• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account you need a forum account. You can     REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation in to English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.

Discussion the incredible case of events

Daenerys Targaryen

Baronet
UBERhelp1 said:
Não estou dizendo nada disso. Estou apenas fornecendo a prova de que é possível concluir a construção gratuitamente.
Click to expand...
I know that. I'm just emphasizing something I notice here that everyone will get the main building, but I who am in the 5% professional league and i will not get the normal building upgrade.
 

Daenerys Targaryen

Baronet
xivarmy said:
Are you sure? You only need 280 Paws... I'm not quite sure how you wind up in professional without that.
Click to expand...
But that's exactly what I'm talking about. How I managed to be in the 5% of the league and not have 280 paws. At this exact moment, even with the buggy event, I have 434,657 points
 

Daenerys Targaryen

Baronet
zookeepers said:
It's strategy.

My strategy to the wildlife event is full-go for paws, never buy tool set,
use the event coins for extra turns mainly sometimes the hammer.
This is my favorite event. Because I'm good at it.

But the strategy above isn't the only valid strategy.
There can be a opposite strategy aiming big chains as priority,
make use of tools and do not care much about paws.

I'm sure you can gain somewhat decent league points without getting many paws.
But if that is how you have played, I think it's fair enough even if you were short for the main prize.
Click to expand...
My strategy was paws of course, my focus is to have the building and not be good in league placement. But like I said I'll be fine in the league, but without winning the building. The game was buggy and still is.
 

xivarmy

Legend
Perk Creator
zookeepers said:
It's strategy.

My strategy to the wildlife event is full-go for paws, never buy tool set,
use the event coins for extra turns mainly sometimes the hammer.
This is my favorite event. Because I'm good at it.

But the strategy above isn't the only valid strategy.
There can be a opposite strategy aiming big chains as priority,
make use of tools and do not care much about paws.

I'm sure you can gain somewhat decent league points without getting many paws.
But if that is how you have played, I think it's fair enough even if you were short for the main prize.
Click to expand...
You still want to drop most of the paws out in a special-focused strategy to get them out of the way. I did go on a special-focused strategy last year for it because I didn't care much about the animal crossing on my main but wanted a ton of mountains. Might've cost me a few paws, but I still walked out with plenty (finished the animal crossing with 2-4 mountains on the worlds I didn't spend any diamonds on). This year I mostly only cared about paws, but I was also so far over target that it's hard to imagine coming up short by putting a bit more focus on specials.

Daenerys Targaryen said:
But that's exactly what I'm talking about. How I managed to be in the 5% of the league and not have 280 paws. At this exact moment, even with the buggy event, I have 434,657 points
Click to expand...
It sounds though like this server wasn't so strong. Cutoff for professional on my worlds as it stands are ~480k for the old ones, and ~540k for the newest (higher % of spenders). I'm guessing you have to at least be *close* to the 280 paws though right?
 

zookeepers

Marquis
xivarmy said:
You still want to drop most of the paws out in a special-focused strategy to get them out of the way. I did go on a special-focused strategy last year for it because I didn't care much about the animal crossing on my main but wanted a ton of mountains. Might've cost me a few paws, but I still walked out with plenty (finished the animal crossing with 2-4 mountains on the worlds I didn't spend any diamonds on). This year I mostly only cared about paws, but I was also so far over target that it's hard to imagine coming up short by putting a bit more focus on specials.


It sounds though like this server wasn't so strong. Cutoff for professional on my worlds as it stands are ~480k for the old ones, and ~540k for the newest (higher % of spenders). I'm guessing you have to at least be *close* to the 280 paws though right?
Click to expand...

Animal crossing was easy.
If you end up in pro league and had those surprise boxes, all you needed was 100 paws,
which is considerably low counting that the duration of the event was approx. 2/3 of this year.
But if the border was 180 paws instead of 100, many players in pro league wouldn't have reached that, I assume.
 

Daenerys Targaryen

Baronet
xivarmy said:
You still want to drop most of the paws out in a special-focused strategy to get them out of the way. I did go on a special-focused strategy last year for it because I didn't care much about the animal crossing on my main but wanted a ton of mountains. Might've cost me a few paws, but I still walked out with plenty (finished the animal crossing with 2-4 mountains on the worlds I didn't spend any diamonds on). This year I mostly only cared about paws, but I was also so far over target that it's hard to imagine coming up short by putting a bit more focus on specials.


It sounds though like this server wasn't so strong. Cutoff for professional on my worlds as it stands are ~480k for the old ones, and ~540k for the newest (higher % of spenders). I'm guessing you have to at least be *close* to the 280 paws though right?
Click to expand...
The server is strong yes league gold is 520k.Silver league 429k. Yes. There are 7 legs left for me to have the last up, but something like that is unacceptable. If I didn't have one more day I wouldn't have the normal up and I don't even know if I can have 7 legs left because I only have one more ticket. What I'm saying is that the event is unbalanced and buggy.
 
