0.5% chance to lose a fortune ...

The last 3 Tailors adventures have an 0.5% chance to provide 100 Beanstalks instead of 669 Magic Beans.
However, even with an unbuffed Fairytale Castle, this rare reward is worth significantly less than the Beans themselves.

Going by actual market price, these 100 Beanstalks are worth roughly as much as 150 Beans, so the player who "hits jackpot" actually loses out on over 80% of the reward! :mad:

Suggestion:

Modify Clever/Heroic/Betrayed Little Tailor loot in one of the following ways:

a) Change the 100 Beanstalks to 1000 - after all, it is rare, it won't flood the game.
b) Rather than have a, 0.5% chance to not get any beans at all - move the 0.5% chance to win the 100 beanstalks to a bonus slot (like Dark Brotherhood)

Both ways, it would not be playing Russian Roulette with an entire army of 5000+ recruits/bowmen, which it currently is.

Like any adventure I guess. You can walk away from SE with nothing good or get an angel gate which sells for loads.

Such is life... sometimes you win or lose. Nothing wrong here, get over it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PChamps

Like any adventure I guess. You can walk away from SE with nothing good or get an angel gate which sells for loads.

---

But you don't invest like 5000 troops into SE - and when you see the first person buying SE LS 13k, tell me :)

As I remarked once before, it's easy to ignore this complaint when the unfortunate recipient is somebody else. That is until you play the same adventure and receive a measly 100 stalks. At which point you feel the sudden urge to submit a Police report.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by casel0gic

As I remarked once before, it's easy to ignore this complaint when the unfortunate recipient is somebody else. That is until you play the same adventure and receive a measly 100 stalks. At which point you feel the sudden urge to submit a Police report.

---

Yeah, that is the point: "Why should we care to make this game better for everyone, as long as I am not concerned with the things that are wrong?"

This section is neither the "bug section" nor the "whine section" - but the improvement suggestions section.
The probability of the crummy reward going to me is sufficiently low to ignore it.

However, even at 0.5%, it happens to someone pretty much every day, and each time it happens, it makes that person upset.
So, this begs the question: "Is Bluebyte really keen on upsetting players - or on making the game enjoyable?"

Here comes the question to those who say "It's just like that": What is improvement all about? Accepting the status quo "because it's always been like that"?
If it were so, we could all just crawl back to our caves and eat raw meat.

They could change the stalks to a gempit. Guess what, within a month there would be people moaning about how unfair that drop is because they have maxed out on gempits and anymore you get would be worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sharpielein

But you don't invest like 5000 troops into SE - and when you see the first person buying SE LS 13k, tell me :)

---

.

If you're doing the advent, thus losing the 5k troops, you have have 2 other LS that you are selling, right? If you buy a ls then just call it bad luck. The price of these LS is irrelevant because they are set by the players and do not reflect ingame value correctly.

I bought about 20 ls now with the Easter event paying the increased price because of the egg chance. Did I get eggs every time or enough to cover my expense on ls?... not really. Should I complain as well about the low chance of eggs or better yet, granite?

Yeah I see "Let's not improve anything, the game should never improve, bad things should stay bad" - I got your point.

Obviously you didn't get the point. I just don't see what needs improving in the current situation. Why should BB improve the loot of this particular advent over the others?

If you want to suggest something about loot you'd be better off doing it for SOTV and SE, advents that people avoid. And by the way, there is no need to be sarcastic. Yeah, I get it you had bad luck with your loot but so do many others. It is a chance you're taking when you go for that adventure.

Most accept that not every adventure drops granite, not every Valiant drops a follow-up adventure or that not every Pirates drops a ton of iron and steel swords. The premise to the OP's suggestion seems to be that BLT/CLT/HLT adventures must drop the most valuable component of the loot 100% of the time. I disagree with this completely. BB could just as well increase the chance of getting 100 beanstalks to 10% or 50%. That way people will factor in that there is a possibility that they will miss out on the big bean reward. The only thing I see wrong here is that 0.5% is so improbable that people disregard the chance of it happening.

OP justifies "fixing" the loot by claiming it's a russian roulette if playing the adventure was worth it or not. News flash, this is the case with all adventure loots. The fact that 99.5% of the time you do get the reward that you were hoping for is a luxury.

You are free to suggest changes to the game of course, that is what this forum section is for. Don't take it personally though if people don't agree with your suggestion. The suggestions need to get critique from peers to show the pros and cons of the suggestion.

You personally must realize that, were you to read a bunch of game suggestions, you would agree with some and hope they got implemented while you would disagree with some and rather did not have them implemented. You are wrong to insult people just because this particular suggestion gets negative feedback. It is not about us "wanting nothing to improve". It's really quite straightforward. We don't like your suggestion. If we did, we would be posting positive feedback. The feedback is also an indicator to BB about how the change would be received. Therefore it's important for us to voice our opinions about your suggestion. The sort of "If you don't like it, don't comment on it" mentality that you seem to have is not appropriate here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stefanceltare

Obviously you didn't get the point. I just don't see what needs improving in the current situation. Why should BB improve the loot of this particular advent over the others?

