The point KA was making is this is screwing players over when they did nothing wrong except play the game as it was. Really it's pathetic to change this as KA said cuz the game's functioned with it for 2 years and in that time I didn't see requests to get rid of it. So whoever has complained about it must not have been in Valor long or they'd realize it's not new.
Firefall you don't get it. We aren't arguing advantages or disadvantages really. Most posting here know the benefits and drawbacks of it. The point is that it's not really wrong. It's playing the game as it's been, more or less a strategy.
Negative Scholars
-
Kingjason666
- Knight
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:50 am
Lol fire. I will never catch up even if they take my scholars away I will still be -1100.
But I do see your point about resources but as I said to u in guildmasters room. We have played this game under certain rules and abilities for over 2years. In older world ts was and is the normal way the game was played and now we are all too far behind to ever catch up to zero. So how can it be fair to change the rules now and all of a sudden tell us that it's cheating. We never saw a rule book that said it was cheating.
What's the difference between this and conq a city that has troops out on support. We all are happy to get those troops free. It's exactly the same thing.
There is only 3 ways that are fair to people that have played the game in old worlds. And that is
1- leave then with all their scholars
2- close the worlds and class top guild only as the winner
3- take away all our scholars but also change us to zero scholars we can educate. This way we loose the ability to (cheat as u call it) but also we are able to still play the game
4 option 4 takes all our scholars and honestly rapes us good as we played the game as it was made
But I do see your point about resources but as I said to u in guildmasters room. We have played this game under certain rules and abilities for over 2years. In older world ts was and is the normal way the game was played and now we are all too far behind to ever catch up to zero. So how can it be fair to change the rules now and all of a sudden tell us that it's cheating. We never saw a rule book that said it was cheating.
What's the difference between this and conq a city that has troops out on support. We all are happy to get those troops free. It's exactly the same thing.
There is only 3 ways that are fair to people that have played the game in old worlds. And that is
1- leave then with all their scholars
2- close the worlds and class top guild only as the winner
3- take away all our scholars but also change us to zero scholars we can educate. This way we loose the ability to (cheat as u call it) but also we are able to still play the game
4 option 4 takes all our scholars and honestly rapes us good as we played the game as it was made
-
LordFirefall
- Posts: 1002
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 4:15 am
- Location: Montival
It became the norm because 1 or 2 players started doing it and then many did it in older worlds to keep up. Not everyone is doing it in newer worlds. For instance, in W43, only about 20% of the top players were doing it. In W95, I know very few who are doing it. Why should they be allowed to continue? Why should those of us who are playing the game as it was intended be forced to go negative just to keep up?
One could argue that you have a defacto rule already, with the escalating cost of scholarships. As far as getting troops for free when you capture a city, you know this isn't the same. We're not talking a hostile cap here - we're talking someone freely giving you a city. But I'll chase that rabbit down the hole regardless. Would it be fair if I could find a way to get troops at 1/1000th, 1/100th, or even 1/10th of their normal cost? That's what's being allowed with negative scholars, whether its W1, or W121.
As far as the options you gave, I'd say close the worlds. Doesn't really matter to me whether a winner is declared though - too much room for argument. Definitely don't agree with option 1, as that's like leaving extra troops that came from the magic troops bug.
One could argue that you have a defacto rule already, with the escalating cost of scholarships. As far as getting troops for free when you capture a city, you know this isn't the same. We're not talking a hostile cap here - we're talking someone freely giving you a city. But I'll chase that rabbit down the hole regardless. Would it be fair if I could find a way to get troops at 1/1000th, 1/100th, or even 1/10th of their normal cost? That's what's being allowed with negative scholars, whether its W1, or W121.
As far as the options you gave, I'd say close the worlds. Doesn't really matter to me whether a winner is declared though - too much room for argument. Definitely don't agree with option 1, as that's like leaving extra troops that came from the magic troops bug.
-
Kingjason666
- Knight
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 7:50 am
To me this is a very cut and dry issue. Owning scholars that you did not pay for by way of scholarships, especially when this is blatantly abused, is a direct manipulation and purposeful circumvention of intended game mechanics. It swings the game WAY out of balance, and also allows those with multiple devices and/or accounts to abuse the system for their own personal gain. I am firmly with the Devs on this issue - negative scholars should be removed from the game, and it should include all past worlds. This is essentially a glitch, and glitches get patched. We live with it and move on. This will make for a much more competitive game in the long run.
Obviously those who are grossly in debt will be against this, as all of their "hard work" will have "gone to waste". Unfortunately, those players can just do what others have been doing the whole time the world has been in existence... Pay for scholarships so you can continue to grow.
It's pretty dang easy to accumulate a massive KSA when you remove 40% of your resource budget and apply it to troops instead of scholarships. It's also easy when grow becomes nearly exponential due to Never having to slow down to catch up on scholarships.
Once this exploit is gone, the game as a whole is better off, and the players are on a more even playing field, which makes for better competition.
Obviously those who are grossly in debt will be against this, as all of their "hard work" will have "gone to waste". Unfortunately, those players can just do what others have been doing the whole time the world has been in existence... Pay for scholarships so you can continue to grow.
It's pretty dang easy to accumulate a massive KSA when you remove 40% of your resource budget and apply it to troops instead of scholarships. It's also easy when grow becomes nearly exponential due to Never having to slow down to catch up on scholarships.
Once this exploit is gone, the game as a whole is better off, and the players are on a more even playing field, which makes for better competition.
I think as a player that has never had negative scholars apart from the ones I got when capping a city, option 3 is the best option as the world can continue, or option 2 as worlds ended long ago, and I got sick of going throught my city's for scholarships and falling alseep as its so boring, I hope from what I've heard on later versions there is a better way of buying scholatships as the old way is just boring,
And as I've also said and had a long talk with support on this matter, truce is another way of making the game an unfair playing field for players with money, so that should also be taken away, but this will not happen as it makes so much money, which I understand but there has to be a better way,
And as I've also said and had a long talk with support on this matter, truce is another way of making the game an unfair playing field for players with money, so that should also be taken away, but this will not happen as it makes so much money, which I understand but there has to be a better way,
The idea of closing the older worlds I'm not fond of. I still have old worlds that in play that even though they are slow and not much happening in my team and I still plug along playing them. I call them my home worlds. We are all like family there and if we were told we couldn't go home anymore I don't believe I would be at all happy about that. Leave the old worlds as they are and consentrate on the new.
-
ThatValorPlayer
- Knight
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:31 pm
I agree 100% that negative scholars need to be fixed. Not sure anyone is disputing that here anyway.
In terms of older worlds etc.. I reported this 'oversight' a few weeks after w26 started, and was met with a response along the lines of "it's not a priority at the moment." I'm really not sure how long ago that was, but they've had plenty of time to address the issue. (Patching, or at least a warning to people that it is an "exploit", the label cheater is whole different thing here)
I can understand completely why people would be ****ed about this feature being removed. That said we don't need another set of rules again like chaos.
Close the worlds and reward all players still active in them with a unique title.
In terms of older worlds etc.. I reported this 'oversight' a few weeks after w26 started, and was met with a response along the lines of "it's not a priority at the moment." I'm really not sure how long ago that was, but they've had plenty of time to address the issue. (Patching, or at least a warning to people that it is an "exploit", the label cheater is whole different thing here)
I can understand completely why people would be ****ed about this feature being removed. That said we don't need another set of rules again like chaos.
Close the worlds and reward all players still active in them with a unique title.
┏( -_-)┛..::LtFarrk::..┗(-_- )┓
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests