Forums-->General game forum-->
<<|<|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12
| Author | Laborers Guild |
|---|
Well, I don't think it is a punishment. Empress wants lords to fight, simple as that. So go fight!
Well, if you don't fight (and although not stated in any of the games' rules that you have to fight), you WILL get penalized. That's punishment in every sense of the word. :) | You got the point ? Or Do I have to dig all the thread and give you more example?
[eye-rolling] You're looking for a correlation where none exists, and to support your weird theory, you select only the examples that meet it. And then you play games with word semantic.
Sorry I'm not at combat level 13 to conform to your theory. | This is long :(
To me it seems we have two group who are talking of different things.
Lets start from the basics :)
-> Professor hat on <-
From wiki play: Some play [...] when structured with rules is entitled a game
From wiki game: Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction
-> Professor hat off <-
If we cannot at last all say "this is a game" (with the above component), than we have a problem on the bases of our discussion.
The key word in this discussion is challenge!
Everyone can get money in many ways (for ideas: https://www.lordswm.com/forum_messages.php?tid=1847079)
Lets see them:
1) Hunt -> reward
Cost: depend on arts used. Till lvl 4 can be done with no arts and cost 0! Minimum art cost is lvl dependent (till lvl 10).
Time: single player combat (5-10 minutes in many cases, but not for everyone)
Gain: 100-200 gold depending on many factors but the reward don't seem to get much bigger at high level.
Risk: cost must be payed even for lost battle.
Notes: Min art cost is bigger than the reward at high level.
NOT A MONEY MAKING METHOD!
2) Mercenary quest -> reward
same as the above only:
- rewards are smaller (or at least it seams to me)
- till lvl 5 you almost can't do any quest (so no no art quest :(
NOT A MONEY MAKING METHOD!
3) Thief ambush -> steal gold
same as the above only:
- reward is bigger but still limited and less than cost (in most cases)
- till lvl 6 you cannot try :(
NOT A MONEY MAKING METHOD!
4) Selling good to other players (arts, estates, resources etc.)
Cost:
- depend on good cost
- empire cut on transaction
Time: advertising, researching market trends :) to decide which good to invest in.
Gain: depending on demand and skill
Risk: no buyer for the good. Some goods can be sold anytime (arts to empire for example) regaining part of the cost (but not all).
MONEY MAKING METHOD: require player skill and with risk (=challenge)
5) Services (repair, enchantment, sleep in estate:
5a) Services (repair, enchantment):
Cost:
- investment to gain lvl in relevant guild
- repair/enchantment costs (can be payed directly by user of service)
Time: limit to repair/enchantment in blaksmith, checks on transfer log for orders ;)
Gain: gold depend on demand/offer. Some enchant/repair actually loose money to increase guilt lvl.
Risk: low demand, investment in guild lvl not repaid
At the moment it doesn't seem to me a money making method for the presence of smither and enchanters who works below cost.
5b) Services (estate):
Cost: very high initial investment (over 1 milion, including rooms cost...)
Time: automated, with reception and fully developed work without player input. You are off line for a month, you still get payed :)
Gain: 100-500 gold per room per night! No more, but less if room empty :(
Risk:
- very long time to repay the initial investment. Very high probability that rules will be changed ones the estates start making more money than the cost
- low demand for rooms (am I alredy seeing many estates with empty rooms?)
6) Leasing/renting (arts,...):
Cost:
- depend on art cost
- empire cut on transaction
Time: advertising, researching market trends :) to decide which art to invest in, with which enchantment...
Gain: depending on demand and skill
Risk:
- no customer for long periods. Goods can be sold anytime regaining part of the cost (but not all)
- renter can go off line and kip the art forever
Note: arts has limited durability arts can be rented only a number of time (repair give a high number of times but for an additional cost).
Notice that TGI were in this category BUT didn't have a limited durability! The chance of not getting back the goods (TGI) was higher!
MONEY MAKING METHOD: require player skill and with risk (=challenge)
7) Click war (by resource from facility and sell it to other facility):
Cost: low for small am | (continue)
7) Click war (by resource from facility and sell it to other facility):
Cost: low for small amounts, but can get bigger quickly.
Time: High => travel between facility, waiting for shift end.
Gain: Low (less than 5% of capital investment if I'm not wrong)
Risk: getting struck with resource without demand in facility when facilities are full of resource (like now?). Resource can be sold on the market.
MONEY MAKING METHOD: time consuming, low risk
8) Enrolling:
Cost: no cost, unless facility out of money and you buy the output to enroll.
