Home Discussion Corner for the official announcements

Update 18.03. - Happiness achieved

11358

Comments

  • uksharon (GB1)uksharon (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,125
    edited 14.03.2014
    exactly meaning demolish more cow shed and chicken coops and apples to free workers to be able to demolish the houses then when i have the correct amount of houses and get the architect to upgrade the rest that are left i could then start and build some cow shed back erm no way how do i delete my account from the forum i know how to delete game.

  • FrodoPlayer3FrodoPlayer3 Posts: 15
    edited 14.03.2014
    Latten wrote: »
    Nah, our players are really clever for figuring this out, no discussion here. It was us who missed this completely, that's why we'll have to change up the game for it to work with everything else.

    Dear Latten,
    There are around 8000 posts on this thread! Over 80% players asking for the same thing!
    Why can't you find a way around this! There is whole team of designers at GGS and none of them can come up with a better idea than this one or even a tweak!
    Think what a solution to this problem, show us players some consideration...
    Lets look forward to upcoming progress! please find a way out of this!
    FrodoPlayer @ en 1
  • monica79538monica79538 Posts: 1,932
    edited 14.03.2014
    uksharon--i asked that few months earlier in a pm. I think they expect us to just not log in anymore.
    monica7953 @ us1
    My heart got left on a different farm game time to shrink it a little--I don't think most remember that one anymore ;(
  • uksharon (GB1)uksharon (GB1) GB1 Posts: 1,125
    edited 14.03.2014
    ok monica i will just delete all my stuff in there and put false email address then thanks

  • monica79538monica79538 Posts: 1,932
    edited 14.03.2014
    I suppose everyone is angry (& rightly so) about me trying to help out explain the house/deco relationship so that people could get a good start in the game. A whole year of my life is virtually wasted. I spent way too many hours on this game and forum. Geez ;(

    uksharon--I don't think i answered your question correctly--Please don't delete it all. I think i am done with it all here.
    monica7953 @ us1
    My heart got left on a different farm game time to shrink it a little--I don't think most remember that one anymore ;(
  • FarmingGamerFarmingGamer Posts: 107
    edited 14.03.2014
    Why don't you think something else like

    Since this is problem only with main farm "expand main farm plots" and then place the decorations back onto farm.Give them 3 months time or whatever the time and after 3 months 500% costs apply.something like that.Thats the best I can think about.go for a poll ask everyone or think something in similar lines
    FarmingGamer @ in 1
  • paultje19752paultje19752 Posts: 217
    edited 14.03.2014
    Latten wrote: »
    It's never 100% fair to take away something from a player, be it as little as it hopefully will be. So yeah, if you pin that question down on me, I will of course say that it isn't fair for players who are at 100% right now, if you look at them apart from everything else.
    But, in the bigger picture, yes, I'd say it is fair for the playerbase as a whole, due to the reasons I listed.

    I honestly don't know if there would be an option that would be fair to absolutely everyone. I know though that our game designers and balancers tried to touch this issue as fair as possible, and to come up with a solution that is probably best for the game alltogether, even if it might raise some questions first.


    i bought libary books wheat and cowfeed to can support my 19 cows and buy also milk liberay.

    you willing to refund that gold cause with this update its useless when i break down mine cows......

    you think thats only slightly fear to first let people belief they need the books and then 2 weeks later BOEM change the rules and i got left with someting i not need?

    i think ggs never thought of this downside...and if they did and choose to not refunding then even more shame on them
    paultje1975 @ nl 1
    paultje1975 @ us 1
    Want to be part of the nr1 fun co-op on the US1 server? mission cafe is accepting applications RIGHT NOW!
  • Foxenas (US1)Foxenas (US1) Posts: 9
    edited 14.03.2014
    It is clear, that regardless overwelmingly negative reaction, GG couldn't care less and going to procede with changes.
    The only question remains: When I drop the game, I don't want to leave my account behind to be used by GG to inflate player number. How can I eliminate my farm completely with no trace left behind?
    Foxenas @ us 1
  • Rusty Farmer (AU1)Rusty Farmer (AU1) AU1 Posts: 1,651
    edited 14.03.2014
    ...Instead we're raising the ingame cost of playing this way, so the whole thing changes from being "a broken rule" to a completely valid playstyle, that comes with a few repercussions as well as with a highly increased production rate and lots of other positives when it comes to missions or projects. We try to make a mechanic that might be called exploitative into a completely fair option. I don't think that's a bad thing.

    Sounds to me, if I'm reading this correctly, that a mass production farm is still a viable option but more expensive and will now become a more challenging choice than an easy one. This is much better than simply shutting it down altogether. I think maybe GGS have been misunderstood here - they are letting this strategy continue, but at a higher price.

    So let's all calm down and wait until after the update to see just what effect the change will really have.
  • Foxenas (US1)Foxenas (US1) Posts: 9
    edited 14.03.2014
    Calm down? Why? Moderators spent so much effort infuriating us, it would be unrespectful of their hard work.
    Foxenas @ us 1
  • amaprincess1 (US1)amaprincess1 (US1) Posts: 636
    edited 14.03.2014
    I'm taking a different and completely good faith approach. Money where my mouth is. I just bought 69,000 gold. I have done my part. Now....

    Listen to us and kill this update. That's your part, GGS.

    If the update goes through, this will have been my last purchase. If the update is 86'd, I keep on buying. We are playing completely within the rules, please do not change them after so many people have spent time, money and effort developing their farms within the constructs of the game. I'm sorry that you feel that you made a mistake in this aspect of the game's development. NOW is not the time to do anything about it, however. Should have done it BEFORE people spent months and months and untold $$$ developing production farms. Too late, but guess what? The "flaw" KEEPS LOYAL CUSTOMERS INTERESTED AND SPENDING MONEY!!!!! Why do you want to screw with that????!!!
  • m22m22 Posts: 6
    edited 14.03.2014
    So this is me doing the talking first...

    Im on level 43 and I have to say I love the game so I have decided to joined a coop no4 in uk1 ranking and get seriously to work,it was perfect;) our coop is full of successful,amazing people who love this game just like I do;) so naturally I was contemplating which strategy to chose and how much I will have to spend to get me there,apart from what I already did(2 months of my life &150 euro)... and then this update comes up... I start to read about it in this and many, many, other posts and I decided to take my time to understand first what happened with out jumping to conclusions ..after two days spend on reading and talking to other people this is what came to my head

    - based on what know do I leave this game before I spend more of my hard earned money and best years of my life to become ultra hardcore player only to discover that i support and promote a company that acts like a bully and don't care about its most valuable assets ?

    -or for what is worth I will try to forget for a moment about damage that is done because we all do mistakes and because im so angry that my logic is gone and we all know that doesn't help... and maybe first I should give them ONE chance to do something in order to fix it.

    I decided to go and sleep over it...

    after good night sleep this is what came to my head-this is the part where I do...

    1-my dear GGS just so you know who you dealing with,what all above stands for and what its at stake here let me introduce my self,my name is Marcin Soltysiak I have been playing Vgames since I was 5years old i'm 33 now so that's 28 years , tens and for sure will be hundreds of thousands of dollars spend in the process... me and people like me are sole reason that company's like this one exist... my message for u is - I find this update a poor choice and highly recommend that you reconsider or scrape it completely,non the less if you decide to go thru with this update as it is,or if u will fail to find a compromise,I repeat IF U FAIL to find compromise you will prove to me beyond any doubt that u have lost or never had any values which people like me hold dear to our hearts... its simple as that. And so u will leave me with no choice but to cancel my account and my support for whatever products that this company has to offer and I had in mind to be part of, now or in the future effective immediately. Also I will think twice to be part of any of affiliates of yours if any.

    2-Further more for the sake of balance I will do my best to make aware of existence of this tread in this forum (with out taking part any of the sides), with help of all social media known to man to ALL those but not limited to who my be concerned about this situation outcome , in order to give them chance to express themselves on the mater with sole purpose to find solution suitable to all.

    With Regards .MS

    PS;!!!IMPORTANT!!!all what has been written above is designed in order to reflect my opinion on the mater of recent update,and performance, and represent only my personal opinion on it.its not meant in any way to influence others to follow my course of action.
    m22 @ en 1
  • flitchflitch Posts: 8
    edited 14.03.2014
    You truly need to not just listen to what you are being told GGS, you need to change your decision. Pumping Boy along with many other coop leaders is correct re: support from other coops. Last night in a space of an hour the top 200 coops were contacted asking if they agreed with the changes and if they were voting with their feet/ wallet, or happy with the changes. Of those that responded (cant use the word embargo as it worries GGS[/B](87% stated they would take a well deserved break from buying gold, even though they knew it may affect the coops current ranking.

    No doubt the affect of the actions that many coops are now taking will result in the profit margin for GGS to plummet, and many so called 'special offers' will be available in an attempt to break peoples resolve.

    Some of our coop members do have mega farms some are heavy gold users, other do not use gold. The aforementioned can manage the changes, the point is Why Should They!!!! As many have said already, you can not change the game strategy when the rules have already been defined and players are playing within the rules.

    The most positive aspect of the proposed change is the way it has united coops, and believe us GGS, we are a force to be reckoned with.

    There is a well known quote attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984), which for those that do not believe the manner in which game players are being treated will affect them at some stage should take heed of

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist
    .

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.


    Happyhens Cooperative currently ranked # 4 and more than happy to lose the ranking to defend a principle
    flitch @ en 1
  • paultje19752paultje19752 Posts: 217
    edited 14.03.2014
    Latten wrote: »

    Of course those players didn't break rules on purpose, we are completely aware of that. If we wanted to actually "punish" them, we could just have set up a building limit for production buildings, some weird "you have to build more deco" messages, even just banned those players without further explanation (and yes, I have indeed seen that on other online games when players discovered a "exploit", in lack of a better word).

    you are serious on this one????
    was there even a slight thought of deleting the production farms without warning??
    give me a few days to get breath again cause i boiling now

    but i really wanna know what happen if players keep there production farms even with 500%?
    paultje1975 @ nl 1
    paultje1975 @ us 1
    Want to be part of the nr1 fun co-op on the US1 server? mission cafe is accepting applications RIGHT NOW!
  • EricaJ (US1)EricaJ (US1) Posts: 202
    edited 14.03.2014
    Firstly - the pop-up / covering the screen with offers insanity seems to have subsided, so thanks for that. In their absence, I'm back to playing and enjoying this game again - if you continue with the current rate, I might actually start reading them again, and perhaps even take you up on some of them. :)

    On Topic: From a game designer's point of view, I believe these changes are desirable and necessary.

    It never made much sense to me that I could reduce my operating costs to zero by placing decorations. It also created a false economy in the minds of many players who believe that -100% is a worthwhile goal, when the truth is that in many cases, their farms could be both more productive and more profitable if they built more production facilities and paid a little in operating costs.

    On the other end of the scale, +300% operating costs was an arbitrarily chosen bottom. I would think that a farm with massive numbers of workers and production facilities with no decorations whatsoever would have workers going on strike and walking off the job, and production halted on at least some of the buildings. Of course, +500% is also an arbitrarily chosen bottom - I would think the strategic value of those decisions would be more interesting if the actual bottom would make the farm lose money. At that point, players would need to decide how much $ they could afford to lose on that farm in exchange for a little more production - but I suppose a bottom is necessary for those players who don't want to do the math calculations to figure it all out.

    So - although I do agree with the changes in the formula, I can also appreciate the frustration and anger of those players who will be instantly impacted in a very big way by it. I think GGS should have given much more than a few days' notice for a change of this magnitude.

    i don't see it as a gold grab - the best decorations in the game are offered for free by completing events - and most of the people who have built +300% farms probably also have a lot of decorations in their inventories and dropboxes. If they cannot accept the +500% operating costs, they need only to destroy a few buildings and replace them with decorations already in inventory.

    A few general notes about spending real money on game gold: It's entertainment expense. GGS does give players some gold options that offer long-term benefits: such as the water tower, workshop, blue-roofed housing, library boosts, land expansions, and decorations. Gold spent to rush building or production is not an investment, but an expenditure to receive an immediate benefit in not having to wait for the cycle to complete. (I admit it does feel a little different when the Architect comes calling, though - because rushing building at that time makes it possible to get more upgrades in the same Architect visit.)

    Online gaming is all about change, and adapting to it. While I don't really like all of the changes, I do applaud GGS for keeping the game fresh and interesting. GGS is not really moving the goalposts, because they did not set those goalposts - players are free to set their own personal goals in this game. I suppose it is true that something that was formerly achievable (zero operating costs) will no longer be possible, thus causing players working toward that goal to be unable to get there - but that goal was chosen by the players, not GGS.

    Anyhoo - JMHO.
    EricaJ @ us 1
  • momoma (GB1)momoma (GB1) Posts: 29
    edited 14.03.2014
    Oh, please go, you most valuable, brilliant... or just golden players... and leave this charming world to humble ones!
    olja
  • randy60 (US1)randy60 (US1) US1 Posts: 66
    edited 14.03.2014
    GGs gave us 5 days to get our farms ready for the change I think that is pretty fair.
    randy60 @ us 1
    [IMG[/IMG]
  • jaystarr2jaystarr2 Posts: 1,657
    edited 14.03.2014
    Foxenas2 wrote: »
    Calm down? Why? Moderators spent so much effort infuriating us, it would be unrespectful of their hard work.

    This made me laugh.

    I'd be feeling much better about this update if instead of all this talk about players "breaking rules" about how the game was "supposed to be played" and whatnot, but rather if the people at GGS just actually said something like "we didn't think of people playing in this way and we screwed up, oops, sorry, and now we have to bring in something to fix it but you won't like it" or something like that, instead of pinning it on players who have come up with novel ways to farm and blaming them for ruining it for everyone, or making up some cock and bull story about how our pixel workers have unionized to complain about the lack of decos or something. :P

    What's the word I'm looking for? Oh, that's right: accountability.
    b3vhjn.jpg
    jaystarr2 @ us 1

    Want to be part of a top-ranked co-op on the US1 server? Success Team is accepting applications RIGHT NOW! Click here to check it out!
  • Colburk552Colburk552 Posts: 44
    edited 14.03.2014
    What? GGS is now requiring people to have decorations on their farm? This is awfully like the government requiring U.S. citizens to have health insurance. Never mind that not everybody can afford health insurance, or even if they could it wouldn't pay anything when they needed it. It was never stated that I had to have decorations. Only that it would be good idea since production costs would be less that way. At any rate, with a maxed farm like mine with almost twice as much production I make the same amount of cash because the +300% eats half my income. Why are you changing the "penalty" to +500%? Is it because farms like mine are "unfair" to other players? How so? Because I can produce more? Like I said I get no benefit for a maxed farm although my co-op does because I can help to finish co-op projects better. Do you know what actually is "unfair" to other players? Gold Barns! Fertile Fields! Gold Decos! The stupid gold mining licenses that one can only get by buying extraordinary amounts of gold! These things allow golders to produce a heck of a lot more stuff and a heck of a lot more cash with it that non-golders have to try and compete with. These are the things that give "unfair" advantages to certain players; especially during the missions. If maxed farms are "unfair" then blue farms are much, more, unfair. At any rate, maxed farms are the only way that non-golders can even try to compete with golders. Please don't change the happiness bar from what it is now!
    Colburk55 @ us 1
  • ange742ange742 Posts: 12
    edited 14.03.2014
    EricaJ wrote: »
    Firstly - the pop-up / covering the screen with offers insanity seems to have subsided, so thanks for that. In their absence, I'm back to playing and enjoying this game again - if you continue with the current rate, I might actually start reading them again, and perhaps even take you up on some of them. :)

    On Topic: From a game designer's point of view, I believe these changes are desirable and necessary.

    It never made much sense to me that I could reduce my operating costs to zero by placing decorations. It also created a false economy in the minds of many players who believe that -100% is a worthwhile goal, when the truth is that in many cases, their farms could be both more productive and more profitable if they built more production facilities and paid a little in operating costs.

    On the other end of the scale, +300% operating costs was an arbitrarily chosen bottom. I would think that a farm with massive numbers of workers and production facilities with no decorations whatsoever would have workers going on strike and walking off the job, and production halted on at least some of the buildings. Of course, +500% is also an arbitrarily chosen bottom - I would think the strategic value of those decisions would be more interesting if the actual bottom would make the farm lose money. At that point, players would need to decide how much $ they could afford to lose on that farm in exchange for a little more production - but I suppose a bottom is necessary for those players who don't want to do the math calculations to figure it all out.

