Questions About Net Zero KP Swap Method

[samidodamage]

Your "investment" is the parts of the 20% u give others...

This 'investment' equals exactly zero. You get the same amount of kp back that you put into other AW's from the chests. Put in 10kp, get 10kp back.

 

[SoggyShorts]

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.

Indeed. I mean imagine this:

• You are standing next to your friend.
• He wants to buy a thing that has a price of $100.
• That thing has a "cash back" reward of $20 once purchased.
• Your friend has $80 and asks to borrow $20 from you for a minute.

Do you need a special incentive to lend that $20?
Keep in mind, he's your friend, it costs you nothing, and he does the same for you all the time.

Back to @Mykan 's chart for admin effort for a second: We switched from WS to Net0 on 3 servers simultaneously, including Beta where only a handful are native English speakers, and then promptly went camping for a week without any cell service.The Net0 ran itself.

It's interesting that there is a bot script for WS- I had reached a point where if we didn't switch I was going to hire my BiL to make one. Honestly, it's so bad that there should be two columns, and no-bot WS the admin effort should be listed as very high.
"Dinner's ready"
-"Just a few minutes, all the wonder targets are full and people are waiting to dump KP, so I have to record them"
Effffff that.
Even user effort should be listed as high due to the
"Open targets thread, close, open FS banner, open wonder- Damn, it's full. Repeat 4x before finding an unfilled wonder." Barf.
So much for dumping your hourly KP while waiting for the elevator.
It might not sound like much, and with lots of admin the user effort goes down, but it can never be as easy as "Open you own wonder, dump."

Ooooh that reminds me of another point not on that chart
"Drop-in, drop-out"
Players entering and leaving a WS is a pain in the butt and disrupts the balance whereas in Net0 it's a non-issue.

 

[ajqtrz]

@SoggyShorts

Indeed. I mean imagine this:

• You are standing next to your friend.
• He wants to buy a thing that has a price of $100.
• That thing has a "buddy reward" $20 when purchased.
• Your friend purchases it and you get the reward.

Are you saying because your friend doesn't get the reward he shouldn't buy it? In other words, the $20 has to go somewhere and the idea that it's an incentive to me if it goes into my pocket but not if it goes into my buddy's pocket, seems strange. In fact, the idea that my buddy would get would be more of an incentive to me than if I got it. Giving always feels better than getting, in my book.

AJ

 

[SoggyShorts]

In other words, the $20 has to go somewhere and the idea that it's an incentive to me if it goes into my pocket but not if it goes into my buddy's pocket, seems strange.

Think harder. There are 7 rewards of various amounts, so who should get which one? First come first serve? Yuck. Complicated spreadsheet tracking? Gross. Or just give them all to the purchaser every time. Fastest. Most equitable. Easiest.

In fact, the idea that my buddy would get would be more of an incentive to me than if I got it. Giving always feels better than getting, in my book.

So when your FS does shout-outs you always wait and grab the last chest or none at all, right? Make sure everyone gets better rewards than you do? Liar.

 

[Dew Spinner]

I am only in Dwarves. I need Runes. It was MUCH harder to get runes with the other system because in order to fill an AW people had to put in a lot of KP and it was near impossible for me to secure a top spot.

With NetZero I can easily get spots when I need them.

I only have so much AW KP so I only try to secure the top spots for the AW I care about.

As a lower chapter player it is much easier to get runes now that there isn't a bidding war for the top spots. Before all players that probably didn't need runes were getting the majority of the runes.

If you play the tourney hard, you never need runes, I have never been short on a rune phase level. To me a rune hase level is a free instant upgrade.

 

[SoggyShorts]

If you play the tourney hard, you never need runes, I have never been short on a rune phase level. To me a rune hase level is a free instant upgrade.

Especially if you are at least a little bit picky with which wonders you want. Having 4+ wonders to smash shards on to insert your bar into a good wonder is a big help.

 

[Deleted User - 1178646]

If you play the tourney hard, you never need runes, I have never been short on a rune phase level. To me a rune hase level is a free instant upgrade.

This does not take into account the changes made last year.
These days players can only aquire runes they have unlocked in the tournaments (and end rewards).
This means for wonders they have just unlocked they need to aquire them from helping in wonders or wait a while to aquire them in the tournments which could take several weeks.

 

[Iyapo1]

This does not take into account the changes made last year.
These days players can only aquire runes they have unlocked in the tournaments (and end rewards).
This means for wonders they have just unlocked they need to aquire them from helping in wonders or wait a while to aquire them in the tournments which could take several weeks.

