Proposal - Clear Dead GB from contribution list

Discussion in 'Proposals' started by sethton, May 15, 2018.

  1. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    My final comment is in regards to how often people reply with something that honestly has nothing to do with the post or they did not fully read the post and the reply they leave was already addressed.
     
  2. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    so in your opinion why is getting a small fraction of your fp back a issue?
     
  3. sloppyjoeslayer

    sloppyjoeslayer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2016
    Gender:
    Male
    Worlds:
    Dunarsund
    oh, I'm sensing a In the Name of Gaming Purism position I think, unfortunately the conversaton over there got polluted before it could really ever get started.
     
  4. Salsuero

    Salsuero Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2017
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    1 Town Hall Way, Salsueroville, Odhrorvar
    I don't see the purpose of refunding only a fraction. It's either all or nothing. A fraction just implies that refunding all would be a form of abuse, with a fractional refund somehow being a mitigation of said abuse. I disagree. If handled properly, there would be no abuse... only stupidity in trying to abuse a system that takes so long to pay out, the benefit would be nullified by the wait.
     
    Titris Thrawns likes this.
  5. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    how is there actual abuse? with only getting a small fraction of fp back why would anyone "want" to waste it. (small fraction inno could decide on 1/4, 1/8, 1/10) with the pop up on the owner side letting them refuse or allow this small fraction, if the player is active its a no. if not active then its a yes but again the fraction could be any size inno chooses.

    I keep seeing everyone saying abuse but not really giving any information on how it could be abused. if you take into account what i have already mentioned could you please tell me what other abuse is possible?
     
  6. Graviton

    Graviton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2015
    Next time choose one of those posts for a response to those posts.
     
    Titris Thrawns likes this.
  7. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    only getting a fraction back would be a consolation to the fact that you had been trying to play the game with that person but something happened and they left and because them leaving is out of your control you get "some" of your fp back. but under normal circumstances you wouldn't even bother because if the person is playing eventually they would level that building. I think getting all back could be used as abuse. If someone had "friends" or multiple accounts then they could use it as a bank to save up large amounts of fp only to have them returned into ones bar and have 5000 10000 fp .... this would be unfair.

    so the bases of the idea is the under normal circumstances you don't want to abort, but if forced to abort (because your OCD about your list) you don't lose all you worked for. but it needs to be a small enough of a return that no one would be encouraged to use it all the time as "fun"
     
  8. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    The reason i used your post is because of your last comment. and i quote "Which leads me to believe that the only real purpose of this proposal is a refund of FPs, which is also the only part of it that is an abuse magnet" it is not an abuse magnet with what has already been proposed in the original post. if you only get a small (1/4, 1/8, 1/10) fraction of fp back and the owner, if active, has to approve or deny, then it really cant be "abused".

    so you implying that i only made this proposal to get 5 fp back out of 500 i donated would be ignorant. If you read all i posted to start and thought about the full concept with the small fraction and popup on the GB owner side how is there abuse?
     
  9. Graviton

    Graviton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2015
    Here's the proposal to remove GBs from one's list, from back in February:

    https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com...ntribution-list-without-withdrawing-fp.21804/

    I don't see that it was actually submitted for voting.

    Here is Salsuero's proposal for a refund of FPs, which has been moved to the Closed/Archived section:
    https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com...urn-forge-points-to-donor-for-dead-gbs.20691/

    Lots of discussion about how it could be abused there. All found in about 15 minutes of searching. ;)
     
    Titris Thrawns likes this.
  10. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    Ok.. thats great i am asking your thoughts. how YOU specifically think it can be abused. not other others thing. you commented on my post so i would like to here how under my proposal with the ideas i have in place how it can be abused. if you specifically don't have any ideas on with my ideas in place it could be abused then i was correct in commenting on your original post that you did not read correctly.

    this is my point. if you personally think it can be abused with what i have suggested in place ( not what others have suggested if it in anyway differs from my proposal) then i would like to know how. if you do not know how then please dont just jump on the turnip farm wagon.
     
  11. Graviton

    Graviton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2015
    What, I need to come up with a brand-new way it can be abused that nobody else has mentioned? Good grief, man.

    Since you keep trying to shut me up, I'll respond by suggesting that you search the forums before proposing something that's already been posted and rejected.
     
  12. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    I went and took a look at the link you provided in your comment. it is 100% different then my proposal. so comparing them as apples is not accurate. comparing them at all is not accurate. they are different proposals with slightly similar ideas but still very different and with what i have proposed i still dont see any actual potential for abuse.
     
