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
Actually - I was in the running for the top 3 and missed out - but was happy when I found out, if I did win - I would have been disappointed.
Besides that - it is not about if you win it or not - it is about not knowing what it is you will or wont win.
Can I remind you - you are yet to clarify this.
Asking for who of the complainers actually won is pretty outright ******* scrap that...
Let me outline a few reasons for why this is the case.
1. This is a discussion forum. We, as the players, are free to discuss the merits, objections, problems, possible solutions, etc. of any relevant issue. We do not have to be affected by something to be able to have an opinion on it (if that was not already abundantly clear!) So it's not clear at all to me why the fact that only Wokkel has weighed in on this as a Top 3 winner has any bearing on anything at all.
2. Whether they are aware or not, the top 3 are affected. Just because Wokkel is the only one who has spoken out about this does not mean that this is not problematic. Suppose you buy something and are short-changed, but you don't notice it. That doesn't mean that nothing wrong has happened. Likewise, in this case, something wrong has still happened; it is irrelevant whether or not the top 3 have said anything or are even aware of the harm done to them.
Or it might be that they are aware but haven't said anything because, as we have already discussed, the forums are not very well frequented. Or what they have wanted to say has already been said. Or whatever other reason. But their motives for not posting should not be relevant at all.
3. Past evidence does not predict future action. Just because past CD winners haven't said anything doesn't mean that future ones will not. I can imagine that if any of the people who have taken part in these discussions were in the top three, you'd be pretty certain to hear about it! Being quiet does not mean that the winners are complacent or actually think they got what they were entitled to.
Also, it sounds like that the lack of clarity in the wording is even turning off people from actually competing for the Top 3, and that sounds like a lose-lose situation for both GGS and the players.
4. The elephant in the room. I don't know if this is just me, but I feel like if it is indeed the case that only Wokkel has said anything as a member of the Top 3 on the forums, the next move by GGS will be something like "See, what are you all complaining about. The Top 3 aren't saying anything, so why should you? You are in the minority!", which again is just dismissing a legitimate concern. I hope this is not the case, but I'm not sure what else the information on whether the Top 3 take part in this discussion is useful for at all.
Or am I overthinking it?
All that checking, processing and what not and a simple thing like what "top 100" actually means is missed. C'mon now.
LMAO! Oh Malreyn, you sure do have a way with words. First you say you "forgot" about one of the most controversial threads this forum has seen (after commenting on it, I might add) and then you follow it with a statement that, basically, belittles everyone that has expressed concern over this event simply because you feel there's a low number of complaints from the actual winners. Of course there's going to be less complaints from them because there's only 3 "Top 3" winners each time this event runs.
At this point, a lot of the negative responses you are getting from people are due to the way you are handling this topic and the responses you are giving players as community manager.
I thought there were 3 winners per server? So that's 3 x however many servers (6? 7?). Still a low number though.
Darnit, you're right. I missed the "per server" part.
Or is it the top 3 servers? (but really only the 1st one)
or is it the top 3 on the top 3 servers but not including the bottom 3?
maybe the top 3 players through all servers?
ouch, my head hurts
I want to highlight something here, and Lord Shivans comment actually make a good base for it.
If i don't collect the data, then how are we expected to make an assessment? I already stated a number of times that the changes are being made, but i need to be able to colelct data for the next review meeting to be able to present it. Personally i can't believe how offended so many of you seem to be at an attempt from me to collect some data. I asked a simple question and more people have attacked me for it than have taken the time to consider what it actually means. I am here through all this trying to provide information and improve processes to make sure that better information gets fed through, but for that, i need your help which i can't get unless people actually want to be helped.
Another point I'd like to make -
I never said anywhere that i had forgotten the thread, simply that i hadn't thought of Wokkel when i made the statement that personally i hadn't seen any complaints from people who had the fountain. At the time i had been going through the support ticket system looking for data there. However i believe this highlights the point that i'm getting the feeling my inforamtion and statements are not being correctly read since i've seen a few incorrect quote and questions being asked over and over again. If you feel i am not giving you the information you are looking for then you need to let me know. If you want specific answers then it is better if you actually ask specific questions.
I won't be commenting on this thread again today but will look at it when i am back at the office tomorrow. In that time i would like to ask that people read the information that has already been shared in this thread and then maybe we can all have a fresh start discussing the issue tomorrow.
Regards,
Ethan
ROFLOL. Hilarious!
Hi Ethan,
With due respect, this goes both ways.
We have lots of questions of you, and it sometimes seems (to us) that you are not answering some of them. So, we might ask them again. Or, you might think you've answered some of the questions, but maybe not to the relevant degree or level of specificity sought. If someone is asking what you think is the same question, maybe they did not understand your response the first time, or it is a follow up question or they are asking for more details.
Just as you want us to let you know when you are not providing us with the right information, I think that it's also fair that you tell us when you think we are not providing you with the right information for you to do your job, or if you don't understand something that we've asked.
