|
|
---|---|
-LOCKED - Hunting Stuffs - Poll Time! | |
Posted on 2014-12-15 06:33:03
Hello lions! We've listened to your feedback, suggestions and comments and have decided to give you guys a poll regarding the hunting feature to see what you feel is best, and to gauge more public opinion and where it's sitting. There are four options that are available on the poll, and I will explain each of them: Option 1 - Revert back to 1 GB to skip hunts, and additional hunts go back to normal. Basically we return to how it was before the SB skip was switched. Skipping was a luxury. Option 2 - Keep the new system. Pay SB to skip hunts still, but no additional hunts. Everyone has the same playing field, and it's effectively capped. Option 3 - Change the system to have skipping incur a cost of 1000SB OR 1 GB (whichever currency you'd prefer to use), with each skip causing the price to increase in tiers. The proposed is increasing the SB cost by 100SB at a time, so the first skip would cost 1000SB, second would be 1100SB, 1200SB, and so on and so forth. Additional hunts would return as they were before - 10 SB per hunt. Option 4 - The same as option 3, except also tier up the cost of additional hunts. First additional hunt costing 100SB, increasing in 10SB increments. Second 110SB, then 120sb, etc etc. You can vote on the polls page - click here for a direct link there. Please keep in mind that Lioden is really dear to us and we care about all of you on here! We listen to each and every one of you but have to make decisions to try to balance the game where we can. We don't want to remove competition and we also don't want to make things completely unfair, either, so it's all about finding a nice middle. Thanks for sticking with us guys! Pls don't poop on me for this. ;0; 0 players like this post! Like? |
🌸Crafty🌸 (#35722)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:53:01 |
Indigo *DDA* PM 19641 (#15126) King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:53:15 |
Personally I really like option 3. Having the possibility to add extra hunts and/or skip hunts at an increasing GB or SB cost sounds fair. Though I'd make the first couple of hunts at a lower cost to not penalize the less fortunate players. Other than that, Option 3 sounds good :3 0 players like this post! Like? |
Kitty (#2)
Usual View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:53:22 |
Silkworm (#50816)
Evil View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:53:55 |
I'm a new player and I see Option 1/3 being for my own personal gain. My goal isn't too beat others with having the highest-stated lionesses, I just want to have decent-stated lionesses that I can breed and sell for a fair amount. I also love the idea of taking in NCLs and hunting them until they have a decent amount of stats and then breeding them with a special stud. It gives NCLs value in my opinion. 0 players like this post! Like? |
mau | g1 6k frontal 3ros cel (#32469) Impeccable View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:55:11 |
Why no option with limited skips, or skipping hunts only bringing back food, or even removing skipping altogether? The main argument I see pretty much anywhere that was pro-skip/pro-unlimited skip talked of food gain. Give them their food game, remove the grinding. Out of all options presented, I prefer 3, will live with 1 and 4, and will likely end up leaving if 2 comes into play, as it'll make the leaderboards and stat market a stagnant monopoly. People who had a chance to exploit the previous system will have lions, and offspring of lions that will be on the boards for at least the next year. Only birth stats will matter, as any semi-active player can easily get 10 hunts in, whether with 5 hours, or skipping. I feel that many of the people who are posting don't really give any of the other ideas a chance, or think over the repercussions of what they vote for. Adding hunts was never the issue, the change of the skip button was, and I honestly feel it would be best if it functioned as a timer, similar to patrolling (send out on x hunts, not able to hunt for x/2 hours), or removed completely. It's really no different from the patrols having a skip button, in my eyes :/ EDIT: I agree, assigning GB a firm value is likely a bad call, but it's he best out of all of the four, in my eyes, though I would have appreciated some more alternate options included in the poll, rather than mostly variations of the same idea. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Maulise | Autumn Floof (#32469) |
Nyoka (#48468)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:55:18 |
Option three all the way. Even though it's a bit heated, I do suggest people read this thread (probably already linked somewhere- and not just the OP, in fact, I think pages 4-6+ are the meatiest) for more ins and outs of why. 0 players like this post! Like? |
~Sunny (#29310)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:56:08 |
I voted #2 - I'm a causal-semi-serious player. Depending on time and all that. I'd love #3 if it was started at a much lower sb value and tiered upwards. I mean, if I have to choose between skipping or being able to pay for stud fee, I'm going to always favor being able to pay for a stud fee than skipping hunts. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Echo (#15480)
Sinister View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:56:15 |
What people need to understand is that this is a BUSINESS. They need money out of it. I feel some people are arguing that we need to limit the super stat players because they create a gap. What happened last time? A bunch of them quit. I am going to remain neutral on the stat change a few months ago, but people need to understand we can't just oust the super stat people out. Those are the people who PURCHASE GB. If the site made all the features in the site against them, they will leave and much less people will be buying GB each week. The admins need to consider this, and so do other people. We should not punish the GB-buying people by taking away the things they can buy GB with. However, there is a measurable gap that needs handled. I am at as much of a loss as the admins likely are. Just realize that we cannot alienate the "1%" for they are who keep the game running. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Echo (#15480) |
Toxic the Meme King (#33375)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:56:40 |
Pfft I realllly wanted extra hunts back :// 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Toxic the Meme King (#33375) |
Sphinx | Regal Sepia (#50934)
View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:56:44 |
I voted for Option 1, but Option 3 is also fine. Much like Silkworm, I'm not "stat grinding" in the sense of trying to break the leaderboard. I level my girls for my own goals and to say "I got them there myself. I bred those lions and leveled them myself". I really like having the option to have additional hunts if I choose. I would rather the skip either go back to 1 GB, or at the very least have a higher cost if abuse is the issue. The additional hunts were never an issue that I could see. It's just the skipping fee that caused the recent concerns. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Koo-Koo For Cocoa (#41220)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:58:38 |
To be honest, I can't really vote. I never skip hunts or add hunts. /shrug. XD; So it doesn't really matter to me personally how the system is. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Echo (#15480)
Sinister View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:59:01 |
Toxic, I feed my lions every other day to conserve food and I have WAY more than enough. Like, 200 extra uses enough, and my pride is sometimes 100 lions large. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Maddy {Roco} (#40076)
Majestic View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 06:59:40 |
Option 3, I also very firmly agree with Mau. I'm a causl to invested player depending on current happenings in my life but 3 is by far the best option to me. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Xylax (#4)
Dreamboat of Ladies View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:00:40 |
Do not treat the polls like democratic voting on a final decision please. It's just feedback for us. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Griff 🐈 (#26694)
Bone Collector View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:01:02 |
Personally I really do not like the idea of paying GB to have super high stats, it gives an unfair advantage to people willing and able to buy GB to do it, and they are really not the only ones buying GB. I would be okay with option 3 if there was an upper limit on the amount of new hunts that could be bought per lioness per day [say for example 25, for a total of 35 hunts, that is a potential 70 stats per day/month for a lioness, still making it possible to get very high stats in a lioness' lifetime, but not brute forcing it], but as it is, it would likely make a bad situation even worse. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Griff (#26694) |