Mismatched Missions - Unfair?

AmazingMurphy (GB1) · 15.02.2019

Actually I do sort of agree with you, but being honest I've not been in a mission with a level 35 player - the lowest I've seem recently is 125 (ish) - but there is still a chance for low level players. I may have lots of cowsheds, but if I've just harvested, and a lower level has everything ready I either have to spend gold/use seaweed or they will win. Being me, I'd sooner hold onto my resources - but I know not everyone thinks that way. What I am getting at, is there is no chance for lower level players in the HWE because the bandings are just too great.

And you are totally right - they have messed up again, all I am saying is that I'm in no way surprised by that - nothing works as it should anymore.

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 15.02.2019

read back to my earlier post, I have had a lot of missions, where max other level is 100 and 1 poor level 35 got me over and over again

.Byron Longford (AU1) said:

last CC I was in missions I am level 450 the other 5 were all less than level 100. It was ok for me I had to hardly harvest anything to win, but was not fair at all on small farms. 1 of the farm that kept coming up against me was only level 35. Think how you would feel level 35 against 450 3 fields against 22, 2 chickens against 33 + 20 ducks 2 pigs against 10, 1 cow against 15 and 20 goats.. NOT fair. This would not be an issue if the formula was how we were told was happening for the last 2 years, but it is not

TMKC (IN1) · 15.02.2019

Life is good with 1 field ... Shelving point is too low.

There are probably just 100 active players on the indian server ... Maybe 100 more passive players

With a population of 1.3 billion people in our country, that number is too low.

If GGS invests in advertising, they could earn revenue getting into the volume business.

For CC, rewards need to be improved.
Missions are mismatched all the time.

Exxy (INT1) · 16.02.2019

Fertile fields are not that costly 350 gold per

10x = 3500 gold

6x to have 60 fields = 21.000 gold

we're far from the thousand dollars here and its a permanent way of playing

Altho, its a lot of clicking

ha ha

During a 2 for 1 ... Its gonna cost you a whooping 10$ of gold, to set yourself that way

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 16.02.2019

I never said it was the cost of the fields, I said the amount of land required for 60 fields and for the number of house is what would cost the gold as a level 39 player can only upgrade house to level 3 and by the time you built all those fields and upgraded houses with nothing else on your farm, you would be higher than level 39. A level 39 player would have to be buying most of the land required with gold as level 39 can only buy half the land required by farm $$. Also I would be very wary a new player that set their farm up like this I would be thinking it is a multiple account farm. Why would any new player ever set their farm with just fields and houses. I would be reporting a level 39 player with just 60 fields to get GGS to check them out. NO brand new player, playing this game will ever set up a farm just fields, more likely is that a player in the large co op has a second account set up just for CC to help out their co op, this is why multiple accounts is against the rules

Player that have been playing longer and in co op that does CC I understand they would set up their farm like this, but not a brand new player, brand new players follow side tasks as we all did to learn the game @Exxy (INT1)

Exxy (INT1) · 16.02.2019

Who knows

I'm leader of 2nd coop on International, and we take low levels, and they have a trend to develop with many fertile fields , as its a wise strategy to perform

Again, its choices

There's multiple ways of playing

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 16.02.2019

yes multiple ways of playing but NO WAY 60 fields by a level 39 player. I bet no one in your co op level 40 can fit 60 fields on their farm

Exxy (INT1) · 16.02.2019

Whoa @Byron Longford (AU1)

Any curious player, new or old , can find ways to optimize their farm

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 16.02.2019

you really are not reading everything. The amount of land for 60 fields and the houses required is impossible to be level 39. By the time you bought all that land with GOLD and upgraded enough houses with gold, just the XP from building the fields and building and upgrading all those house would have you higher than level 39. I would definitely reporting a low level player with just fields and houses, just to get GGS to check them out. If they have more stuff they even higher level

For the fields alone it would take over 14 block, the houses required would take 6 block so total it would take 20 blocks of land just for 60 fields and the houses required, plus land for 2 barns and a farmhouse. nothing else they need 23 blocks of land no decorations

Exxy (INT1) · 16.02.2019

Building a fertile field is 200 xp...

You'd need 600 employees for 60 fertile fields ( House level 3 = 20 ) so thats 30 houses that are 25 squares

So 750 squares, Thats 8 landpiece

So far so good

For the 60 Fertile fields , 24 squares per, You'd need 1320 squares , So lets round up to 13 Landpiece

You need 21 landpieces.. for all that

That seems fairly realistic

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 16.02.2019

60 x 24 is 1440 and you even rounded down not up from 1320 to 1300. You better go back to school and learn maths, stop learning GGS maths.

I rounded down 1440 to 14 blocks if I round up it would be 15 block required, for 1320 that is only 55 fertile fields

30 house agree take 8 blocks of land (if they use gold to go to level 4, 6 blocks) but 8 for $$ , but you also got farm house you can't get rid of and 2 barns, insane to get rid of, minimum nothing else on farm 23 blocks and that is on the generous side towards you. It is more like 24 without rounding down as you can't fit half a field or half a barn on the farm. 26 block if they use 8 blocks of land for houses. so with less gold needing 8 blocks for houses total 26 blocks, when a level 39 player can only have 17 that means more gold required to buy those blocks of land

Upgrading 30 house xp alone would put you over level 39. I would def be reporting a player who has done this as to me it would be very suspicious as a 2nd farm of a large player and get GGS to check them out as this is way out of normal.

I want you to take a screen shot of a level 39 farm, with no deco and 60 fields.. I just don't believe it to be possible. The maths don't add up. or just send me a PM with the user name and I will check them myself. I have an account on INT server

tasnim bushra (INT1) · 16.02.2019

@Exxy (INT1)
Who knows I'm leader of 2nd coop on International, and we take low levels, and they have a trend to develop with many fertile fields , as its a wise strategy to perform Again, its choices There's multiple ways of playing

yeah exxy.thats good.i agree with You.

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 16.02.2019

@tasnim bushra (INT1) yes lots of fertile fields for low levels if they can afford is good not arguing that point, the argument is to be level 39 with 60 fields not possible, as @Exxy (INT1) said they came across a level 39 player with 60 fields., I want either of you to take a screen shot of such a farm. 60 fields and level 39. NOT possible unless planned from day 1 as a 2nd farm of a large player. The fields can not even fit on available land with the houses required, without gold, and that is if the whole farm, is just house fertile fields, farmhouse and barns, NO deco, NO chickens, NO cows, No pigs, NO apples, NO cherries, NO mill, ooops which has to be there as well. sorry add 1 more block to my calculations..no silo, no composter. no nothing except fertile fields and houses. Show me a level 39 player with this design and I will show you a player who has 2 accounts.

tasnim bushra (INT1) · 16.02.2019

look.i said i have seen. an player.and u are true.. he had no deco, cow,chiken,apple,cherry. he had nothing but house and burns and fertile fields.
i had seen him long time ago...i didnt remember his id name.

im telling that lower level doesnt matter if u know the patterns of playing a game.i have also passed that level.
and i passed that level with a good amount of rp.

it doesnt mean that u will need 60 fertile fields to play a mission.
anyone can buy minimum 10 fertile fields easily.because in the beginning everyone get a gold mining license from a task.
and as your sayings.lower levels cant use seaweed feed,humas,mystery boxes,they cant use golds.they cant use anything.
we have so many events where we get theese types of things easily.and just need a coop for rewards.
as @Exxy (INT1) says that,they accept lower level players.i know exxy.she really accept lower leve player there also so many coops which accept these players..from this they can achieve rewards and can up their level very fast.
and it has been a long time i have not played a mission with players under 100 levels.

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 16.02.2019

I agree with all that, not arguing that all I am saying show me a level 39 farm with 60 fields and NOTHING else and I will show you a player with 2 accounts. Big difference from 10 fertile fields to 60, if you have not seen that player for long time, he was probably banned for multi accounts. The statement was made by @Exxy (INT1) which is what we are talking about not strategy of having lots of fields.

All this is off the point of this thread any way. [no naming or shaming as per the Community Guidelines | Pickle]

PCA (GB1) · 16.02.2019

IF only ggs wanted the game to be fair ....

they wouldnt set up events where coops of any size compete against each other and players from level 6 to level 1000 play in the same missions

There are games where coops are matched by number of active players. players are given by the game gifts to give to others, players can help each other by exchanging goods

ggs is not interested in "fair" ggs wants us to play a "pay to click" game, they are working very hard to achieve this, this and nothing else

Exxy (INT1) · 16.02.2019

@Byron Longford (AU1)

Tasnim only re-wrote one of my earlier message

We are only proving, That you can play just fine as any level

I've been competitive, all the time I've been progressing in the game toward where my farm stands today
I've fought stronger player, I've fought players who were willing to spend more, some that there were weak, some that were pretty bad

To make it short, You cant win all missions

Some will be easier to win, some will be harder
End of the story

xAlleycatx (AU1) · 16.02.2019

Byron Longford (AU1) said:

I agree with all that, not arguing that all I am saying show me a level 39 farm with 60 fields and NOTHING else and I will show you a player with 2 accounts. Big difference from 10 fertile fields to 60, if you have not seen that player for long time, he was probably banned for multi accounts. The statement was made by @Exxy (INT1) which is what we are talking about not strategy of having lots of fields.

All this is off the point of this thread any way. [[no naming or shaming as per the Community Guidelines | Pickle]

I agree with you. I have 35 fertile fields on the Au server, and 45 on the US server. There is NO way as a level 39 player I could have done that. The amount of workers needed is not available at that level. Especially when you add the mill, cows, chickens, pigs, etc that are needed.

TMKC (IN1) · 17.02.2019

Level 430 vs Level 8 .... feed mission .....