  13. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    my proposal has not be suggested and rejected. not in the current format. and yes if you want to throw the word abuse around you should have something to back it up with otherwise you are simply discounting the idea for no reason
     
  14. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    Also i am in no way trying to get you to shut up i would love it if you could offer something helpful to the post or thread. but honestly so far all you have done is said it could be abused but offered no proof or suggestions as to how. i believe what i have proposed has deterred the current ideas of how it could have been abused.

    ONLY AN EXAMPLE
    If i told the mods you were being rude and abusive but did not back it up with any proof then they would ignore me because it was pointless for me to complain.
    this in effect is what you are saying here.
    its abuse its abuse
    how?
    i dont know but it is !

    i have searched the threads and i think my idea would work with no real abuse in site. change my mind
     
  15. Graviton

    Graviton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2015
    There are two links, not just one. But okay. Let's look at this claim that they're 100% different.

    Your proposal:
    "The ability to remove a GB from your contribution list when the player has quit or the GB can no longer have Forge Points added to it."

    From the first link:
    "Allow players to remove arbitrary great building entries in their contribution list."

    Your proposal:
    "Also it would be nice to get a fraction of your Forge points back that are now "lost" in this GB. A quarter FP returned or something like this but not a full refund."

    From the second link:
    "Players should get back the forge points invested in Great Buildings of players who have quit the game or have been banned through no fault of the investor."

    So we're somewhere south of 100% I think.

    You do suggest a popup, but that wouldn't prevent abuse, as two or more players could conspire together to use GBs as an FP bank, as others have pointed out. That would be called "abuse".

    You can now have the last word on your abuse-prone proposal that's already been proposed, albeit in slightly different forms, twice.
     
  16. sethton

    sethton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2018
    again my proposal is both removal of the GB and a small fraction of fp back. the first link is only removal of gb so different and the second is a full refund of fp with no removal so different. neither are the same. your example of an elephant is different that my proposal of an apple.

    even if someone used the gb as a bank if the fraction was small enough then why would anyone do it and would it truly be considered abuse?
    bob donates 1000 fp and gets 10 back how is this a "bank" that anyone would use? in no way would you ever get a full refund even if two players worked together so its still not abuse.

    i truly understand what you are trying to say but they are so different i dont understand your argument. they just are not the same and cant be abused in such a way that would truly benefit any player over what another player as the option of getting
     
  17. Volodya

    Volodya Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2014
    Gender:
    Male
    I have 20 pages of gb contributions (I imagine other players have a lot more) but yeah, who cares? It's rather easy not to click past the 1st several active pages. The one adjustment in this stuff I think is worth considering is having fully-leveled gbs automatically collect after a certain amount of time; a month? 6 months? I dunno what makes sense. As it is, there are a handful of buildings on my list I could level at a profit with my Arc bonus, but the building owner almost certainly has left the game and will never collect, so of course I don't do it. It's a minor point that wouldn't help me much, but I do think it would be fair and not really subject to abuse.
     
  18. Salsuero

    Salsuero Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2017
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    1 Town Hall Way, Salsueroville, Odhrorvar
    Well, if you get a full refund, then the GB would no longer be on your list since you have no donation, so the removal is implicit.

    If the fraction is that small, why refund anything at all? I don't want 1% back. That's pennies. That's not even worth the bother of implementing the code.

    Well I respectfully disagree and I've stated why. Good luck with your proposal.
     
  19. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    So I guess to clarify what I think after reading the back and forth on a % FP return, I believe that once you've spent FP they're spent. No getting them back. I believe the only thing you should ever get back is the possible reward once a GB levels. If it never levels, well, that's the chance you take. Getting them all back, of course, would be open to abuse. But getting any of them back is not really fair, because what about people that put a bunch of FP on a GB and end up in 6th spot? Functionally no different than donating to a GB that never levels, and you can donate a ton of FPs to high level GBs and still be in 6th or lower. So I am always and forever a no on return of FP other than as rewards, but would be in favor of a proposal to merely be able to remove GBs from your contribution list for whatever reason you deem fit.
     
    Titris Thrawns and Graviton like this.
  20. Titris Thrawns

    Titris Thrawns Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2017
    I found one! BURN THE WITCH PURIST!

    Well, the abuse I was gunning for would be performed by the GB owner upon the FP contributor. I also got carried away by spring boarding off your idea into another one. So I've right and proper muddled the whole affair, eh?

    I think @Stephen Longshanks last post clarifies the potential abuse angle. Many people believe that once FPs are donated, the die is cast and there is no take backs. So any form of refund will be seen as a selfish change aimed at 'getting back what was lost/spent'. Some people get the mediocre service at a restaurant, eat the food given(even if it is not the food ordered), and pay their bill. Others will protest the service, demand the proper food and demand a refund. The second group is easy to demonize. I think a lot of the refund proposals get lumped in with the second group.
     

Top