Time: minimum (1 minute? even less for many players). Time constrain once per hour.
Gain: 169-205 gold multiplied for LG (meaning 169-1,025 gold)
Risk: no free slots or no gold in facility.
- no free slots isn't a problem at shift end
- facility got weekly new gold
So risk low
MAKING MONEY METHOD: no risk, not time consuming. (=no challenge)
9) Multi (financial assist) NOT RECOMENDED!
Cost: time on the multi
Gain: 30% of multi month (can be more)
Risk: block of character.
MAKING MONEY METHOD: but the challenge is AGAINST admin not other players so you AREN'T playing this game.
10) Hacking (for financial assist) NOT RECOMENDED!
Cost: time on the hacking
Gain: unlimited 30% of multi month (can be more)
Risk: block of character.
MAKING MONEY METHOD: but the challenge is AGAINST admin not other players so you AREN'T playing this game.
Those who like the LG rule thinks that simply enrolling isn't playing the game (=> money with no challenge => not a game).
This is the only money making method that has no challenge, so is the only that got a patch.
The only other are:
- click war but it is a very limited method, so it doesn't require a patch (for now)
- estates investment with unlimited return. If demand for rooms is high it will become an issue and will be modified (but I think it won't for at least 6 month, probably up to 2 year, seer hat on :)
- TGI unlimited leasing (no durability). Already blocked => only sell. No TGI generation mechanism (enter in TG with TGI get 2 TGI) only generation mechanism left real money => diamond => TGI. But since real money (donation) are an accepted gold generation mechanism => no limitation. | Al in all LG rule is there to say:
You want to make money, play the game and make money using skill and having some risk.
Sorry forgot 2:
11) Two tower bets:
The challenge is quite obvious :)
12) Roulette:
It is biased for the house so in the long run you loose.
NOT A MONEY MAKING METHOD.
The only good thing about roulette is that you don't play with real world money (diamond escluded). |
[eye-rolling] You're looking for a correlation where none exists, and to support your weird theory, you select only the examples that meet it. And then you play games with word semantic.
Sorry I'm not at combat level 13 to conform to your theory.
My post in #181
I find it interesting. If you check players who post in this thread
...
There are some exception, of course. That's why I said MOST. Not ALL.
Weird theory ?? Read my post in #186
I am not trying to make a theory or anything. If you read the first sentence, I am just interested.
Which part of these sentence that you don't understand ? We can have further discussion in private mail. I don't want to flame this thread :) | Well, if you don't fight (and although not stated in any of the games' rules that you have to fight), you WILL get penalized. That's punishment in every sense of the word. :)
No, its a game mechanic/realism attribute ^^
It's like having to get an education before you make a lot of money... You can work all you want at McDonalds, but if you can't get a better job.. well your time=less money. It's not a very good analogy but whatever.
It's just an aspect of the game... If you work over and over and over again, your productivity goes down-- you can't work as well. | Xerfer about workaholic rule:
Well, I don't think it is a punishment. Empress wants lords to fight, simple as that. So go fight!
I would never play such a game, because I like only strategy games, where it is I who decides how to play, not Empress. I have my own brains, I don't need someone telling me what to do. And being a slave isn't my favorite game character.
MathProfessor about Estates:
Very high probability that rules will be changed once the estates start making more money than the cost
That is a very good point. | I would never play such a game, because I like only strategy games, where it is I who decides how to play, not Empress. I have my own brains, I don't need someone telling me what to do. And being a slave isn't my favorite game character.
Well, ok, that's ur opinion. Personally, I would not play I game where I just put in codes hour after hour. But that's just me. | | I'd accept that the Empress wants us to fight, but why does she have a problem with us chatting while we work? | ain't it funny how people tendentiously avoid well argumented posts with undisputable points :}
despite Robai's, frey12's and Jedi-Knight's posts #197, 198, 199 say pretty much everything about what we are here to discuss. | I dont understand, why people who dislike LG change are still talking about, how bad is this change for top players and how hard for them is win one combat in 10 enrolls. This is definitely not true. I checked combat log of 25 top players here and everyone who will do the same, cannot say, that top players have problem win 1 battle in 10 enrolls.
Its ironic, that no one from top players are "crying" here, like LG change hurts them, but "low" levels have repeated that "mantra" again and again ...