Exxy (INT1) · 17.02.2019

Those are my last 4 missions

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/n4/x34nbb0k9j05.png

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/sc/ecs6vlx2di2y.png

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/wz/boa90yfy2gix.png

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/uh/4pw7wuecu25w.png

It seems not too badly matched

I just realized i should have blurred the names :S sorry, first time using screenies

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 17.02.2019

this is what a level 20 in my co op had to compete against on even ground.
level 20 in my co op

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/xt/s3bm5su2ojkc.png

compared to 130

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/t0/prstccesxrz6.png

this would not be a problem if the formula was working how GGS said it was, again if it was working how GGS said it was.

This is a brand new player to the game only playing for a few of days and got to compete against level 130, good way to chase away new players. This player is trying to help co op , but is disheartened when gets very few points as the formula is NOT working how GGS said it was. Without massive amount of gold there is no way they can ever win.

Seeker1 (US1) · 17.02.2019

Byron Longford (AU1) said:

this is what a level 20 in my co op had to compete against on even ground.
level 20 in my co op

compared to 130

this would not be a problem if the formula was working how GGS said it was, again if it was working how GGS said it was.

This is a brand new player to the game only playing for a few of days and got to compete against level 130, good way to chase away new players. This player is trying to help co op , but is disheartened when gets very few points as the formula is NOT working how GGS said it was. Without massive amount of gold there is no way they can ever win.

...and you're able to log in another player's, level 20 farm at your co-op because account sharing is allowed?

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 17.02.2019

no they emailed to me.

here is 1 from my farm. in progress now

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/fa/3a3t9ubudewo.png

Seeker1 (US1) · 17.02.2019

IMO, I think if missions were setup so only similar level farms were matched together, then there would be a lot more solo missions or missions with fewer than 6 players, thus resulting in less of a ranking bonus.

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 17.02.2019

Agree 100%, but the that is not the problem, the problem is that the formula that GGS said was in place so in cases of mismatch the smaller farms would be better off with RP rewards if against large farms than if they were against other small farms and winning. This has been proven to be a lie, miss information, bad coding or some other error and need to be fixed.

Seeker1 (US1) · 17.02.2019

Byron Longford (AU1) said:

Agree 100%, but the that is not the problem, the problem is that the formula that GGS said was in place so in cases of mismatch the smaller farms would be better off with RP rewards if against large farms than if they were against other small farms and winning. This has been proven to be a lie, miss information, bad coding or some other error and need to be fixed.

Please link me to the "formula that GGS said was in place." I'd like to see this information. Thanks.

EDIT: Nevermind, I found it... so Im guessing Marowit works for GGS ?

Seeker1 (US1) · 17.02.2019

WascallyWabbit said:

@Shay1968 (US1) This is the way it was explained to us by Marowit last year:

Each player in a mission gets RP based on their own score & then, in addition, each (except the one in last place) also gets a % of the total RP earned by all the players.

Any players with 0 score are eliminated, so a mission of 6 players where 2 players have 0 score, will count as a mission of 4 players, with the 4th place player being "last".

The % of the total RP that each player earns, varies depending on the number of active players in the missions:
2 players = 100% - 0%
3 players = 100% - 50% - 0%
4 players = 100% - 90% - 10% - 0%
5 players = 100% - 90% - 40% - 10% - 0%
6 players = 100% - 90% - 80% - 20% - 10% - 0%

So as you can see, it is definitely much more beneficial for lower level players to be drawn again those with much higher scores & even big gold users, as long as they do not come in last place.
The reason that solo missions are a bad deal, is because the player in the mission with the lowest actual score (0's do not count) is deemed to be in "last" place & that is the only position that get 0% RP in addition to the RP for their score. (All other positions, get some RP based on the total scores of all players which as you know can sometimes be very high scores). - So the player in a solo mission, actually comes last.

5-10 Man (AU1) · 17.02.2019

Save everyone having to go back and look, here are the relevant posts...

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/59/qu22de908b2m.png

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6025126/uploads/editor/u9/fc6fdk43czma.png

Dark Underworld (AU1) · 17.02.2019

WascallyWabbit said:

Byron Longford (AU1) said:

@Southern (US1) then it is even worse that I thought that number in mission makes 0 difference. Oh boy the numbers people have huge error they have been covering up. We had been under impression something like my formula, where depending on what others do effects our RP. I think they need to employ someone better with maths to do their calculations. Time and time again, we find errors with their maths, I am presuming it is maths error, either that or they just keep on giving us lies until we find and prove the lie. I prefer to think it is just poor maths.

I myself do very few mission, but I do see the problem and agree with low level players complaint.

@Byron Longford (AU1) I can appreciate the upset over this issue, but to say they have been covering it up is uncalled for. When we showed the formula that Marowit gave us, to the current balancer, he agreed that that is how the scoring is supposed to work & was willing to look at any data we had showing otherwise. Southern has supplied that & the balancer is now checking the numbers for us.

Of all the different systems that they have tried for mission selections & scoring, the current one is by far the most fair to everyone, especially low level players, if it was working correctly, so lets see how his investigations go.

this was weeks ago and NO response from balancer

5-10 Man (AU1) · 17.02.2019

Yeah, and this thread started in June 2014. Somehow, one gets the impression GGS really just don't give a damn.

Mismatched Missions - Unfair?

Comments