because without incentive, why would you ever help someone. Right?"

I do hope this quote is tongue in cheek as it's more of a personal attack than an argument for or against FSO's. In real life I have a well thought out philosophy about giving. The short answer is: "a gift is a gift." The longer explanation is: If you give it to me as a gift I'll take it and owe you nothing as it's a gift. If, on the other hand, you give it to me and believe it implies future repayment of some type, better tell me the terms before you give it because then it's a "business deal" and I might not like the terms. So giving is giving and I don't need to profit. On the other hand, many in the world do "give" with the expectation that they will get in return. I'm just not one of them.

Back to the subject at hand.

I ran a bunch of tests and found that it really doesn't matter what you put into each chest because the total profit will always be about 20%. The difference is that FSO's ask less from the contributors and net zero's ask more and in the FSO they are asked for less with the AW owner has making up any difference. One puts the profit in the hand of the owner, the other in the contributors.

Thus, the advantages of the FSO, from a fellowship experience is that the contributors have less KP tied up...and that means smaller players can join in more.

In running the tests I set up a spreadsheet and put in a 850 AW with 7 chests. I put in the rewards for each chests and then the various amounts contributed. The only difference was the distribution of the awards and the size of the contributions. 1KP per chest works the same as the stated rewards used in net zero.

I still prefer the FSO for it's speed and that it takes less contributions to get into.

AJ

 

[BrinDarby]

If it only takes you 800 KP to fill a 1,000 KP wonder, then you are getting a return on your 800 KP.

Your "investment" is the parts of the 20% u give others...
Your "return" is the 20% you get back on your AW...... ROI = 100% = 0 profit.

 

[Deleted User - 1178646]

Your "investment" is the parts of the 20% u give others...
Your "return" is the 20% you get back on your AW...... ROI = 100% = 0 profit.

You should seperate invenstments others if you count that within its like:

• 800 KP spend in your own wonder
• 200KP spend in other wonders as a helper
• 200KP give to you by other players
• 200KP given in return for helping out.

So in your example you do not get 200KP back but 400KP

When you help others you get 100% of your investment back so net result 0%. there is no gain or loss there.
But in your own wonder you get 200kp of the 1000 for free = 20%

In normal methods the profit is with the investor.
In Netzero the same profit is there but as not given to the investor but the wonders owner.


Because we all play on different levels by giving the profit to the wonder owner you guarantee that everyone gets a fair share of the profits,
If a group of a handfull players are way above the rest of the group traditional methods like for example KP swaps. this small group can pretty much force all the others out of the wonders in the majority of cases. this means the other 20 players get a lot less on there investment, for those players Netzero would be way more beneficial.

Other way around if 2 players in the fellowship get way more KP then the others they are always grabbing the top spots but with big numbers making there Roi also very unfavorable 50KP back on 300 KP invested aint great. so for them Netzero is also beneficial.

There is a small group of players who arent big, nor small and exactly in the middle of where you get more, for example 30 points invested 15 return.
These are getting less in Netzero.

Without knowing it myself I have been using netzero for years now, as an active wondersearcher I get so many KP that I can easily overwhelm my fellows when I want to level a wonder. I noticed that and therefore decided to fill my own wonders and ask them to help me with the chests.

You cannot spend 5000+KP a week in swap threads where the rest only has 100-1000 to spend.
It just did not work out, it was very unpleasant for the rest. also it was near impossible to grant some player the runes he/she needed (for example unlocking timewarp you want those players to get timewarp runes asap)

Netzero makes it very easy to level your wonders at your own pace, get a 20% profit / free share for everyone no matter there pace. and it's very easy to allocate specific runes to specific players.

 

[SoggyShorts]

Your "investment" is the parts of the 20% u give others...
Your "return" is the 20% you get back on your AW...... ROI = 100% = 0 profit.

So is it wordplay you're after, or do you really not get it?
I would think it's obvious to everyone by now that getting a discount is the same as getting a payout.
"A penny saved is a penny earned" and all that.