Or....they could just shatter runes from a wonder they dont want and craft unbreakable runes from the broken rune shards. Most players dont build every wonder.

 

[ajqtrz]

Think harder. There are 7 rewards of various amounts, so who should get which one? First come first serve? Yuck. Complicated spreadsheet tracking? Gross. Or just give them all to the purchaser every time. Fastest. Most equitable. Easiest.

So when your FS does shout-outs you always wait and grab the last chest or none at all, right? Make sure everyone gets better rewards than you do? Liar.

Who should get the first, second, third and so on? Why do I care about that. At least somebody is getting them. And do you really think somebody's going to complain because they came and put in 7 and got a return of 40 vs 6 and getting a reward of 30 vs breaking even? People in my fs aren't that petty. At lest so far I've not seen a single complaint.

And, please don't call me a liar. Or imply I would be if I answered you and said I'd take the last. I take whatever comes to me and am thankful. Nobody has to be a saint and nobody has to be a sinner. Sometimes you can just take what you get and be satisfied. That's how I generally roll and am a pretty happy guy. At least that's what my friends say. I spend a lot of time laughing, even at myself.

AJ

 

[BrinDarby]

@SoggyShorts & @CrazyWizard ,
I was making sure, and yes I got it .....
Something said there by 1 of u2 seem'd to have profit...
So, I was just checking....( was trying to agree w/what u said )

Net0 , here or on climate imply's no profit.....

I do agree, of all the other ways, Net0 seems easiest....
I also think its abusable, thats all ...

 

[Killy-]

I do agree, of all the other ways, Net0 seems easiest....
I also think its abusable, thats all ...

Actually it is not abuasable unless you have an idea how. Every possibility got dismissed so far.

And do you really think somebody's going to complain because they came and put in 7 and got a return of 40 vs 6 and getting a reward of 30 vs breaking even?

It is not vs breaking even but vs getting 20% back. Please compare correctly, because otherwise it is no comparison at all.

 

[BrinDarby]

@Killy- ,
as AJ and I have said, its not fair to the FS, that a few ppl can dominate
the shards @ everyone else's expense. Some players have also said that
earning shards is important to them..... so yes, its abusable....

 

[Killy-]

@Killy- ,
as AJ and I have said, its not fair to the FS, that a few ppl can dominate
the shards @ everyone else's expense. Some players have also said that
earning shards is important to them..... so yes, its abusable....

And this got dismissed, because the runes can be distributed to exactly the people that need them. If anything this is an additional advantage form net0. Why are you trying to create a hypothetical case that doesn't exist?

 

[Kekune]

Re: runes... it's like most other systems that are only as good as the people using them. Most systems *can* be abused, and it's leadership's job to hold members accountable for their behavior.

In our net zero group nobody dominates the runes. People have been very helpful about offering runes to players who need them and coordinating so that happens. It's easy to do...IF everyone is playing cooperatively. That ease of sharing appropriately is, to me, an advantage of net zero.

I don't know of any system that does a better job distributing runes, so to me the potential for abuse isn't an issue. If it comes up in our swap group, I'll address it.

 

[SoggyShorts]

@Killy- ,
as AJ and I have said, its not fair to the FS, that a few ppl can dominate
the shards @ everyone else's expense. Some players have also said that
earning shards is important to them..... so yes, its abusable....

As the others said, this is a total non-issue. In fact, the very rare time that a player does need runes they can simply ask and several FS members will choose to upgrade that wonder next allowing the player who needs runes to get as many as they could possibly need in just a day.
Far superior to any other system there is.

Compare to shout-outs where players can totally dominate the KP rewards or swaps where players can totally dominate the shards AND Kp rewards?
No contest.

 

[StarLoad]

... Why are you trying to create a hypothetical case that doesn't exist?

That is what the player does and why I have him on "IGNORE" Don't even need to read his comments to answer that question.

 

[NightshadeCS]

I also want to throw another weight on the Net 0 scale. The benefit of being able to contribute to my own wonders should not be overlooked. As a member of a WS, I was FORBIDDEN to put KP in my own wonders (unless I wanted to incur the penalty of doing so). [I have been informed that this is not a normal function of an AW society by @Mykan so it is likely this will not be a problem for some others] This made it very inconvenient when I had a busy day and could only pop on to Elvenar quickly to reset. If I wanted to empty my KP bar, I had better make sure to check the targets, and sometimes that meant going through 4 or 5 people's AWs to see if there was room.

