|
|
---|---|
-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? |
Tinyteenie [Caestra818] (#51032) Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:21:45 |
mau | g1 6k frontal 3ros cel (#32469) Impeccable View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:23:14 |
Indigo: It would still pose an issue unless skipping hunts is severely limited. I really don't see why people are opposed to any feature that would truly negate the effectiveness of skipping hunts. No matter how it's done, it'll be pay-to-win. I know a ton of people are opposed to removing the feature completely, so I won't suggest it, but there are tons of ways to alter it to make it more fair. -Timer solution. Send out lioness for x number of hunts at once, pay the fee, get the food, inability to hunt again for x/2 hours -The biggest defense of the skip system I see is people use it to get food. Let them get their food with their skips, with a chance for a third carcass, but NO stats or EXP -(suggested prior in the topic) Allow people to have 10 skips per lioness, but skipped lionesses cannot have hunts bought for them that day. As I see it, any one of these solutions would be more fair on the community in its entirety. There's also an option of limited skips (10 per account), but I feel that will still give players who can afford it daily a stat advantage, and would still be pay-to-win-esque. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Maulise | Autumn Floof (#32469) |
Sootsprite (#28010)
Ruthless View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:24:01 |
For me it's a tie between one and three . I prefer three but if not three, I feel one would be the best option . Sure it won't get used as much but hey ! We were fine without using the skip hunt option . 0 players like this post! Like? |
Alkaid (#46308)
Dreamboat of Ladies View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:24:31 |
Option 2 is the only one that even relatively makes sense, but to be completely honest, all the choices need to be attended. 1000 sb for a skip seems a tad high. And it is nearly impossible to earn gb in this game. Also, I fail to see the point in eliminating additional hunts. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Ulfruna (#19599)
Lone Wanderer View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:25:34 |
TerraLobo (#1986)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:25:58 |
Honestly? I don't see what was wrong with the old system. The time was decreased so we didn't have to wait very long in the first place, what more do you people want? Reverting the price from GB to SB was a pointless change to me, and I have voted for option 1 accordingly. The old system worked just fine, so I saw absolutely no point in this change. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Indigo *DDA* PM 19641 (#15126) King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:26:34 |
Ooops Maul I agree! I meant to say limit the amount of hunts you can skip XD 0 players like this post! Like? |
Nyoka (#48468)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:28:35 |
At the risk of being obnoxious, I think this thread in some ways illustrates what people have said about most people voting for the current option (2) being more casual players. The replies in this thread are by and large twos, but they are also by and large the shortest answers with no reasoning or explanation added. Some of them are the posts that as a forum moderator (not here, not making a weird claim) I cringe at, because they look really close to junk posts. They aren't, as they're actually replying to the thread, but the lack of substance is glaring. Casual players and casual posters seem to intersect. This isn't for all of them, of course. There are a couple well reasoned ones on page five, and I have a bit of a confirmation bias when skimming this thread, I haven't actually quantified and counted the posts. It's just an impression. Unrelated to the rest of this post, it isn't all that hard to get SB or GB without spending money even when playing casually, and skipping isn't necessary to playing the game. Plus, I mean, the point of any game is to learn some strategy. 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Nyoka (#48468) |
Shichibi (#34877)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:29:32 |
I really would have liked to see a 5th choice: Limit extra additional hunts you can give per lioness and limit the skipping time (5 times, 2 times, etc.) Or a 5th and 6th to split those two. I would be fine with that one, I do agree we have to do something, but 2 is the worst option in my eyes, because it affects the non-casual players the most and the hardest. 5 additinal hunts per day and 5 skipping times sounds reasonable imo. Maybe also increasing the skipping price then? I do see it can be abused for on two accounts, at least with only limiting skipping times, but not with the lionesses, they keep their hunts tracked or ? If they do, limiting both would be the best, imo. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Toxic the Meme King (#33375)
King of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:30:06 |
I feel like option 2 is mostly for people who don't sped much time on here and have a lot of SB lion around (haha puns) For me personally I check in to lioden every half hour for explore and to hunt, I never skip hunts because I would loose money when I sell the carcasses. By limiting the hunts now my food income, and where I get most of my money from selling food, is decreased. I'm probably the only one but my main concern is food lol 0 players like this post! Like? |
Sootsprite (#28010)
Ruthless View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:30:09 |
@Alkaid I think 1k to skip hunts is just fine as before they were 1GB . GB is rather easy to get here if you sell things and look in the right places . Honestly I agree with everything Mau and Soren have said here and on any thread I've seen regarding this general subject . 0 players like this post! Like? |
Griff 🐈 (#26694)
Bone Collector View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:30:32 |
Yes, those kinds of limits make sense to me, Maulise. Though it would need to be carefully balanced so ultrastatting is not possible but it's also not impossible to get any kind of decent stats. It's a thin line. Edit: And we can't discount the opinions of casual players altogether, either, just as we can't discount those of regulars. Casuals can become regulars, after all, if they are not scared off before then, that is. :p 0 players like this post! Like? Edited on 15/12/14 by Griff (#26694) |
Cat (#5265)
Famous View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:31:54 |
I'm sorry Nyoka, I didn't mean to aggravate you with my defense of #2 D: 0 players like this post! Like? |
Moose (#31221)
Renowned View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:32:59 |
There is always going to be people that intentionally abuse what ever you find is the fairest thing to do, that is very disappointing. I think option 2 is the way to go for now. 0 players like this post! Like? |
Nyoka (#48468)
Deathlord of the Jungle View Forum Posts Posted on 2014-12-15 07:33:17 |
Oh no, you haven't, and my post is rather rude (thus the disclaimer at the start), so don't worry. Any well reasoned posts for the defense of two are fine by me, it's the vast amount of posts that say simply '2' that I was remarking on. 0 players like this post! Like? |