Home EN General Discussions & Questions

Join the official Goodgame Big Farm Discord today!Join our Big Farm Discord Server


Are you looking for a community of like-minded farmers to discuss your farming experience with? Look no further than the GoodGame Big Farm Discord Server!


Our server is the perfect place to connect with other farmers from around the world. Whether you're looking to chat about strategy, share tips and tricks, or just make new friends, our community has got you covered.


And that's not all - as a member of our Discord server, you'll also have access to exclusive giveaways and other special events. It's the perfect way to stay up to date on all the latest news and updates from GoodGame Studios.


So what are you waiting for? Join the GoodGame Big Farm Discord Server today and start connecting with fellow farmers from all over the world. Just click here to join the fun!

Please replace shovels with count

FarmingGamerFarmingGamer Posts: 107
GGS:D

Please find an alternative to replace shovels with the count.We appreciate that you brought something for us but personally I feel shovels should be replaced with the count in near future to help the co-operatives.In a project how much we contributed towards the total count(in figures) for example how much milk individually we have collected and so on.It will eliminate lazy people fooling around the coop and making the coop go slower.

My only point is the actual individual count is much better than shovels
Post edited by FarmingGamer on

Comments

  • ezio auditore3ezio auditore3 Posts: 2,399
    edited 01.01.2014
    It would definitely be nicer! :)
  • rhon (GB1)rhon (GB1) Guest, GB1 Posts: 1,542
    edited 01.01.2014
    I like the shovels idea. The formula might need tweaking a bit but it is intended to determine 'effort'. With a raw numbers only count a low level member can never look good against a high level. My own co-op has levels from 21 to 103. How depressing would a raw number count be for the level 21 player who worked hard towards a Project? Next Project they might think it not worth even trying :(
  • dragonpridedragonpride Posts: 574
    edited 01.01.2014
    i completely agree with changing shovels to the actual amount collected.i think when people spent months of asking and asking for way to see whose doing what in the co-op projects that it was basically the figures they were wanting to see.the entire point of the system was supposed to be a way to weed out slackers but its still pretty much impossible to do even with shovels.
  • gizmo22 (AU1)gizmo22 (AU1) AU1 Posts: 1,720
    edited 01.01.2014
    I agree!! The shovels are a vague representation of each members contribution towards a project. Yes a numbers count would make the lower level players look bad BUT its the cooperative leaders responsibility to take into account their level and the production facilities on their farm compared to the others. Its the same as dollar and gold donations towards a co op. The higher level players amounts will tower over the rest and since GGS doesn't have a "level based" equation for that figure I don't see why it should continue with shovels.
  • Twiglet (GB1)Twiglet (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,174
    edited 02.01.2014
    I agree the shovels should go and replaced with a count im sick of lazy players who just go along for the ride instead of helping there team.
  • EricaJ (US1)EricaJ (US1) Posts: 202
    edited 02.01.2014
    I think the implementation was a great design choice. Here are a few of the reasons:

    1) GGS has access to every bit of raw data related to every co-op member's contribution to every project every co-op has ever done. They are, therefore, in a much better position to analyze and evaluate individual member contributions than we are.

    2) Co-op Leadership may not have the time, skills, patience, or inclination to deal with analyzing raw data for every member's contribution to every project. Many might not care at all about relative contributions of individual members, but presenting the raw data would require them to address it in some way.

    3) There are likely privacy laws and concerns in some jurisdictions that would prevent GGS from sharing raw data about a player's activity with other players. This is an international game, and laws vary widely.

    4) Raw data does not take level or production capacity into account, and would only diminish and demean the effort expended by lower level players when they see their raw figures next to those of higher level players.

    5) Some projects require as many as 3 different commodities be produced. Presumably, GGS would be expected to report raw data separately for all 3 of them.

    6) I think it imperative that the information be transparent and available to all members. For a Leader to have access to information unavailable to other members would create a veil of secrecy, and likely stir up some paranoia for some people.

    7) It's also important that the data reflect participation over the last several projects, rather than just the most recent one. It provides a much better sense of the value of a member's overall project participation, and at the same time can show trends if there are material changes in a member's contributions.

    8) That GGS drops the lowest contribution in making the calculations is another great choice on their part. Even the most active players are sometimes unavailable to help much with a given project, and that should not impact the value of their overall participation.

    9) They may have saved themselves a heavy load of trouble tickets by not reporting raw data. You can bet that some people would sit there counting their chickens (so to speak) and open tickets when GGS reports data that is different from what they believe they produced. 99.99% of the time, it is the player who made the error - but GGS is still expected to research and resolve any perceived error reported by any player.

