So when does the counter reset?
That would be some coding nightmare wouldn’t it if that is how it works?
I wish people would use the word “punish” more carefully when they talk about video games.
Like, a system of demerits that leads to a ban, temporary or permanent, is a punishment.
A reduced resource gain is more like a… diet. They’re going to put us on a diet.
5 Likes
Here’s how I saw it rolling out:
- You said that saying “top 10 earns a lot” is faulty because the top 10 includes guilds that earn very little (similar to some guilds in top 50, or even out of it) ← Here you made your point, which is pretty sound at this stage.
-
I pointed out that anyone who said “top 10 earns a lot” is looking at a different top 10 than you are ← Here I’m attacking your point.
-
You answered that there’s still a big difference between top 10 guilds ← Here you seem to protect the wording of your point, but not the ‘point’ part of it, as I’ll explain below.
-
I explained that there’s nothing faulty with grouping them together, because huge is still huge even if there’s something bigger. ← Here I explain why you didn’t actually protect your point earlier, because it only actually worked when the top 10 included guilds that everyone agrees to not be considered “huge”. As long as someone sees the amounts of every guild in the top 10 as “huge”, they’re allowed to call them “huge”, and there’s no faulty generalization.
-
You answered that you don’t think the amount of the 10th guild is “huge” ← Here you completely stray from your point, since that’s just your opinion on the question of how much exactly is considered huge, and has nothing to do with “faulty generalizations” in the case that someone’s definition of “huge” is different that yours.
-
I said that in my opinion, the earnings of the top guild is also not huge ← This is me pointing out that you changed the discussion to what amount is considered huge, and your opinion is as subjective as mine or anyone else’s, having nothing to do with your original point.
-
Your reply to that was that I was beside the point ← Well, you led me there. I was the one trying to stay on point.
So there. I’d like to hear your interpretation of the same conversation.
which is plain wrong, as you can see by actually looking at the numbers of last week (ordered by weekly trophies):
Guild number 1: 25,930
Guild number 10: 9,146
Guild number 50: 1,877
You can see that top 1 guild has less than x3 trophies compared to guild 10, and guild 10 is more than x4 compared to guild 50.
its all general to how progressed people already are, and how much they play.
And so then what? With my luck it still a full month to get a puny mythic card. And where does it leave the others? G estimated it’s 3x the amount of even the 10th guild.
And its “at the moment” too, last few weeks I saw the rate fitting the estimates in ut (11th) guild, but expect to drop it radically in the near future as the game again consumed all its fuel. And nothing interesting to change the boredom is expected in what, 3 month?
So the gap between 25930 and 9146 is not bigger than between 9146 and 1877? I don’t even…
Also the 1877 is not even the actual 50th highest trophy count that week. It is just the lowest weekly trophy count of the guilds that are overall placed in the top 50. You can safely assume that the actual 50th highest trophy count of a guild in this week is a couple of hundred trophies higher than that.
You are just deliberately arguing for the sake of it, when my point still stands firmly: Arguing the guild task earnings of the “top 10” guilds as if they were the same across all 10 of these guilds is a faulty premise, when the number 10 guild is much closer to the number 50 guild in its earnings than it is to guild number 1, regardless of whether you look at overall standings or weekly earnings exclusively.
1 Like
Relatively, yes. Guild 10 earns almost 40% of what guild 1 earns, and guild 50 earns about 25% of what guild 10 earns. You were the first one to compare with multipliers, and that is indeed the right way to go. You can’t suddenly switch to fixed number comparison and use that against me. It doesn’t work.
Except nobody said they were “the same”, as I pointed out, just that they were all earning more than the amount considered by some people to be huge, and so these people can safely say “the top 10 guilds earn huge amounts” and be completely right.
You can have a different opinion on what is considered a huge amount, but that would not mean what others said is faulty, just that your opinion is different. As long as their opinion didn’t change, there is still nothing wrong in what they said.
Let’s do a thought experiment:
We can safely assume that you consider what the top guild earns to be “a huge amount” (not really an assumption, you actually said it). Now consider these questions:
- If all top 10 guilds would earn the same as the current top guild, would you be correct if you said “the top 10 guilds earn a huge amount”?
- Then, if the top guild earns 3 times as much, would you suddenly lose the right to say that (even though you still consider the amount the 10th guild earns to be huge)?
1 Like
Top 10 guilds can have a ‘bring a member to work day’. We can have a complaint leaderboard and put them in line for this joyous day. Oh you weren’t there? Back of the line!
Dibs on Monday, 5pm Aussie time.
Actually i started with absolute number comparisons until you felt the need to lecture me, then i made a ONE TIME multiplier remark just to show how much more the number one guild gets than the number ten guild and went back to absolute numbers when i compared gaps.
You can measure gaps any way you like, for me absolute numbers is the logical approach, you see it differently and that is fine, doesn’t make my comparison wrong in any way though. Number one guild is more than 15k trophies in front of guild 10 while guild ten is significantly less than 10k trophies in front of guild 50(and i’d like to repeat that the actual 50th highest trophy earning guild is a couple of hundreds above what the currently top50 placed guild that got the lowest trophy count in that week has to show, further closing the gap between the actual weekly rank50 and rank10 guild.)
I have stated absolutely no opinion about what i consider huge in that whole exchange, in fact i didn’t ever use the term huge, and i don’t know why you keep hammering it as if i did. All i said about that is that i consider what number ten guild earns reasonable, but three times that which is about what number one guild gets, might not be. Personally i don’t see a reason to change anything, if someone decides to no-life Gems of War, then he should get the rewards to show for it.
Top guilds can earn whatever they want, i wasn’t the one shouting for changes.
But since people started discussing top10 guilds earning economy endangering amounts of task rewards, i felt it important to note that the gap between number one guild and number ten guild is much wider than the gap between number 10 guild and the guilds several ten places below. And if you get really hung up on your multiplicative way of comparing gaps then just exchange the place 50 guild with the 20th or 30th placed guilds of that week.
Nope i really didn’t, regardless of how much you wish i did.
When considering economy endangering amounts of task rewards the number one or even two guilds are on a whole other level than number ten or nine guild are, and throwing them in together in that discussion is faulty, that is all i said.
I wouldn’t say that, what i would say is that it is no longer faulty to consider the top10 as one item when discussing economy endangering amounts of task rewards.
Again i wouldn’t say that as i haven’t said that, but i would return to the point that it is faulty to consider the top10 as one item in this discussion when the gap between them is so much bigger than between number 10 and following…
So what exactly is the point of this thought experiment?
What do you think should be ultimately done? Do you think it is fair for each completed task in a given week to cost more each time it is completed?
Resulting in number 1 guild beingbeing hit harder than number 10 guild…
there indirectly nerfing it the same way they did gold keys maybe not as bad as that though 
adding more stuff to get in this case more tasks to be done that arent gems and key tasks xD
1 Like
Glory would be great! I know its not realistic… cant think what new resources they could add to the game, its already pretty convoluted
1 Like
But why would it be faulty to group different items by a specific criteria?
If someone want to say something about all guilds that earn above a certain threshold, what do you suggest they do, how would they say that without grouping them in a way that you consider faulty? Or are you saying they aren’t allowed to do that at all? That’s beyond strange.
I went from rank ~100 guild to a rank 2 guild on a console two weeks ago and the loot I get is ludicrous. Well appreciated though 
Cosmetic rewards that don’t effect game play could be worthwhile top tier guild goals such as new armor skins that don’t change the stats of the armor you are really wearing. Various funny hats, a clown nose, groucho Marx glasses, a halo etc would be cool to display on the hero in the pre battle screen. Custom sounds when a hero uses a weapon attack would be neat.
It’ll keep the artists busy and help manage the game economy lol
If top teir guilds have everything this is perfect for them. Also i look forward to this as well.
Not in general just faulty in that specific context for the reason i stated; the guild task earning guild number 10, 9 or 8 even being much closer to the guilds several tens of places below them than to the guilds at the top with which they are grouped in this specific context when we talk about top10 guilds task earnings breaking the economy of the game. That is all.
And i wasn’t lecturing or correcting anyone, or trying to say anyone what they are allowed to do or say, and i don’t see where you might be getting that from the things i said, i just felt it was important that when discussing possible changes to guild tasks one should be aware of this and the fact that possible sweeping changes to the tasks that would hit guilds just a few places below the very top as hard as the top ones, could very well make progress in most guilds but these few painfully slow.
1 Like
[quote=“Spherix, post:135, topic:9255, full:true”]The key here is not just “happy”, but “playing the game long-term”. Giving out rewards faster may meet the first objective, for a short period of time, but also make players bored faster as they have nothing to look forward to.
As I’ve said before, games are artificial problems that we deliberately create so that we can enjoy solving them. If they’re too easy, then they don’t remain interesting for long, and thus do not serve their purpose of entertaining us very well. Players are naturally driven to look for any possible solution, any way to optimize, any way to win faster – including appealing to the developers to make it easier. That drive to solve problems is exactly what games are created to cater to, but defeating the problem by begging for it to be easier defeats the purpose of creating or playing the game in the first place! A good game is fun to play, not just to win.
[/quote]
Post of the week, right here.
2 Likes