Now with NET 0, if I am pressed for time, I just throw all my KP into one of my own wonders and I'm out the door.

I can't even begin to imagine how relieving it has to be for the admin. So much time, so many volunteers needed. Not to mention just knowing your way around the spreadsheet. Good lord, what would happen if some cells got messed up? Chaos!

Now, I think Shout Outs are just fine, it's a game and if some people can make a profit by that method, ok. It is interesting, though, the change in philosophy that happens when you move to Net 0. Soggy's illustration of the non-participating FS member is a perfect example. Though they did a shout-out, everyone still "bought" the chests at face value. I have even had it bleed over to my other worlds. I now feel somewhat guilty if I put 1 or 3 KP in to get 5 back in a chest, even if the owner requests it as such!

It has made for a wonderful shift toward cooperation and one may even see benefits from that in seemingly unrelated ways.

 

[Kekune]

Reading back through this there's another benefit that I don't see mentioned: less mail than the swap threads. Funny enough, this is the one that actually sparked my interest in net zero.

I used to get so. much. mail. With 6 very active swap threads, at some times of day they'd turn over repeatedly. It was annoying to get constant alerts that I rarely needed or wanted to respond to, and I suspect those constant messages might contribute to difficulty communicating with some players - it's just a lot to wade through, and I'd guess some just start ignoring their mail alert.

With net zero, my mail alerts became relevant again. Because there are usually only 1-2 posts per AW (list it, then announce its done) there's just a lot fewer messages. And most of those messages are actually relevant to me; if someone has an active AW, I should go donate. And I can see at a glance through the last message if there's nothing open. Depending on how active your chat is, you could probably even do a lot of the net zero in chat like you do shout-outs.

 

[ajqtrz]

It is not vs breaking even but vs getting 20% back. Please compare correctly, because otherwise it is no comparison at all.

The statement I made was about FSO vs net zero to the one's contributing. Those contributing get 0 back and thus, to them it's "net zero" (which is why it's named that). The return to the contributors varies by chest in FSO AND you can easily adjust so anyone who wants a shard can get them. For instance if I have an FSO and somebody grabs the first chest with the shard with, say 5KP, I can ask if it's okay for me to put in 6KP. Everybody gets moved down one level, and, maybe, if all the chests are taken, the last person actually looses 1KP, but, overall, it's so cheap who's complaining? So, the comparison was about those contributing and thus, the large profit over no profit comment I made, stands.

And this got dismissed, because the runes can be distributed to exactly the people that need them. If anything this is an additional advantage form net0. Why are you trying to create a hypothetical case that doesn't exist?

It is actually easier to distribute runes in the FSO exactly because the cost to the contributor is so small. If you have a small player (the ones who more likely need the rune), and they want the top chest, they have to shell out 41KP to take it from the one who has it via net zero. In FSO the same cooperation can apply and they would need to put out no more than the top chest cost in FSO +1.

Finally, on the idea of cooperation, it would appear to me it's more cooperative for me, as the AW owner, to let the contributors take the profit, especially if they are small players, and work with them to distribute runes in the same way as might be done in net zero. It's my opinion, btw, that all this talk about abuse is probably pretty silly as I've seen so little abuse in the players here that I'd be surprised. So let's just focus on which model is better: The model that distributes the profit to the AW owner with the expectation he/she will participate in other's AW's and thus get it all back, or the model that distributes the profits to the contributors with the same expectation at a much lower cost to the contributors and thus, the potential for more participation? Since participation is important after reading all the pros and cons, I suspect the net zero is a great way to do things, but that the FSO is a bit better as it: 1) allows for greater participation by smaller players; 2) includes a greater motivation to the contributors, and 3) allows the owner to actually give some KP to the contributors instead of claiming it for himself/herself immediately.

AJ

 

[Kekune]

It is actually easier to distribute runes in the FSO exactly because the cost to the contributor is so small.

I'm curious how many get lost to snipers? Because this seems like exactly the kind of setup a sniper would love. If the runes leave the fellowship, it doesn't really matter if they were cheap.

FSO is a bit better as it... includes a greater motivation to the contributors

Fwiw, I find shout-outs demotivating. I detest jockeying for position. I usually avoid taking shout-outs in my groups, even when there's very likely a profit in it for me. Even if there's a clear rule about not jumping people, I don't like the race to get in or miss out.