    So overall - for the best interests of the players, the co-ops, and GGS - I commend them for the way they handled this request.
  • dragonpridedragonpride Posts: 574
    edited 02.01.2014
    EricaJ wrote: »
    I think the implementation was a great design choice. Here are a few of the reasons:

    1) GGS has access to every bit of raw data related to every co-op member's contribution to every project every co-op has ever done. They are, therefore, in a much better position to analyze and evaluate individual member contributions than we are.

    2) Co-op Leadership may not have the time, skills, patience, or inclination to deal with analyzing raw data for every member's contribution to every project. Many might not care at all about relative contributions of individual members, but presenting the raw data would require them to address it in some way.

    3) There are likely privacy laws and concerns in some jurisdictions that would prevent GGS from sharing raw data about a player's activity with other players. This is an international game, and laws vary widely.

    4) Raw data does not take level or production capacity into account, and would only diminish and demean the effort expended by lower level players when they see their raw figures next to those of higher level players.

    5) Some projects require as many as 3 different commodities be produced. Presumably, GGS would be expected to report raw data separately for all 3 of them.

    6) I think it imperative that the information be transparent and available to all members. For a Leader to have access to information unavailable to other members would create a veil of secrecy, and likely stir up some paranoia for some people.

    7) It's also important that the data reflect participation over the last several projects, rather than just the most recent one. It provides a much better sense of the value of a member's overall project participation, and at the same time can show trends if there are material changes in a member's contributions.

    8) That GGS drops the lowest contribution in making the calculations is another great choice on their part. Even the most active players are sometimes unavailable to help much with a given project, and that should not impact the value of their overall participation.

    9) They may have saved themselves a heavy load of trouble tickets by not reporting raw data. You can bet that some people would sit there counting their chickens (so to speak) and open tickets when GGS reports data that is different from what they believe they produced. 99.99% of the time, it is the player who made the error - but GGS is still expected to research and resolve any perceived error reported by any player.

    So overall - for the best interests of the players, the co-ops, and GGS - I commend them for the way they handled this request.
    hi erica. i dont see raw figures as being much of an issue.if you have ever played a mission you would see that the raw figures of every participant are shown and available for anyone to see.i dont think anyone meant for only the leader to have access to these numbers either.a good system i think would be instead of having shovels next to our names in the members list,we have the figures of whatever we collected from our last project.we also have fasters in our co-op who can use gold to skip entire projects.while thats good for the co-op it also makes players with 3 or 4 shovels drop to 1 instantly and showing the numbers would make it clear that the player fasted the project so the leader would know nobody was slacking.as for smaller players feeling outclassed,it only makes sense that a lvl 70 can contribute more than a lvl 20.
  • EricaJ (US1)EricaJ (US1) Posts: 202
    edited 02.01.2014
    hi erica. i dont see raw figures as being much of an issue.if you have ever played a mission you would see that the raw figures of every participant are shown and available for anyone to see.

    Choosing to participate in a mission implies willingness to have your production (or sales or what-have-you) displayed to other users. Laws may be different for day-to-day play, but I'm not an international lawyer, and neither are you.
    i dont think anyone meant for only the leader to have access to these numbers either.

    That suggestion has been made by other players in other threads, so I addressed it.
    a good system i think would be instead of having shovels next to our names in the members list,we have the figures of whatever we collected from our last project.

    I disagree.
    we also have fasters in our co-op who can use gold to skip entire projects.while thats good for the co-op it also makes players with 3 or 4 shovels drop to 1 instantly and showing the numbers would make it clear that the player fasted the project so the leader would know nobody was slacking.

    Instantly? Interesting, since the shovel representation isn't calculated until a project is completed, includes the last 5 projects, and drops the lowest performance.

    Regardless, if gold use is skewing the results, then the formula might need to be tweaked.
    as for smaller players feeling outclassed,it only makes sense that a lvl 70 can contribute more than a lvl 20.

