Join the official Goodgame Big Farm Discord today!
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!
Comments
Now for the whole new system, I am really not sure how this will work as it would need to be implemented in such a way that if a player harvests more towards their score, it adds more reputation points to their score than to anyone else's. Otherwise, why would you bother harvesting if it is going to add more to your opponent's score if they are ahead of you? I haven't thought about it too much, but it would be extremely complicated to set up.
Also, if you ignore coming 1st in the mission, you get a lot more points from harvesting smaller amounts over multiple missions even if you are not winning them. If you are going to be put against players that have a similar ability to you, often you will end up with someone stronger as it's random and sometimes you will end up being the strongest. But the player with the larger farm doesn't always win the mission as well.
Finally, if we split the missions into different level groups, then it may force a longer wait for missions. Unfortunately, I don't think there are enough players doing missions to support this. But I don't even think it should be split based on levels. It should randomly group players into a mission based on their reputation point amounts. Also, it should be fixed so that getting 1st when no one harvests doesn't give you the equivalent of 3rd as the only reason you are getting a lower amount of points is because no one else did anything in the mission.
But you see, these are all things that are basically affecting the mission grouping system excluding finishing 1st by yourself. Implementing the system mentioned earlier means that now instead of getting points based off whatever rank you came and the amount you harvested, it is going to depend on how much everyone else harvested and it kind of becomes a fluctuating mess as to how many points you will get, particularly if the system is not well-designed and gives the players higher up more points than the lower ranks get if the lower ranks harvest additional items. This system at the moment is somewhat simple in general, you get a specific rank and a score and you get a certain number of points for that. That's why I really don't think that the system should change.
Uncle John has this completely correct. This IS the answer. Make it a TEAM effort.
Dividing by XP levels definitely won't fix it because XP doesn't make any difference. How much GOLD you buy is what makes the difference. I'm a level 400+ and I get beat by players at Level 100 all the time. People with 6 fields putting up 40,000 or 50,000 wildflowers. That can't be done without buying lots of GOLD.
But if you WANTED a heavy gold buyer to play in your mission because his huge harvests would make more points for you, even if you came in at 6th place, missions would be a totally different experience.
Now, the problem with making that change is this question: "What's the incentive for the gold buyer to make those huge harvests?"
If he can't beat the pants off everybody, why would he want to buy lots of gold to make sure he comes in at 1st place?
A couple of thoughts on that...
First, a whole lot of heavy gold buyers really love to help their teammates. They spend their gold often because it's good for everybody they're playing with. You see this inside the co-ops pretty often. The gold buyers don't cut down their production to the level of their lowest players -- instead they're producing like crazy to help the WHOLE co-op.
The other thought I have is that we could make 2 co-op championships. One would be competitive and work just like the missions work right now. The most ruthless, sneaky, dishonest ... and rich ... players would still win. And get lots of personal points for it. The other league would be the teamwork league.
We could alternate the 2 different coopchas the way the 2 Dream Worlds alternate.
If nothing else, a lot of questions would get finally answered -- such as which one do people like most? And which one sells more gold for BigFarm?
Maybe with those answers something could be figured out that worked for everyone.
As you say, "missions would be a totally different experience"
I would like to have the waiting-time reduced from "up to 5 minutes" to "up to 3 minutes" - if that was the case maybe I could do more than 6 missions inside the range of the activated stackmaster.
I would also like that I am ranked as a 1.place when I actually am nr. 1. As I have said earlier, I am not the one to blame for wanting to do something in the missions. It is either the systems lack of competence to put me in a group for the missions, OR it is a lack of people (which is not the case according to my team-members).
PLEASE, tell the team to look into this mess and come up with something so I don´t feel that I am punished. I don´t deserve that
if the waiting time is too long, cut the amount to get missions faster
it seems like the system first puts players together who dump similar amounts
if it doesn't find it, it takes a long time and missions with only 3 or fewer players arise
if the time is too long, it is advisable to level down the missons here
it takes 20-30 missions to let the system know the new quantity
i think on SKN1 there is nobody who play with your quantities:
the stacker only manages 20 pages
I don't want to play on AU
the selection criteria for the group in the missions is the delivery volume
so it happens that level 100 and level 900 are players in the group
reward choice this time, manor, I have 30+ in storage, co op apple 5 in storage and co op cherry 9 in storage. Yeah I really need these great rewards....lol
Nah , its really a matter of server's population
There is way more players on a german server compared to Australian or International server
And its why you will always almost get fast missions
But there is pro's and con's to all that , we're on international here, it can be slow at times, but its generally okay
And we have no problem competing , as we usually finish in top 20 of Master League , we're a really hard working team tho )
therefore, many level the missions down, so put small amounts into the missions between the CCs
Our co op of 38 members only 5 have more than 1M RP, MOST are less than 100k and our co op will be top 5 in gold league, that shows how few players on AU server that do missions
doesn't it make sense with only 70 active cc players to merge servers?
Note only 2 of top 12 are in Master League.
Here what it looks like on International
This is why I suggest that ML co op compete against each other in mission, at least then the ones on smaller servers that do want to compete in CC can do so, also why there should be an Individual challenge (like CC) with mission with the top 50 from each server competing against each other, for those who really want to do missions. These are not for me, I HATE CC but if they want players to continue to spend gold, this is my suggestion.