Support this! Really, the only game that feels worth playing in fairgrounds is G&G because of that.
This is a very needed change.
There's so many cool fairgrounds games but if you don't want to be stuck there forever you have to play G&G. If every game had as close to an equal "treasure per hour" earn rate as possible, players could just play their favorite game, or a variety, and not feel like they're wasting time being inefficient.
More player choice is always a good thing IMO.
This is a very needed change.
There's so many cool fairgrounds games but if you don't want to be stuck there forever you have to play G&G. If every game had as close to an equal "treasure per hour" earn rate as possible, players could just play their favorite game, or a variety, and not feel like they're wasting time being inefficient.
More player choice is always a good thing IMO.
support, i cant wrap my head around g&g no matter how much training and reading up ive done, so ive just been playing mahjong but it takes upwards of at least an hour.
Support.
Currently the effort people put into completing games doesn't feel like it brings an adequate reward. The games also have few-to-no features which encourage playing for more than a few rounds, making it so you often play maybe 4-5 rounds, get bored and then go do something else. And since the G&G hack exists, for a lot of users playing anything else feel worthless while those who have trouble with the game feel left behind. Compared to other site activities, the fairgrounds fall behind and work that goes into creating the games ends up underutilized.
Increasing the treasure payout would be a nice help. Again, since the G&G hack exists any argument of not wanting players to earn too much treasure or risk inflation is moot. There's also the fairgrounds limit which can be adjusted if necessary.
Another possibility is to consider fairground exclusive prizes, for example you could earn tickets playing the games which are then spent at booths with unique familiars, apparel and the like. But that'd take a whole lot of time and balancing (not to mention finding some way to circumvent the G&G hack) so just increasing the treasure payout would be an easier solution.
Support.
Currently the effort people put into completing games doesn't feel like it brings an adequate reward. The games also have few-to-no features which encourage playing for more than a few rounds, making it so you often play maybe 4-5 rounds, get bored and then go do something else. And since the G&G hack exists, for a lot of users playing anything else feel worthless while those who have trouble with the game feel left behind. Compared to other site activities, the fairgrounds fall behind and work that goes into creating the games ends up underutilized.
Increasing the treasure payout would be a nice help. Again, since the G&G hack exists any argument of not wanting players to earn too much treasure or risk inflation is moot. There's also the fairgrounds limit which can be adjusted if necessary.
Another possibility is to consider fairground exclusive prizes, for example you could earn tickets playing the games which are then spent at booths with unique familiars, apparel and the like. But that'd take a whole lot of time and balancing (not to mention finding some way to circumvent the G&G hack) so just increasing the treasure payout would be an easier solution.
Support. Since the max pay out is capped, it really shouldn't matter how fast one can complete the puzzle. I've actually never maxed fairgrounds, I usually get to about 30kt and stop because honestly the coli and fodder training is much faster (and I get both coin and food in the bargain, rather than coin alone from the FG).
If nothing else, could the payouts be increased in non G&G games for speed? I managed to do the butterfly mahjong in 70 seconds -using a browser time. On the next game, I had to leave the laptop to do something, came back about 10 minutes later to finish the puzzle and it paid out the same.
The high score idea is cute, but there's absolutely no bragging rights or anything associated with it, so it seems like a useless dynamic to me,
But anyway, I don't know how much the intended Fairgrounds time is supposed to be. But if the goal was for the players to spend hours there, it's sadly mistaken. As others have mentioned, it's much easier to go do something else for treasure or getting so tired of the tiny payouts that one just wanders off.
Support. Since the max pay out is capped, it really shouldn't matter how fast one can complete the puzzle. I've actually never maxed fairgrounds, I usually get to about 30kt and stop because honestly the coli and fodder training is much faster (and I get both coin and food in the bargain, rather than coin alone from the FG).
If nothing else, could the payouts be increased in non G&G games for speed? I managed to do the butterfly mahjong in 70 seconds -using a browser time. On the next game, I had to leave the laptop to do something, came back about 10 minutes later to finish the puzzle and it paid out the same.