    So - although I do agree with the changes in the formula, I can also appreciate the frustration and anger of those players who will be instantly impacted in a very big way by it. I think GGS should have given much more than a few days' notice for a change of this magnitude.

    i don't see it as a gold grab - the best decorations in the game are offered for free by completing events - and most of the people who have built +300% farms probably also have a lot of decorations in their inventories and dropboxes. If they cannot accept the +500% operating costs, they need only to destroy a few buildings and replace them with decorations already in inventory.

    A few general notes about spending real money on game gold: It's entertainment expense. GGS does give players some gold options that offer long-term benefits: such as the water tower, workshop, blue-roofed housing, library boosts, land expansions, and decorations. Gold spent to rush building or production is not an investment, but an expenditure to receive an immediate benefit in not having to wait for the cycle to complete. (I admit it does feel a little different when the Architect comes calling, though - because rushing building at that time makes it possible to get more upgrades in the same Architect visit.)

    Online gaming is all about change, and adapting to it. While I don't really like all of the changes, I do applaud GGS for keeping the game fresh and interesting. GGS is not really moving the goalposts, because they did not set those goalposts - players are free to set their own personal goals in this game. I suppose it is true that something that was formerly achievable (zero operating costs) will no longer be possible, thus causing players working toward that goal to be unable to get there - but that goal was chosen by the players, not GGS.

    Anyhoo - JMHO.[/QUOTE
    My thoughts exactly. I think people are overreacting to the situation and should wait until the update happens to voice their opinion. What pains me the most is that these comments are influencing others that do not understand how little this will effect everyone in the grands scheme of things.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC][email protected]
  • paultje19752paultje19752 Posts: 217
    edited 14.03.2014
    Colburk552 wrote: »
    What? GGS is now requiring people to have decorations on their farm? This is awfully like the government requiring U.S. citizens to have health insurance. Never mind that not everybody can afford health insurance, or even if they could it wouldn't pay anything when they needed it. It was never stated that I had to have decorations. Only that it would be good idea since production costs would be less that way. At any rate, with a maxed farm like mine with almost twice as much production I make the same amount of cash because the +300% eats half my income. Why are you changing the "penalty" to +500%? Is it because farms like mine are "unfair" to other players? How so? Because I can produce more? Like I said I get no benefit for a maxed farm although my co-op does because I can help to finish co-op projects better. Do you know what actually is "unfair" to other players? Gold Barns! Fertile Fields! Gold Decos! The stupid gold mining licenses that one can only get by buying extraordinary amounts of gold! These things allow golders to produce a heck of a lot more stuff and a heck of a lot more cash with it that non-golders have to try and compete with. These are the things that give "unfair" advantages to certain players; especially during the missions. If maxed farms are "unfair" then blue farms are much, more, unfair. At any rate, maxed farms are the only way that non-golders can even try to compete with golders. Please don't change the happiness bar from what it is now!

    so true so true
    paultje1975 @ nl 1
    paultje1975 @ us 1
    Want to be part of the nr1 fun co-op on the US1 server? mission cafe is accepting applications RIGHT NOW!
  • Colburk552Colburk552 Posts: 44
    edited 14.03.2014
    Latten once before had smiled on maxed farms saying:
    Latten wrote: »
    I have to say I never thought of the option to play the game this way :) It's great what you guys are able to figure out over time, really!

    Now he condemns it as "unfair." Latten, which is it now? Is maxed farming a "great option to play the game" or is it "unfair to other farmers"? GGS is displaying communist tendencies under the cover of fairness.

    "Oh, do you poor fatherless child that makes his living by stealing radios think that it is unfair for that guy over there to wear thousand dollar suits and drive million dollar cars? Okay, Mr. Gov. over here will take that away from him. Never mind that it is within his rights to own thousand dollar suits and so forth."