I understand, that in this game are people, who dont want fight too much battles per day, but as they said, this is Lord of war and money. And "money part" is not only about enrolling, because we can earn money by many ways. But if i will say that fight (any kind) is 50% of this game and enrolling (the best source of money) is another 50%, doing one fight per 10 enrolls is not realy hard for anyone. With this style of playing is 90% enrolling and only 10% fighting. Is it still lord of war and money ? Yes i know, is not possible win each fight, but everyone shoud win 1 battle per 10 enrolls (even high levels).
And dont tell me more, how hard is win battle for top players please ... | post 212
If you read Kotrin or my posts you would see that we are players who do more 10 fights or more during 10 enrolls and may or may not win due to players like us changing factions. You would also know the top 25 players are nearly all the same faction last I checked. | for Valgard:
Now you have:
Thieves' guild: 2 (150) +90
Mercenaries' guild: 4 (654) +346
It means that you haven't faced the problem yet and it seems that you don't understand it.
You will change your mind when your will have something like this:
Thieves' guild: 7
Mercenaries' guild: 6
Wining a battle will be a problem. I'm sure. | Valgard wrote:
I dont understand, why people who dislike LG change are still talking about, how bad is this change for top players and how hard for them is win one combat in 10 enrolls. This is definitely not true. I checked combat log of 25 top players here and everyone who will do the same, cannot say, that top players have problem win 1 battle in 10 enrolls.
I just went and took a look at the combat logs of about 10 of the top players. You are partially correct, they are winning quite a few fights right now. But, did you take a look at those wins? A substantial portion of their wins right now are against the newly introduced MG quests and the new Tier 5 upgrades. What happens when they have gone through all the easy ones of those? I suspect you will note a significant decrease in their win ratio.
Aside from the above, the challenge faced by top level players is just one of the issues many here are taking with the changes to LG. The other major point is the fact that a valid and formerly legal style of play has been effectively diminished or eliminated. Many of us are unhappy at the arbitrary limitations put in place by a new rule of questionable benefit.
In my case, the rule is mostly a minor annoyance, but I am in fact impacted by it. I certainly do my share of combats, my combat victories are roughly equivalent to my LG, so I'm essentially at a 1 win - 1 enroll ratio. So how am I affected?
I play very heavily during the week while at work. I enroll and fight nearly all day long. As soon as my health is recovered, I fight. But on weekends, I just enroll to recoup some of the costs of fighting all week. Now, I cannot effectively do this, because the workaholic rule will hit me in the middle of the weekend. So I either have to rearrange my real life to be able to fight on weekends, or I lower my amount of fighting during the week so I do need to earn as much during the weekend. One glance at my combat log over the past 7 days will show you the path I have chosen.
My question remains... why am I, and others who were playing within the spirit of the game, being penalized by a rule of questionable benefit? What greater good has the rule brought to the table that makes it worth sacrificing for? | 213: I changed faction at lvl 10 from barbarian to wizard (maybe the worst change), so i know that it is not easy, but doable. And a lot of top players changed faction at top levels. No one of them are crying here ...
213: My TG is not very high (i am not enjoy it) and MG is not highiest too, but how can you say, that with TG7 and MG6 my battles will be "impossible", when you are only lvl 7 and your own TG=0(0) and MG=0(1). Enough said ...
I can post here links with combat logs of first 100 players and i am sure, that almost all of these players dont have a problem win 1 battle in 10 enrolls. But it would be only waste of my time, because you realy know, that for top players is hard win fight ... | for Valgard:
I dont understand, why people who dislike LG change are still talking about
No offense, but do you see the title of this thread? And there are just as many posts from players who don't 'dislike' the LG changes who are discussing about the LG changes in a.. LG thread.
I checked combat log of 25 top players here and everyone who will do the same, cannot say, that top players have problem win 1 battle in 10 enrolls.
Out top Player's combat log -
11-30-09 04:40[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of dark elves - Lost
-11-29-09 21:50[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of dark elves - Lost
11-29-09 20:48[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14] vs Army of Demons {2} - Won, vs a new quest type. Give him 1 more month and he starts getting Army of Demons {20}
11-29-09 20:22[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of barbarians - Lost
11-29-09 19:51[Full] [Chat]: Sekmeth[13], Antos[14], aceace[13] vs Maia[13], Kusika[14], RADO[12] - Lost
11-29-09 17:34[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Alyna[14] - Lost
11-29-09 15:48[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of dark elves - Lost
11-29-09 15:34[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14] vs Brilliant unicorns (50) - Won, vs New hunt creature. Give him 1-2 more month and he starts getting Brilliant unicorns (1000)
11-29-09 08:47[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of elves - Lost
11-29-09 07:13[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14] vs Demons-raid {16} - Lost
11-28-09 21:40[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of elves - Lost
11-28-09 21:18[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14] vs Thunderbirds (42) - Won, vs New hunt creature. Give him 1-2 more month and he starts getting Thunderbirds (1000)
11-28-09 20:31[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of necromancers - Lost
11-28-09 20:22[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14] vs Army of Demons {1} - Won, vs new quest type.