    Indeed, it does - and the number of shovels displayed for them takes that into account.
  • dragonpridedragonpride Posts: 574
    edited 02.01.2014
    i dont get where all the legal stuff is coming from.if there were laws against showing the progress of players i dont see how it would be possible for us to view other players farms or see the ranks for all players on a server.(this would be a good issue for the mods to make clear to us)when you join a co-op you are expected to pull your own weight and players are still able to get away with slacking or claiming that their not the ones dragging their feet because theres no way to prove otherwise.and with players able to skip multiple projects in a matter of minuets the shovel system is not an accurate way of weeding out moochers and leaders are no closer to having a way of getting rid of them(witch is fair and beneficial for the whole team)then before the shovels were introduced.the way players labeled as slackers are handled would be up to the leader to decide.a good leader will talk to the player and discuss the reasons a player cant seem to contribute as much as a player at the same level or lower level than they are.our co-op has a very active chat with a good leader and good deputies who are able to understand what our members can fairly bring to to the table based on their lifestyles.the point being, this system they gave us was not what was asked for and people want what was requested in the first place.
  • Moonbeam11 (US1)Moonbeam11 (US1) Posts: 38
    edited 03.01.2014
    The shovel system needs to also show the actual total number each player contributed upon completion of each project. This would also serve to a better understanding of how the shovels are distributed. It would also help to avoid a member getting the boot for only having 1 shovel. Knowing the actual number of items contributed would not hurt anyone and would actually help everyone to recognize we are all at different levels and stages of play and ability to contribute, time-wise included. I reiterate, we need the shovels And the actual totals contributed. Plain and simple.
  • Twiglet (GB1)Twiglet (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,174
    edited 03.01.2014
    If a mission comes up and you have to collect lets say 35,000 eggs if i add 1,000 eggs at the start of the mission and because i can not be bothered doing it and there is no way to prove i have not contributed fairly i can then add another 1,000 eggs at the end and still get 4 hammers. The shovel system is not an accurate way of showing who is not doing there fair share. If there where legal issues how come it showed the amount you produced in the mission ?

    I must add i don't do this i am one of the group members that always pull my weight but i do see this going on.
  • TopherII (US1)TopherII (US1) Posts: 47
    edited 03.01.2014
    I like the shovel system it keeps the leaders in check and gives a general representation of what the members are doing. I do not trust that every (most but not every) leader in this game is decent enough to have the raw data and take into consideration the level difference.

    I do get a little worried that since we do not know the exact formula for the shovels that there could be a bug and we will have no idea that it is miscalculating things. Just a wee bit worried, but I move on :)

    On that note, I am not sure if it is already, but the golden shovel award...it would be cool if that were for the last project ran and not based on the calculations.

    Thanks for listening,

    Top
  • FarmingGamerFarmingGamer Posts: 107
    edited 03.01.2014
    Count is better than Shovels.A person who did not login for 48 hrs is having the same number of shovels than a person who is actually playing the game and contributed more for the project.

    If a 20 level member contributed more than the capacity of his farms contribution then we will know that he is a good player but what if he is just spying on the coop from a different cooperative and on a purpose to make the coop go slow.In the original announcement it clearly states that " The amount of shovels is calculated by a complex formula, taking into account the player's level, the average level of coop members, the pure amount of work done, the size of the cooperative and much more So for example, a very low level player in a huge cooperative can only help so much with a high level project. The system will recognize this, so the low level player will get an appropriate amount of shovels. If the highest level player in the same cooperative does the exact same work, he will get considerably less shovels."

    Even the small level players who are playing very little with yellow* status next to their id they are getting 3 shovels and person who is actually playing the game for many hours and working completely on the project ends up with 3 shovels.(Taking last 5 projects into consideration)

    I don't see a point why any player will feel bad about the system until they should be worried they will get caught with the "counts".Someone mentioned who will have time to calculate and stuff but definitely someone will be there to do things apart from the "Leader".

    Please get us Count for projects orelse please change the "Missions" to Shovel system :D
  • Moonbeam11 (US1)Moonbeam11 (US1) Posts: 38
    edited 03.01.2014
    The developers have headed in the right direction with the shovel system, however, there is still the need to have the actual total amount contributed visible to all members so there is no confusion as to who has done what towards the total co op contribution for that specific project. Leaders of good, high level co ops, already take into consideration the ability level of each of their members and do not penalize them for lower numbers. The numbers are essential for proper planning of projects, as well. To make a long story short, I don't see why this has not already been programmed into the game by the developers.
  • short79short79 Posts: 174
    edited 03.01.2014
    Shovels work for me!
  • mariachi (RO1)mariachi (RO1) Posts: 7,850
    edited 03.01.2014
    shovels are a good representation of effort if the players in the coop are of similar levels and "gold" power.
    on some server, I play in a coop with 30 members of similar "power", and 1 strong gold player. until this one player came to us, the coop members had 1-5 shovels and about 6 of us took turn in having the yellow fork.
    since this big, strong player came, we finish projects faster and of course we are all happy. but the shovels lost their importance... he always has 5 and the yellow fork, and the rest of us hardly gain 2.
    this doesn't look right. we make the same effort as before. if now we gain only 1-2 shovels, it doesn't mean that we are lazy. we work as hard as we can, as hard as we did before. now, we can't tell who is lazy and who is working hard, because the max we get is 2 shovels, due to the strong competition of only one big gold player. if one strong player can "damage" the balance this way, I would say that the formula is not so good... :(
  • farmer arash82farmer arash82 Posts: 1
    edited 03.01.2014
    ?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(?(hi
  • Suzy832Suzy832 Posts: 10
    edited 03.01.2014
    I agree with EricaJ.
    I think it is great that not only the last project, but the last 5 projects are taken into account. And keep in mind this is a game and should be fun for everybody. Even for people that have a lower level, of with (temporary) less time to spend on the game.
  • monica79538monica79538 Posts: 1,932
    edited 03.01.2014
    If people are not pulling their own weight and it can be now verified, even in such a generalized method such as the shovels....why are they still on the co-op? What more proof do you need?