Emberguard

Emberguard

Overlord
Daenerys Targaryen said:
So I'm **** for being the only one that will get the gold up for being in the top 5% and not getting the normal building up as I see it from the experts
Click to expand...
If it's any consolation, I'm also in the top 5% and prior to the day extension there was no way I would have been getting the last upgrade (for free). Just waiting on that final auto-generated ticket to see whether or not I can scrape into the final upgrade I need.


xivarmy said:
Are you sure? You only need 280 Paws... I'm not quite sure how you wind up in professional without that.
Click to expand...
The stats for the League is only based on whether you're popping large amounts of blocks at a time. Not on how efficient the moves are in relation to the actual board

I made a lot of preventable blunders this time round in the mini-game, where I'd be like "ok, I better not touch this block until last as otherwise I'll block my path to clear the other blocks", get distracted or close the game for a bit, come back and then pop the block I needed to not touch, or put the chest to the side instead of on top of the paw. But that was definitely me making obviously bad moves in those cases.
 
.Chris

.Chris

Baronet
zookeepers said:
The problem is, when the minigames are released in beta, the balancing is always crappy. I doubt if anyone is thinking about game play strategies, when planning a new event. First setting in thr anniversary event seemed that they assume going for full clearling the boards is a good strategy, in the Summer event, it seems that they forgot about taking away the stars from the boxes.

Adjusting balance is one roll of beta server, but now Inno is relying to much on it. Beta server should better be used to check more precise balancing.
Click to expand...
During my masters thesis I had to write a software to do calculations based on some input from the user.

I tested it myself and it worked fine.
Gave it to a colleague from the same division and it worked fine.
Gave it to a colleague from a different division and it broke completely.

I found that the reason was that I as well as my colleague from the same division knew which input values were reasonable and restricted the test inputs to those. The other colleague did not have our background knowledge.


I think it might be possible that the devs do playtest the minigames but they do so with the knowledge how they designed the game to be played and therefore get the results that they were shooting for.
Then BETA players come along and find more efficient ways to play and all your balancing goes out the window.
It is for this reason that I suggested in another thread that the BETA players should be incorporated earlier in the development cycle of new mini-games because then they could base their balancing around the results that players achieve who do not know how the game was intended to be played. Beta testing the whole event would then be only for testing on a larger scale.
 

Deleted User - 57457

Guest
.Chris said:
During my masters thesis I had to write a software to do calculations based on some input from the user.

I tested it myself and it worked fine.
Gave it to a colleague from the same division and it worked fine.
Gave it to a colleague from a different division and it broke completely.

I found that the reason was that I as well as my colleague from the same division knew which input values were reasonable and restricted the test inputs to those. The other colleague did not have our background knowledge.


I think it might be possible that the devs do playtest the minigames but they do so with the knowledge how they designed the game to be played and therefore get the results that they were shooting for.
Then BETA players come along and find more efficient ways to play and all your balancing goes out the window.
It is for this reason that I suggested in another thread that the BETA players should be incorporated earlier in the development cycle of new mini-games because then they could base their balancing around the results that players achieve who do not know how the game was intended to be played. Beta testing the whole event would then be only for testing on a larger scale.
Click to expand...
It's an interesting case study. I think a way the devs could incorporate Beta players' input earlier is through isolating the intended minigame. Much like MooingCat made an emulator for the Aztec's minigame. Allowing players to train without constrains or consequences. In a similar way the devs can make a potential new minigame available. With intended resources
 
Dessire

Dessire

Emperor

xivarmy

Legend
Perk Creator
.Chris said:
I think it might be possible that the devs do playtest the minigames but they do so with the knowledge how they designed the game to be played and therefore get the results that they were shooting for.
Then BETA players come along and find more efficient ways to play and all your balancing goes out the window.
It is for this reason that I suggested in another thread that the BETA players should be incorporated earlier in the development cycle of new mini-games because then they could base their balancing around the results that players achieve who do not know how the game was intended to be played. Beta testing the whole event would then be only for testing on a larger scale.
Click to expand...
It probably is a factor. But I also think for the last year or so the design team has been in flux for one reason or another. Could be a new design lead. Could be a pointy-haired-boss giving them unrealistic demands and causing them to stretch wildly to accomplish them. Could just be that it was "time" for a new direction and they're feeling out where that direction should be.

One of the strongest pieces of evidence that it isn't just tunnel vision is the 40 FP at beta-release Panda Shrine. Even the nerfed 18 FP one is a whole new tier of power. So what caused them to think that 40 FP was appropriate? And if they thought it was appropriate for where they want to go why was the nerf all the way down to 18? Certainly indicates a lack of resolve in where they're trying to go with a relatively simple balance decision.

Accordingly it's plausible that in anniversary event originally they had thought 2 buildings being in reach was fine - and then changed their mind. It's no more outlandish than 1 40 FP building. If they wanted us to clear boards, why were their balance changes to nerf the value per board which hurt every strategy equally and entrenched the "never clear the board" strategies as the only good enough ones rather than increase the cost progression of resets so we'd be less inclined to use as many? (say 0->100->200 instead and the 3rd reset in a day would be awfully unappealing).

And then with the pirate event, it's as simple an event as an event can be - and a clone of one of the longest standing event minigames in the game. The distribution of results is pretty much entirely statistical with minimal variation based on strategy - there's only so much you can do to find extra doubloons (pretty much coming down to spending it all on one or two days so you don't strand boards before you find the shuffle but that doesn't change things by *that* much). So why was it so far off initially? Only real options are a) they never did the math and never tested it - or - b) they weren't sure what they wanted us to be able to accomplish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top