---

Because ... it'd be a start?
The argument you gave can exactly be used to justify that no adventure loot should get improved, ever because "Why this and not another" can be used to say "Others aren't better" any time.

Quote:

---

If you want to suggest something about loot you'd be better off doing it for SOTV and SE

---

Yeah, I also agree SOTV is very poor as well, but seriously, why should SOTV get improved and not Gunpowder? Or why should SE get improved and not Wild Mary, so your point is invalid by your very own reasoning?

Quote:

---

advents that people avoid.

---

By improving the loot of SE, it would make the probably most valued trophy in the game, the Angel's Gate, a piece of garbage because soon the game would be flooded with them.
There are already many reasons for doing SE, one is MSE and the other the Angel's Gate. Plus, of course, some quests that some care about and others don't.

Quote:

---

And by the way, there is no need to be sarcastic. Yeah, I get it you had bad luck with your loot but so do many others.

---

No, personally I didn't have bad luck, but I witnessed a guy on my Friends List (not even lv50 yet) who had that "luck" twice in a row. Purchased lootspots, he lost over 25k - which was pretty much his entire belongings. Of course, it was a gamble, but seriously, losing a "39999-in-40000" bet - and ruining a year's worth of savings?
They have quit in frustration, so yes, the point is moot, they won't care anymore.

Quote:

---

It is a chance you're taking when you go for that adventure.

---

Yeah sure, it's a chance. Most high levels (like me) get seriously irritated when it happens, but we can get over it: 2-3 Roaring Bulls and the cash is back.
But for those lower-levelled players who try the first time and burn their fingers, it's really a pity.

That said, for the person selling the lootspots, it's always a safe bet, you gain 20000+ coins for an adventure that costs less than 10k coins to conduct (plus, of course, time) - but getting the stalks on a tailor is equivalent to getting 10 times Saltpeter, 2x Cannons and Horseman Statue in a row from RB (which can also happen - but the odds of that happening are about "once on this planet".
So yes, the risk of ruining yourself on a Tailor Lootspot is actually significantly higher than on other adventures.

But then again, we can all blame it on player stupidity: why do people pay so much if they can actually ruin themselves?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King-Fero

OP justifies "fixing" the loot by claiming it's a russian roulette if playing the adventure was worth it or not. News flash, this is the case with all adventure loots. The fact that 99.5% of the time you do get the reward that you were hoping for is a luxury.

---

The problem is that "Variation is Evil" ... a basic premise of quality management.
No variation is best, even if the returns are slightly lower.

In the end, it all comes down to very simple statistics:
On average, assuming you use Premium, you get 1007*99.5 Beans + 150 * 0.05 Beanstalks in 200 adventures, so statistically, you get 100196,5 beans and 75 Beanstalks in 100 adventures, or 1001.965 beans and 0.75 stalks per adventure, plus a bit of the other trash like Baskets, Granite etc., which increases the price about 1k coins above the beans' value.

From this average, the market value of lootspots is derived and it suits, literally, 99.5% of the time.

However, if you hit the "unlucky coup" on a lootspot purchase, you will take over 12 adventures just to re-coup the losses.

It's a completely different story for other adventures, like Roaring Bull, where the "worst case loot" (600 Saltpeter + some other trash) is - statistically - compensated within a mere 4 adventures.

That said, if you want to "make bank" on lootspots of an adventure like RB, statistically, you should be set with roughly the price of 5 lootspots.
If you want to "make bank" on lootspots of an adventure like the Fairytales, you are well advised to have the assets of at least 12 lootspots before you start.

Oh, and you can actually "make bank" on SE lootspots as well: They typically sell about 2000, yet there's a 35% chance to receive MSE, which sells 6000 - statistically, you need to afford 3 lootspots in order to profit. With assets worth 5 lootspots, you're usually in the profitable area.


Of course, the Fairytales are "highend content" and one may reasonably argue that they're not intended for low-levelled players to gain money on.
Regardless, thanks to the statistical variation in the negative area, one needs enough money to purchase over 70 Secluded Experiments, 100 Roaring Bull - or 500 Dark Priest Lootspots - before one should seriously consider investing into a Tailor Followup Lootspot.

You are crunching numbers to conveniently support your arguments here. I could do just the same to prove the complete opposite. Nice effort, but maths isn't really your ally in this argument, as these lootspots do provide profit in the long run. And like in any free market, if the sellers start requesting a price that won't provide profit in the long run, the buyers will simply stop buying. As such it works just the same way as other adventure loots, so I see no justification why the element of luck should be removed from CLT/HLT/BLT loots specifically. I would not bother to contradict your suggestion if it involved some other form of chance - like suggesting that the loot drops 700 beans 80% of the time and 100 beanstalks 20% of the time. As far as I can understand, you're basically saying that it's not nice to get bad loot, and if something is not nice then it's a fault and needs to be fixed.

