Anyone else notice that BB_Dantesama's front page post saying all participants would receive rewards appears to have disappeared?
Anyone else notice that BB_Dantesama's front page post saying all participants would receive rewards appears to have disappeared?
The problem is two fold
yes BB did make mistakes in planning and execution of this event. hopefully like most of us in life we learn from our mistakes so future events should be better but not all blame can be leveled at BB... those who heard snippets of rumour or half a conversation who were quick to stop doing adventures because they saw no point as some people have 220 generals (which are paid for just like vetren generals) or those who thought they could exploit a glitch to win.
Some like the guys in our guild (and others i know) helped each other, those who could do the adventures did those who couldn't supported those who could. Even people who don't write/make guides helped show others their results from doing the adventure so people could learn better paths/troop set up so others could do it with low loses and without vetren generals.
I'm not a big spender (hence no vetren general) but i do spend on settlers and I don't think it is right for some to complain because someone spends and has a bit more advantage (yes this time it was a big advantage). Game makers can't provide games if everyone plays for free it shouldn't be a big gap but if people are supporting the game why should they be on exactly the same level as those who don't support the game? who would be happy if they spend loads of their money on a game and find it is for nothing?. Or like after this event, that money helps support your server where so many didn't join in and went out of their way to try and make as much profit as possible holding back those trying.
Yes- at the same time they said that the servers lagging behind were negatively influenced by trying to cheat with abandoning adventure after first subquest poped up- Make of it what you wont, my read is they concluded all that have not reached 100% are to blame themselves and they did a great event with minor flaws- so why give away stuff to cheatersOriginally Posted by CaptChaos
Mostly due to stuff being editted out and complete silence on stuff after that minor analysis has been posted whitewashing the event
Hello all,
You will receive your particpation rewards at some point today.
As mentioned on previous threads of the same topic, I would like to thank you for your constructive feedback.
Your feedback and support are crucial and we will do what we can to improve our next events.
I am going to close this thread now as the event is now closed.
Best
BB_Dantesama
I am no longer the Community Manager for this version of TSO. Please send any question to BB_Ravel.
Rules and Code of Conduct ¤¤¤ Beginner's Guide ¤¤¤ Important Links ¤¤¤ Help/Support & FAQ
Thank you for your suggestions guys. This is great.
As long as this remains constructive, I'm all ears.
Best
BB_Dantesama
I am no longer the Community Manager for this version of TSO. Please send any question to BB_Ravel.
Rules and Code of Conduct ¤¤¤ Beginner's Guide ¤¤¤ Important Links ¤¤¤ Help/Support & FAQ
also, i'd like to add that some people used the trade to become better, instead of helping each other. for example, if 1k brew was for sale for 1gc, to help you get your army on their feet, they would just buy it for their own gain. reselling it at normal or higher prices. my suggestion is, that if you ever do server adventures again, is it possible to make a side trade-office, where goods traded can only be used for the event. not really sure how it could be implemented in the game, but i think it's something worth thinking about at BB side. making sharing for the adventure more productive. just a thought
Impossible reallyalso, i'd like to add that some people used the trade to become better, instead of helping each other. for example, if 1k brew was for sale for 1gc, to help you get your army on their feet, they would just buy it for their own gain. reselling it at normal or higher prices. my suggestion is, that if you ever do server adventures again, is it possible to make a side trade-office, where goods traded can only be used for the event. not really sure how it could be implemented in the game, but i think it's something worth thinking about at BB side. making sharing for the adventure more productive. just a thought
But the way it was done in g4 was that needers would post a trade paying 1 log for 1k of needed item and donators could just search for those trades and then pick out the people they wanted to donate to- Fairly easy to regulate as well - esp if you combine it with a "event participants thread on forum listing known participants so it gets harder to abuse donations
Perhaps it is good idea to test the adv b4 the event, simply give one to each player and make sure that the loot is to good to miss. That way you will know of possible lags and also know the number of active players.
As the image is not visible in the announcement (I guess it depends on where in the world you are, as it seems to use CDN), here is the image:
I must admit that my experience with this event and adventure is very confusing. All the uncertainty of what the criteria were, when were you active, how much is 100%. and on top of the christmas event. Then came the ghastly rumors of cheating, which i can not figure out still. This event has made me feel very bad indeed.
There are two issues I would like to share some thought on. 1) the general level of the active players at each server, and 2) the difficulty of the adventure
1) The idea of an inter-server competition is not bad, but there has to be found a better way measure the servers. I'm still not sure how the number of active players is found, but anyway the level of the active players has to be taken into account in one way or other.
If the German and Polish servers who excelled at this event has the sole advantage of a higher mean of level of the active players, this seems to be the deciding factor as to the ‘fairness’ of the competition. I would suggest some sort of 'penalty' (or the opposite) calculated from the number of active players and of their level, like a 'golf handicap'.
Probably it would be better to reward a low level player who completes the adventure with a factor multiplied to the count of completed adventures. Thus rewarding the higher effort it cost lower level players to do the adventure with a higher 'score' at count of finished adventures: e.g. if a level 45-50 completes an adventure it counts as 1, but if a level 36-39 completes the same adventure it counts as 1.7 * 1, in any case it takes more time for the player at the lower level as he needs train troops more often during the adventure than a higher level with more settlers on the island.
2) Another way of addressing the level issue is to have multiple adventure difficulties. Like the Christmas event has. I’m not uniformly happy about this idea. I will nonetheless comment on some of the suggestions made above.
In general I favour the idea of the server uniting to do most adventures which is ‘obstructed’ if the adventures become untradeable. It is not possible to hand over your adventure to someone else if you have no chance to complete it yourself. If there are different levels for the adventures there I feel that there ought to be restrictions on the level of the players doing them. The higher level players should not be able to do the easy adventure. Almost the opposite as the restrictions are today, where you cannot purchase and start certain adventures before reaching level 42.
But in adding level restrictions to the adventures it will be necessary to give the adventures slightly different names in order to allow players to distinct between the adventures if they purchase them at the trade office. The cost (in map fragments) and reward of the adventures should be scaled to fit the intended player level.
I’m not fond of the idea of rewarding a more difficult adventure given to higher level players a higher 'count' as that would defeat the object of level out the difference in the level-composition of the different servers. And if the restriction of high level players to complete easy adventures cannot be implemented I would rather that they then got a lower count towards the total score (somehow coming back to the 'gold-handicap' again).
The idea behind these thoughts is to improve the ‘fairness’ of the competition. However way you look at it I feel disappointed that I, despite my efforts, did not get a chance to decorate my island with the special Mayan decoration, which I had amble chance of pillaging from the villages I battled in order to save the world.
Posting Permissions