11-28-09 19:24[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of demons - Lost
11-28-09 18:48[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14] vs Nightmares-raid {0} - Won, vs new quest type.
11-28-09 18:17[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of necromancers - Lost
11-28-09 17:43[Full] [Chat]: Kusika[14], Zeed[12], asteria[12] vs JoseyWales[13], _force_[12], shutNIK[13] - Lost
11-28-09 16:10[Full] [Chat]: • Kusika[14] vs Caravan of necromancers - Lost
From the above, the ONLY battles he has won in his last 20 fights are vs new hunts creatures and quests types. He has lost ALL other battles - 14/14 losses.
In fact, just looking at the 1st page of his combat logs, he has lost every single battle he has fought, other than those new hunts and quests. Those logs are for 3 days, which is definitely more than 10 enrolls.
Very soon, those new hunts and quests will go the same way as the old hunts and quests... then what? Get the picture?
So please, while it's not impossible to win fights at the highest levels, at least have an open mind when players of higher levels, who have much higher HG, MG, TG etc than you, says that winning a battle is not as easy as you assumed they are. :) | And I tell you a little secret.
I just leveled to combat level 12 yesterday. Since I leveled up, I have been online for quite a bit.
Now go to my combat logs, since I leveled up (and although I'm so excited about getting my Royal Griffins and my substantial increase in troops from building the Citadel), I have only just fought... once, a few minutes ago.
Reason? I'm trying to 'stretch' my winnable battles for the future, in case I get the 10-hour-no-win LG penalty. And coming from someone who loves to fight, and averages about 10-20 battles a day, this is not a good sign.
And the funny thing is, I didn't even plan it this way, it just came subconsciously. I'm still at a lost if I should fight relentlessly (recklessly?) like I used to do, or try out this 'save-winnable-battles-for-every-10-enrols' method.
LG change was made to force players to fight? Hmmm... | Ok, you posted combat log of Kusika. I can post a lot more top players with 90% succesfull fights ... But still, no one from them posting in this discussion and crying. Ask Kusika why he (she ?) have so many loses, i dont know, maybe he wants lower caravans difficulty. But much more top players are realy succesfull.
And this:
So please, while it's not impossible to win fights at the highest levels, at least have an open mind when players of higher levels, who have much higher HG, MG, TG etc than you, says that winning a battle is not as easy as you assumed they are. :)
Show me these players, who have highier HG, MG, ... than me and have posted to this discussion. I dont want flex about how i am good, but i can only see low levels ... Only you are lvl 12, but your HG is the same level as my. Yes more points in HG, but i have stoped playing hunts with assist, so i only do few hunts during day. Your TG is much higier then my, but i dont enjoy it. But i have not stoped caravans because they were damn hard (more then 90% succesfull when i stoped), but because it was boring like hell waiting for them. And finaly my MG is "little" higier than yours. But i am level 10, so at 12. lvl i can easy have better "stats". So dont tell me please, how hard is win 1 fight per 10 enrolls ... | The irony of Valgard's support for the LG rule is somewhat striking... one of the suggested reasons for the rule was that some players were abusing the system by financially supporting character's with multi's.
From Valgards's Transfer log:
11-29-09 10:53: Player was imposed a penalty of 1 gold. // Mutual transfers between multiple characters of one player are forbidden. Cease all financial operations between them.
11-29-09 10:52: Player was imposed a penalty of 1 gold. // Sign your characters properly. C.f. General rules, section 3. https://www.lordswm.com/help.php?section=5
11-29-09 10:50: Player was imposed a penalty of 20000 gold. // Loan not returned.
But enough with the off-topic. I simply could not resist pointing out the irony. To address the most recent statements that the lack of high level players decrying the rule means they support it is faulty logic. The reverse could also be stated... Since they have not posted their support of the rule here, they must not like it. Both statements are faulty logic and should be avoided.
As already stated, I do not support the LG change because it limits flexibility of playstyle and penalizes my particular style despite the fact that I play in the desired manner (1 enroll - 1 combat win, see post #215) |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
<<|<|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10|11|12Back to topics list
|