    Never mind that is (was anyways) within a non-golder's rightful choice to choose not to have decos on main farm. Now you are penalizing us for that choice just like communist graduated income tax penalizes the upper middle-class (small business owners) for their hard word and their risky investment because they make an "unfair amount of money."

    puh-leaz
    Colburk55 @ us 1
  • bigpapa12bigpapa12 Posts: 87
    edited 14.03.2014
    uksharon3 wrote: »
    exactly meaning demolish more cow shed and chicken coops and apples to free workers to be able to demolish the houses then when i have the correct amount of houses and get the architect to upgrade the rest that are left i could then start and build some cow shed back erm no way how do i delete my account from the forum i know how to delete game.

    simple just don't log on anymore and everyone that wants to quit go ahead and do so. Oh wait your not going to, really, but doesn't this complaining all the time make it much better cause in the real world that's what people like to do most anyway.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]bigpapa1 @ us 1
  • Gwendolen (US1)Gwendolen (US1) Posts: 1,268
    edited 14.03.2014
    Colburk552 wrote: »

    Now he condemns it as "unfair." Latten, which is it now? Is maxed farming a "great option to play the game" or is it "unfair to other farmers"? GGS is displaying communist tendencies under the cover of fairness.

    I have the vague feeling Latten still doesn't think it's wrong or unfair, he is just the one having to bring us the "great" news in as political correct terms as possible. Since he's a CM, not a dev, he probably didn't come up with this "brilliant" plan.
    Gwendolen @ US1

    Proud leader of Success Team
  • Asid (GB1)Asid (GB1) Posts: 31
    edited 14.03.2014
    I really dont want them messing up the happiness formula. Its working fine. I really dont like the sounds of what they are planning. They are just making it more gold friendly game overall. I guess Time to find a new game to play.
    Asid @ en 1
  • Marcella59Marcella59 Posts: 59
    edited 14.03.2014
    I'm wondering if this doesn't have something to do with how quick those of us who run +300% farms are finishing these events. I'm on step 5 and no gold was involved. I always run 2 cherries, I built 2 extra. I saved those cherries until I got to the blossom step. I run 4 pigs, I built 4 more. My farm is totally set up to run events, and yes, this means I run at +300. Which means I help my co-op in the process. Just something to think about.
    Marcella59 @ us 1
  • Instant Ocean (US1)Instant Ocean (US1) US1 Posts: 189
    edited 14.03.2014
    JAYSTAR : As usual, so well put my friend. You are a witty one and expressed part of what I was about to say.

    LATTEN: Explain this one to me because so far, you have failed to do so. I get that GGS wish to correct a screw up that THEY designed and never foreseen... Why am I not surprised here... I dunno. But this is FACTUAL as you said it numerous times. Now, to me that is fine and by looking at how the game is set up, it is true that it was most def not intended to be played with no decos. So let's say I'm fine about that part of the GGS solution of making it to -500% if you play this way. BUT...

    What I do not get, and this is what I want you to answer me please: Why do you penalize players that ARE PLAYING the game the WAY GGS WANTED TO and achieved -100% happiness? WHY? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And please don't tell me that your team of genius devs cannot figure out a way to make it so this correction doesn't affect players that are playing the game as intended. I will not buy it. NEVER.

    For one thing, and trust me, I almost fell off my chair, I agree with Monica here. You guys keep giving us things we never asked for and give some BS stuff we don't want and to top it off, GGS always finds a way to screw it up with bugs and are not fixing them. Why don't you fix the damn game and then, implement stuff players want. But no, this would be too logical. Instead, turn around and penalize the whole group for a small group of players you claim are exploiting the game... Well sorry mate, but if it is allowed, it is not an exploit. Now you decide to change it as it was not your intention. FINE, change it.... But don't penalize players that are not using that FAULT that GGS created.

    I am eager to hear you on that one mate... and please, be precise.

    PS: I'm not angry at you Latten as you have nothing to do with all this... but sorry mate, you are the First Line of GGS and our go-to person. Also, I might sound a bit "demanding". Well guess what buddy... I have spent hundreds of dollars on that game... I'm entitled to DEMAND a clear and logical explanation as why my investment will now lose its value. How the hell will you compensate me? If you were a company that I hired for services, I'd sue your.... "rear-end" (talking about GGS here, not you personally).