Jay
The way you present your questions and comments also has to be monitored, even more so given that you are community manager. You have rules on how we should present ourselves on these forums and I'm sure you do too. I know it's not the easiest job trying control a disgruntled mob and help them but it has to be done in a matter that doesn't fuel the fire.
Your previous comment stated that you were simply "curious" about whether the people complaining were ever in the winning circle. Considering some of your previous comments about this topic and some of the responses you gave, people became defensive and probably thought (I know I did) that it this was just another way for you to validate the insignificance of players' concerns over this matter. If you would've presented it from the very beginning as data you wish to collect so that it can be presented to GGS and further move this issue to the front lines then I'm sure people would've taken it with a more positive attitude. Once again, clarity is the ongoing issue here.
Thank you, thank you! Don't forget to tip your waitress
You have hard DATA as to who got which rewards and yet you are asking on here? Clearly -- You do not understand your audience.
And even then dont understand that other players then the winners complain... come on... I guess i WONT be going for top 3 place next time. Spending 12 million for 90 happiness??? If you dont understand the other players concerns about that???
Well seriously i am out of words at the moment... probably for the best... [i dont want a forum ban...]
Or hey, they could even put it in that Racing Farmer ad that we see like 352395623956239659236 times per day. (Yes, that may be a precise number of how many times a day I log in.)
I don't know. Changing the wording on anything could take just as long, according to their extensive process
Here is a direct question:
Could you please outline and explain how GGS defines the below terms:
"Top 3"
"Top 100"
"Participant"
Thank you. I hope this is direct and to the point enough and that we can get an explanation for how GGS describes these terms.
I have 1 question.
If you have 3000 points you have a green V (dont know the english word for vinkje sorry) at the price you get.
So if someone in the top 3 only get that green V on the deco, its clear that they only get the deco right?
So the explanation of the first 100 is still wrong, but you can see what you get at the end.
I am not in the top 3 or 100 so if somebody else knows for sure, please tell.
greetz
and it also says: YOUR REWARD.
So people not knowing what kind of reward they're getting, doesn't make sense.
But yes, the wording is still incorrect
If you feel i haven't answered something clear enough then you should just tell me. I'm only human and we all make mistakes, but if nobody points out to me the problem then it makes it harder to deal with.
The reason i didn't was because i was trying to avoid the response that I actually got for it. I'll admit, it didn't work as i expected.
And where would i have got that from if i don't ask. Sure, i could ask the developers for a list of all the winners, and then remove the data for the servers that are not part of this community and then cross reference that against the complaints. Or i could just ask here, get the data quicker and then actually be able to work out the details sooner.
Monica795924, with all due respect if you actually took the time to read then you wouldn't have to be disappointed. You agreesively tell me to read it to collect data, but then you don't take your own advice to get information. How many time have i said now its being changed? 4 times in this thread alone. How is that not a resolution?
Our definition is the same as anyone elses. It has already been well established that there is an issue with the choice of words that was used and that it is being changed.
Regards,
Ethan
You do realise; then by your very definition the Top Three are entitled to Well Spring, Top 100 Prize and the participant prize.
The Top 100 are entitled to the prize and the participant prize.
Then everyone else just the participant prize.
Thus; GGS having the same definition and understanding three is the issue will then mean that you will have to credit the people the correct prize; by your own definition.
I am interested in this discussion continuing, but considering we keep revisiting the same points i don't really see it as a discussion.
Regards,
Ethan
I don't see it as clarity anymore - it is completely wrong.
Merriam-Webster can provide the following definitions below:
Participant: one that participates
Top: the highest position (as in rank or achievement) (2) : a person or thing at the top
100: a number equal to 10 times 10
3: something having three units or members
The Charity Event then has a description at the point of entering (which should be accurate and explain what you are entering into; as with any competition or event - I assure you compared to the prizes received - it is not, and knowing this GGS continued to run the event)
Orphanage charity drive!
The mayor has called for a big donation campaign for the orphanage.
If you donate generously then you will receive a reward for participating As the top 3 and top 100 are still participating they are participants.
The top 100 and top 3 will receive a special reward.
For a minimum of 3,000 points - Rose seeds x 70 Every entrant has put in a minimum of 3,000 points and are participants so, should receive this.
For the top 3:
Well spring of charity this you receive..
For the top 100 top 100 would still include the top three.:
Rose seeds: X140
Super humus: X70
Super pig feed: X700
I know for you this is seen as not clear.
BUT, there is an error and people were mislead and were caused a loss by this error.
Regardless of the error (wording or prize giving) - it should be rectified.
It is the same as having a 50% bonus on gold and only giving 5% because you forgot to put the dot in there. An error was made and the loss incurred should be rectified.
I think when you meet with the developers who came up with this event that you should go around the room and ask them what top 100, top 3 and participant means. Also, make sure they realise for next time that Top 3 is inclusive of both AND that Top 100 is also inclusive of participant.
Maybe then they will get it.
It is not unclear - it is incorrect.