I take a very solid position when it comes to claims like this. I believe that the game, any game for that matter, will lose it's interest if there is no element of failure. There are players requesting stronger troops, more island space, better buildings, more powerful buffs, and more. The list goes on and on. In my opinion, to have troops that can easily take down any enemy, to have all the buildings my heart desires, or to have all the resources I want in abundance all the time will make the game more boring. To get just the kind of loot I desire 100% of the time falls into this category. If anything, an improvement would be to increase the variation in the FT loots.

50% = 800 beans
35% = 450 beans
10% = 100 beanstalks
5% = 1500 beans

Now that would make the lootspot interesting!

This entire thread appears to be an argument over whether "more" loot and "improved" loot are the same thing. They aren't. Argument over.

I have had the magic 100 stalks twice, did I whinge? Yeah of course I did but I soon got over it because I still got over 2k beans from swapping and you only need to do a small amount of these adventures to get all the goodies you want.

I have the Major General, a posh residence and both Quartermasters yet still have over 40k beans and about 15k stalks in store.

So I say get over it. Those that are complaining are doing so because they are trading the beans for coins and it affects their precious income. Well that's why you charge 26k coins for the 2 other slots and get loads of xp / star coins. What, would you like BB to come and cook your breakfast as well as it takes precious time away from profiteering......

Regards
fish

PS. I wish the percentage drop on the stalks was higher maybe even 50%. That way less people would be doing them for profit and that would encourage more people to do them and swap with friends to get the better goodies rather than just see them as a profit machine.

PPS. The argument about lower level players losing a years worth of virtual savings makes me giggle. BB's intent was for these to be massive multiplay adventures for high end players. Even suggesting a low level player do one as a lootspot is crazy they would be better investing their coins in growing their economy through upgrades. To do so once and get the stalks is unfortunate but to then decide to go for it again and be unfortunate suggests they should get their head checked out for a lobotomy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerontius

This entire thread appears to be an argument over whether "more" loot and "improved" loot are the same thing. They aren't. Argument over.

---

Fail troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sharpielein

No variation is best, even if the returns are slightly lower.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishslice

So I say get over it. Those that are complaining are doing so because they are trading the beans for coins and it affects their precious income. Well that's why you charge 26k coins for the 2 other slots and get loads of xp / star coins. What, would you like BB to come and cook your breakfast as well as it takes precious time away from profiteering......

---

Oh, now you are getting star coins from Fairytales? Which exploit are you using to achieve that?

Quote:

---

PS. I wish the percentage drop on the stalks was higher maybe even 50%. That way less people would be doing them for profit and that would encourage more people to do them and swap with friends to get the better goodies rather than just see them as a profit machine.

---

The same could be achieved by reducing the amount of beans to 300 and awarding these 300 beans at 100% of the time.
Lemme get get back to that "Variation is evil" kind of thing and please explain to me why would people actually do Fairytale adventures if not in order to get beans?
Oh, and your suggestion is so terrible that it couldn't get worse, it would make Fairytale Castle even significantly LESS useful than it already is, wishing for something that makes an Epic Building even worse than a Cannon Forge is ... ah, I guess ... you understand the game, I don't?

Quote:

---

PPS. The argument about lower level players losing a years worth of virtual savings makes me giggle. BB's intent was for these to be massive multiplay adventures for high end players. Even suggesting a low level player do one as a lootspot is crazy they would be better investing their coins in growing their economy through upgrades. To do so once and get the stalks is unfortunate but to then decide to go for it again and be unfortunate suggests they should get their head checked out for a lobotomy.

---

So, you wouldn't take a gamble at a "guaranteed 99.5% chance" to win 105% of your returns?
I bet your preferred form of savings is then the Bed mattress, because any form of investment, even your savings account, has significantly higher risk.

Then again, I guess in today's society anyone who extends money to banks or stock "should get their head checked out for a lobotomy" as well.
Including peopkle like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and so on which all seem to be much less intelligent than you are?

Sorry sharpeilein - yes you are right its extra beans in that slot.

Re the rest of your comments - utter garbage (in my opinion, which of course I am allowed to have).

Sharpielein why does this have to drop to insults just because people do not agree with your suggestion? You seem to be the only one "trolling"

Iv been reading this over the past few days, Have to agree really with PChamps, Fish and quite a few others, Sharpielein I don't agree with the suggestion, I think the drops chance's are just fine. Also I don't agree with how you are trying to make it either, There is no need to belittle other people just for having their own opinion.