    Instant Ocean
    Leader of Funny Times
  • bigpapa12bigpapa12 Posts: 87
    edited 14.03.2014
    Marcella59 wrote: »
    I'm wondering if this doesn't have something to do with how quick those of us who run +300% farms are finishing these events. I'm on step 5 and no gold was involved. I always run 2 cherries, I built 2 extra. I saved those cherries until I got to the blossom step. I run 4 pigs, I built 4 more. My farm is totally set up to run events, and yes, this means I run at +300. Which means I help my co-op in the process. Just something to think about.

    it has nothing to do with these events. people with "normal" farms have no problem finishing the events either. What's it matter how fast you finish the event anyway you get the same prize if you finish 3 days early or right on time.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]bigpapa1 @ us 1
  • bigpapa12bigpapa12 Posts: 87
    edited 14.03.2014
    JAYSTAR : As usual, so well put my friend. You are a witty one and expressed part of what I was about to say.

    LATTEN: Explain this one to me because so far, you have failed to do so. I get that GGS wish to correct a screw up that THEY designed and never foreseen... Why am I not surprised here... I dunno. But this is FACTUAL as you said it numerous times. Now, to me that is fine and by looking at how the game is set up, it is true that it was most def not intended to be played with no decos. So let's say I'm fine about that part of the GGS solution of making it to -500% if you play this way. BUT...

    What I do not get, and this is what I want you to answer me please: Why do you penalize players that ARE PLAYING the game the WAY GGS WANTED TO and achieved -100% happiness? WHY? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. And please don't tell me that your team of genius devs cannot figure out a way to make it so this correction doesn't affect players that are playing the game as intended. I will not buy it. NEVER.

    For one thing, and trust me, I almost fell off my chair, I agree with Monica here. You guys keep giving us things we never asked for and give some BS stuff we don't want and to top it off, GGS always finds a way to screw it up with bugs and are not fixing them. Why don't you fix the damn game and then, implement stuff players want. But no, this would be too logical. Instead, turn around and penalize the whole group for a small group of players you claim are exploiting the game... Well sorry mate, but if it is allowed, it is not an exploit. Now you decide to change it as it was not your intention. FINE, change it.... But don't penalize players that are not using that FAULT that GGS created.

    I am eager to hear you on that one mate... and please, be precise.

    PS: I'm not angry at you Latten as you have nothing to do with all this... but sorry mate, you are the First Line of GGS and our go-to person. Also, I might sound a bit "demanding". Well guess what buddy... I have spent hundreds of dollars on that game... I'm entitled to DEMAND a clear and logical explanation as why my investment will now lose its value. How the hell will you compensate me? If you were a company that I hired for services, I'd sue your.... "rear-end" (talking about GGS here, not you personally).

    Instant Ocean
    Leader of Funny Times

    for the love of [email protected] come on. I would suggest everyone get every little nit picky thing they can off their chest now while there is still a message board to freely complain on. As I see it there won't be much longer. There have been so many changes to the game which all effect most players in some shape or form. Now not that I read these message boards very much cause it's just a wine fest and personally wine upsets my stomach, but there are a few issues that I know of that I have never seen complained about on here. I am not going to state what these are because you all can see the excitement that is created from a mob mentality of people. Are we going with the one who cries the loudest wins?


    Post edited by Kat Nip
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]bigpapa1 @ us 1
  • SystemSystem Posts: 106,509
    edited 14.03.2014
    Pixie, I apologise if I didn't phrase it correctly - there is no threat, just a heads up that if someone is going about organising a gold purchasing boycott, there can be some serious consequences. I really like this community and I don't want anyone to end up in trouble for doing something like that. I'm sorry that you read my post as a threat - it in no way was meant to be one at all.

    there is no threat...
    must be something wrong with me... i still percieve it as a threat that a person may see serious consequences\ and end up in trouble.
    Saying its just a heads up is like holding the gun with the barrel just pointed slightly to the side... no threat, just a little friendly advice is all.

    And what is serious consequenses anyway? To be kicked out of a game you allready consider leaving due to horrid management?
    Consequense of that would be people writing about it here.. in the forums.. so that everybody finds out what GGS does to disobedient.. workers.
    No, not workers.. they listen to the workers...
Sign In to comment.