The high score idea is cute, but there's absolutely no bragging rights or anything associated with it, so it seems like a useless dynamic to me,
But anyway, I don't know how much the intended Fairgrounds time is supposed to be. But if the goal was for the players to spend hours there, it's sadly mistaken. As others have mentioned, it's much easier to go do something else for treasure or getting so tired of the tiny payouts that one just wanders off.
|
|
|
|
[/center]
|
While this is a needed change, I'd honestly support reducing the payout of G&G at the same time as bringing the payouts of other games up. I can make 1.6kt within 8 to 16 seconds with Glimmer and Gloom, and yeah, that's insanely out of whack with Jigsaw's 10kt-in-30-minutes - but if Jigsaw was brought up to that level, it'd be 'one hard jigsaw puzzle instantly maxes fairgrounds', and I don't think that's really something I want? I really doubt the high turnout of G&G was a deliberate design choice, and considering how reliably it can be gamed, it's healthier for the economy to nerf it a bit.
While this is a needed change, I'd honestly support reducing the payout of G&G at the same time as bringing the payouts of other games up. I can make 1.6kt within 8 to 16 seconds with Glimmer and Gloom, and yeah, that's insanely out of whack with Jigsaw's 10kt-in-30-minutes - but if Jigsaw was brought up to that level, it'd be 'one hard jigsaw puzzle instantly maxes fairgrounds', and I don't think that's really something I want? I really doubt the high turnout of G&G was a deliberate design choice, and considering how reliably it can be gamed, it's healthier for the economy to nerf it a bit.
Support, G&G feels like a chore now lmao. I really like Mahjong but the payout's just so frickin low...
Support, G&G feels like a chore now lmao. I really like Mahjong but the payout's just so frickin low...
[quote name="Trix" date="2018-12-10 07:28:51" ]
I don't want G&G to be nerfed, but I'd like to see the others pay out more.
[/quote]
That's a good point I forgot to mention in my reply. I really just want other game's payout brought UP, not G&G brought down.
Aside from gaining the ire of everyone that's relying on it for income, it doesn't change the fact that most other games are just too slow to be realistic options for most people.
Trix wrote on 2018-12-10 07:28:51:
I don't want G&G to be nerfed, but I'd like to see the others pay out more.
That's a good point I forgot to mention in my reply. I really just want other game's payout brought UP, not G&G brought down.
Aside from gaining the ire of everyone that's relying on it for income, it doesn't change the fact that most other games are just too slow to be realistic options for most people.
[quote name="Amut" date="2019-11-17 09:52:28" ]But if the goal was for the players to spend hours there, it's sadly mistaken.[/quote]
I find it a bit odd that it's set up to take hours and hours to reach cap in the Fairgrounds if you're not playing G&G. Like... all that time is time that isn't spent going to new pages and loading new ads with which to fund the site. If it takes me two hours to do Mahjong, that's four times as long as G&G. It means 90 spare minutes were used up in the Fairgrounds when I could have been clicking a whooooole lot of other pages.*
*I admit I don't actually let FR ads run. Apply this concept to the people who do.
Amut wrote on 2019-11-17 09:52:28:
But if the goal was for the players to spend hours there, it's sadly mistaken.
I find it a bit odd that it's set up to take hours and hours to reach cap in the Fairgrounds if you're not playing G&G. Like... all that time is time that isn't spent going to new pages and loading new ads with which to fund the site. If it takes me two hours to do Mahjong, that's four times as long as G&G. It means 90 spare minutes were used up in the Fairgrounds when I could have been clicking a whooooole lot of other pages.*
*I admit I don't actually let FR ads run. Apply this concept to the people who do.
I would love to play the other games! I enjoy Mahjong and Artifacture, but like others have said, they just aren't time efficient, which is sad.
I'd love to see the other games buffed up to be more lucrative to play.
I would love to play the other games! I enjoy Mahjong and Artifacture, but like others have said, they just aren't time efficient, which is sad.
I'd love to see the other games buffed up to be more lucrative to play.
