Forums-->General game forum-->
| Author | Fair play on the Admin's side |
|---|
There are number of assumptions that we as players make, that we expect the admins to respect. But for a lot of those assumptions, we really have no way of verifying if those assumptions really always hold. What if it was in the admins' interest to not follow through, then would we ever out if they cheat?
--------------------
In case I'm not making sense, let me go with examples.
As an example, let's consider the "Chance to call an epic stack - 5%" claim attached to the golden scrolls. But I see no way that this can be verified. What if this number is artificially high only for the next two weeks so that people are enticed into donating more, and then drops to the real 5% later. Would we ever know?
What if a person gets better drops from chests of abundance in his initial donations so as to entice him, and worse drops later afterwords when he's clearly hooked enough.
What if
Moving on to a far crazier example.
We assume that random drops of all forms (ABC, campaigns, hunt arts etc.) are not player-dependent. But what if some players are marked to get better drops than other players. The admins might find it more useful to give epic troops from the golden scrolls to players who immediately declare so in the forums (so that donation looks more enticing the the forum viewers than it really is) than to ones who keep that information to themself. They could easily be tracking how frequently a guy posts on forum or chats on pm.
They could similiarly be making event opponents or cg matchmaking easier, for those who they deem more "influential".
What if CG-matchmaking artificially helps those on a long losing-streak so as to keep them from giving up. | Now, the question is, are there any systems in place that prevent the admins from abusing the black-boxes? If not, do we rest entirely on the good-nature of the admins to follow through?
Do you suspect parts of the game are rigged? Would you mind if parts of the game were rigged in such a way that they helped the growth of the game, (as in the examples above) as long as no one suspected it?
I think this line of questioning is what lead to the "Fair game control system" for roulette, and could give way to more transparency.
DISCLAIMER: This is not an accusatory post. I have Zero suspicions of foul play. I was reading up on rigging in online poker earlier today, and couldn't stop wondering why similar concerns wouldn't extend to this game.
--------------------
Some other blackboxes that should be suspected:
- CG/Tournament/QT matchmaking
- MG drops [drop-rate of particular elements]
- Enemy AI performance [including initial placement]
- Event difficulties
- "randomness" in damage/luck/morale formulas
Some motivations that admins may have to rig odds:
- Increase likelyhood of inter-clan war (which bring major donations)
- Increase donations directly
- Make forums more positive
- Encourage any failing aspect of the game [like say if WG became less popular, they could decrease it's difficulty/increase drops] | if WG became less popular, they could decrease it's difficulty/increase drops
Actually this is something they say they did somehow.
The "difficulty" is not some objective measure that is constant over time.
After a troop balancing, some faction might find their existing task more difficult.
To make something like this work there must be some heuristic mechanism that adapt difficulty according to result.
Same goes for CG matchmaking where some combination of level might create unexpected result. I'm not referring just to build, even some faction specific troop that are available starting in specific level and have an impact out of any proportion when combined with higher/lower level.
Another place when you can see this to happen is leadership value in LeG, where value is being adjusted by usage.
Is it fair to increase the value of some troops that are used only in low number. Obviously not, think about someone that got a stuck while leadership value was low and now can convert then at a much higher value. But I do not think this is inappropriate for the game to keep working.
What would be the alternative, allow the lucky player that got the overpowered stuck to keep using it at ridiculously low cost and so get almost free LeG points? | From my point of view from this side of things the liklihood of this is based around benefit versus ease and risk of detection/suspicion.
If there is a clear monitory benefit and the implementation is easy and it won't be detected then they may be inclined to do it. If these do not exist then whether provable or not, the chance is low since there motivation to do it would also be low.
In this regard then one has to think of the underlying motivation, trying to increase the liklihood of donation. This is not something they can directly make happen so easily as a gambling website where your clientele visit it to try and make money. The main way they would do this is to make it attractive to donate by giving some form of benefit, this is inherent in how they have adjusted the economy and control desirability and rarity of artifacts. There is an inherent need to keep generating new reasons for people to spend in game gold to keep the economy ticking over and motivate people to donate. They have implemented various things that link to this, imperial sets (thus upping the clan war top bar and requiring new enchants to stay competitive which in turn maintains element prices), micro level diamonds to speed up repairs, hunters guild or merc guild. leaders guild troop buying.
These are easier to implement, is transparent and above board and more likely to make the population happy than unhappy.
In a game when you can happily exist without donating at all (certainly past a certain point of Labourers guild level) and the main motivation for donating is from goodwill and happiness with the state of the game or direct benefit then rigging the game is a risky strategy which has a chance of reducing the donations from players or making them leave (and obviously then not donate at all). As such I personally think it quite a low liklihood that they have rigged the system in anyway. Too little benefit, too much hassle and too much risk. | Donators will always donate; if you have a steady income, it's only natural you devote a part of it to your entertainment. In fact, after you start donating regularly, you'll find yourself a bit trapped in the need of continuing to do so, because naturally you adjusted your gaming to having those extra benefits. I don't see admins in need of rigging anything (in terms of cheating odds) to influence this.
However, it does make sense to me that they try to favour non-donators. I know a truckload of players who only started donating upon reaching high CLs (14+). I imagine admins will use any trick in the book to keep these non-donators involved, in hope they someday start cashing in.
Just like The One Ring, I have absolutely no proof of this. And it is hard to draw the ethical line here. Although my first instinct would be to condemn such rigging of odds, I could actually find myself supporting it after giving it some thought. Afterall, I do want admins to keep lwm alive... | My personal impression is that the game is fair. Of course, donation will give you a certain advantage. But, all in all, you can gain everything by being an active and persistent player.
My argument is based on the game’s transparency system. This is a very transparent game. Think about it, you can browse any battle, transfer, purchase of any player. This is something to be proud of in terms of fairness. From a single player's perspective, the ability to cheat on the long run is very unlikely. You will be discovered by keen players.
Regarding rigging, why make all the length of having a transparent system, strict rules that are being enforced, and moderators with low tolerance to misbehavior?
That's my impression of the game. | Regarding rigging, why make all the length of having a transparent system, strict rules that are being enforced, and moderators with low tolerance to misbehavior?
Careful
(it's a joke, settle down)
Player banned by moderator Lord Syrian until 2019-06-02 22:21:20 // Spamming in GGF // You should know better... I trusted you | The admins might find it more useful to give epic troops from the golden scrolls to players who immediately declare so in the forums (so that donation looks more enticing the the forum viewers than it really is) than to ones who keep that information to themself. They could easily be tracking how frequently a guy posts on forum or chats on pm.
Well, I am not really 'active' on forum and I have opened around 250 chests and never got a rare art
I'm just saying.. | 250 chests
283^ | | Frankly my dear i don't give a damn. | I have opened around 250 chests and never got a rare art
Since the percentage is unknown, and was changed overtime, this might actually be in the average.
From mine experience the probability is probably around 0.1-0.2% So you should open way more chests before getting a rare art.
IMHO do not get chest if you are looking for rare arts.
Get gold and buy them. You can do that with donation and if you get a rare art from the chest it is a bonus one (and probably not the one you need, sorry).
Donators will always donate;
As a donator I disagree.
Admin need to keep me interested in the game. If I get bored I reduce my donation. If it feel too much like work instead or fun, I reduce my donation. | I agree with #4201Lord MathProfessor on both accounts.
My donations are based on artifact rewards. The last donation rewarded a stack of creatures which led me to skip donation. I hope to obtain a rare artifact from a chest. However, the likelihood of obtaining a rare artifact is extremely low. |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
Back to topics list
|