    I do think the shovel method is better than nothing, but an exact number is too stringent. I think higher level players forget the lower level production amounts too easily and an exact production number will not be helpful as it will only track how many corn per hour.

    I also have lots of questions (STILL!) about how the library affects the shovel figures--some things count, while others do not.
  • ezio auditore3ezio auditore3 Posts: 2,399
    edited 03.01.2014
    I have to admit I'd like both methods together, the shovels and the numbers....... If the numbers were kept personal that would be better :)
  • jaystarr2jaystarr2 Posts: 1,657
    edited 03.01.2014
    I wouldn't mind keeping the shovel system provided that we were given a full explanation of how they are calculated. We know that production has something to do with it, but also "planning ahead" (e.g. using nursery seeds or fert) can affect it, but what about other features, e.g. time online, level, etc.? All we've been given in that regard are some hand-wavy explanations about their calculation, and even though a long-term shovel proposal is being considered (for more than 5 projects), it might be good to know how exactly the raw numbers, plus all these other considerations, calculate into shovels.
  • ezio auditore3ezio auditore3 Posts: 2,399
    edited 04.01.2014
    Well for now I'm lucky because I can only play 5 mins a day and my co-op is only doing the collecting milk project. So with 4 cowsheds I'm averaged at around 4 shovels :):)
  • lucy822lucy822 Posts: 89
    edited 04.01.2014
    I think the idea behind the shovels are to give guidance to co-ops but needn't be more stringent. There are always members within a co-op who don't chat and you only know they are active because it shows they have logged in - but you cant tell if they are helping with a project or not. I like that the shovels have made me think 'oooh, they are team players - who knew?!' about some members.
    At the same time, I would never want to see hard working co-op members kicked out because they couldn't log on as much as usual for a couple of days - and those who choose to be a silent co-op member may fall foul of this. As a chatty member of a co-op, if I cant log on for 24 hours or go away or something, I let the co-op leader know. But, not everyone would want to do that...
    Don't get me wrong, I think improvements could be made - but im not sure what the best way forward is with this. But, I think GGS will take everyones opinions in to account and coupled with their own parameters of what they can actually do in terms of programming etc (like the point about projects which involve collecting 3 things) and move on from there.
    I am wondering if a percentage kind of calculation rather than number would be fairer... not an exact percentage but something using calculations such as the shovels do. or maybe it could be coupled with both an actual number and a calculated 'work done' figure - this would then also show info to everyone else, particularly higher levels who may have forgotten what its like to be just starting out, that a small number is still equal to a lot of work for them.
  • dragonpridedragonpride Posts: 574
    edited 04.01.2014
    hi lucy: i can understand the concern about smaller players being kicked out but honestly i cannot see an experienced leader doing this.i just turned level 80 yesterday and was thinking about how it was almost impossible to imagine myself making 1million$ when i was at level 20 or how i struggled to keep 1 cherry orchard going.i dont think any of us really forget what its was like to be a little guy and if a leader does start throwing out small players over not being able to keep up then thats not really the kind of co-op i would want to be a part of.i think the percentage concept is basically what the shovels are and they are affected by gold use other factors.a good leader would be able to see the numbers while taking into consideration the players level, number and level of buildings they have related to the current projects and play time and be able to tell if one or more players used gold to fast a project and who is truly slacking.if one player has 3 cows and another has 6 a good leader will see that even though player2 got double what player1 collected,they both put in the same amount of effort.and if a clearly active player cant seem to give as much as others on a regular basis,a good leader will talk with them instead of deleting them.we found out we had a player who had arthritis and wasnt able to contribute as much as the rest of us.if we hadnt spoken with her she could have easily been deleted.i guess in short this tool would only cause grief in the hands of the ignorant and inexperienced.in the right hands it would be a very useful addition in my opinion.
  • ezio auditore3ezio auditore3 Posts: 2,399
    edited 04.01.2014
    Hmm, well said Dragon :):)
  • dragonpridedragonpride Posts: 574
    edited 04.01.2014
    thank you ezio :) just trying to make it as clear as humanly possible as to why i favor the numbers.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file