Refining the "Aid" Algorithm

[DeletedUser]

Whether I agree or disagree, it doesn't change the key point. I think its great the moderator allowed the debate. I am not one of those that immediately screams DNSL, but this jumped the shark about 2 weeks ago.

I guess I should have specified that I am agreeing with the statement that I quoted and I agree that rather than look to change the game, he needs to make a choice and live with it. In fact, I have stated just that before on subjects like this.

 

[lemur]

Whether we think the current algorithm is smart, fair, efficient, etc. is irrelevant.

Quite right. Why would InnoGames care what we think? We're just the video game addicts, right? Why would a dealer care what the junkies think?.

The cut is fine. Now scram.​

The argument that you are not talking about the order in which SPECIFIC buildings get aided or polished is semantics.

The interpretation of any rule is semantics. Furthermore, if a rule were flawed (which I doubt in this case, because I don't think it applies to my proposal), then the unwillingness to challenge it would beg the question of whether those who make the rules are infallible. Is InnoGames divine? Praise the Lord!

Or as Gutmeister put it ...

Constitutional amendments get tweaked, and yet the DNSL is sacrosanct.

The current algorithm for motivation/aid is well-established.

That doesn't make it right. You're employing a fallacy — Appeal to Tradition. Slavery was well-established in the Antebellum South. Did that make it right? Of course not.

He wants to change the rules to avoid the downside of the choice he has made.

You know my motivation? Is that because you're inside my head? . . Despite what you and a few others here may think (or what we have all been taught by the capitalist system), not everyone is motivated primarily by self-interest.

Like the other detractors of the proposal, you have avoided the core issue, which is the glaring inconsistency in the game between designing and promoting game decorations, on one hand, and then punishing players for actually using them.

Why bother creating quality artwork if the game process then discourages players from creative design?​

.

 

[DeletedUser]

You know my motivation? Is that because you're inside my head?

No, it's because you've repeatedly stated that it is your motivation.

Like the other detractors of the proposal, you have avoided the core issue, which is the glaring inconsistency in the game between designing and promoting game decorations, on one hand, and then punishing players for actually using them.

We haven't avoided it, and it isn't the core issue, it is a red herring to distract our attention. I challenge you to watch the commercials for any computer/video game, and then try to find everything that is in the ad in the actual game. Can't do it, so why would it be an issue here?

 

[DeletedUser31882]

I challenge you to watch the commercials for any computer/video game, and then try to find everything that is in the ad in the actual game. Can't do it, so why would it be an issue here?

I watched a trailer for No Man's Sky before it was released so I could better understand the hype. I was not impressed and was not surprised when the game did not live up to the expectations.

I'm not quite sure how my statement fits into the overall topic, but I figured I'd share my random thought on that particular comment!

Inno clearly prefers the trade-off aspect associated with decorations. That is likely why the issue of aid is on the DNSL.

I wouldn't say it is a clear preference. It could be that the trade-off aspect associated with decorations was an oversight with Aid Implementation and after looking at it, Devs decided that it wasn't worth the work to balance it for decorations. Thus making it preferred only by virtue of work load and presumably their diamond revenue analysis[My guess is premium decos don't bring enough to merit the work]. Unless we can pin-down an exact record of the devs decisions, it's all mind-reading on our part. That being said...

@Algona was kind enough to send me this link about an old proposal that is similar to this one: https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/improved-aid-priorities.8223/

Deep in there (Post#69-ish if I recall?) is a post saying that a similar proposal had gone to the Devs and was rejected. My guess is that is where the DNS item was added to the L.

The more interesting part for me is, how many were in favor of that proposal back in the day and the differences & similarities in arguments in that thread versus this one.

I'd still vote yes, but, after reading some history, I don't think the Devs will change their mind even if this got past the DNSL barrier.

 

[DeletedUser14354]

You know my motivation? Is that because you're inside my head? . . Despite what you and a few others here may think (or what we have all been taught by the capitalist system), not everyone is motivated primarily by self-interest..

You should probably re-read what I wrote. I said you want to change the game to eliminate the downside of a choice you have made. That is a statement of objective fact. Your motivation in proposing it is largely irrelevant.

Now we will turn to the larger straw man argument inherent in pretty much all of your posts. I don't frankly care whether you think the aid priority is currently correct or not. Any proposed change to that system is on the DNSL. Arguing that you aren't proposing to change the current aid system IS semantics.

As for Inno's divinity...they created the game, they created the rules that govern the operation of the game, they are the only ones that can change those rules. That is pretty much the definition of "divinity".

Finally, you reference a point about constitutional amendments being "tweaked". To wit, a constitutional amendment has NEVER been tweaked. One was repealed. That was the 18th amendment (prohibition). It was repealed by the 21st amendment in 1933. The last actual amendment to the constitution was ratified in 1992. The one before that was in 1971. Any argument for change based on 2 changes in 50 years isn't the strongest argument.

 

[DeletedUser14354]

That doesn't make it right. You're employing a fallacy — Appeal to Tradition. Slavery was well-established in the Antebellum South. Did that make it right? Of course not..

This is the part where I start to question whether English is your first language. "well-established" means understood by all, as in, there is no real mystery to how the system works. It has nothing to do with an appeal to tradition.

FYI, the comparison of the aid algorithm to slavery is beyond stupid.

 

[DeletedUser31498]

You should probably re-read what I wrote. I said you want to change the game to eliminate the downside of a choice you have made. That is a statement of objective fact. Your motivation in proposing it is largely irrelevant.

Now we will turn to the larger straw man argument inherent in pretty much all of your posts. I don't frankly care whether you think the aid priority is currently correct or not. Any proposed change to that system is on the DNSL. Arguing that you aren't proposing to change the current aid system IS semantics.

As for Inno's divinity...they created the game, they created the rules that govern the operation of the game, they are the only ones that can change those rules. That is pretty much the definition of "divinity".

Finally, you reference a point about constitutional amendments being "tweaked". To wit, a constitutional amendment has NEVER been tweaked. One was repealed. That was the 18th amendment (prohibition). It was repealed by the 21st amendment in 1933. The last actual amendment to the constitution was ratified in 1992. The one before that was in 1971. Any argument for change based on 2 changes in 50 years isn't the strongest argument.

Umm yeah, but you're comparing INNO's DNSL list to the constitution, and even though amendments HAVE changed, your argument is nothing on the DNSL should even be discussed? lol. I can't wait to hear your thoughts on how much of a waste the Supreme Court is, interpreting laws that have been around for centuries in some cases.

I just don't get your guys' shrill, mindless automaton repetition of the company line. Your deference to authority, while admirable perhaps in the military, is pretty disappointing from a grown adult playing a game. Bravo for INNO brainwashing you all though!

 

[lemur]

You should probably re-read what I wrote.

No, it's clear that you are the one who needs to do some rereading.

I said you want to change the game to eliminate the downside of a choice you have made.

Where did I write that? Try posting direct quotes.

That is a statement of objective fact.

No, your misinterpretation of what I "want" does not magically become a "fact" — let alone an "objective" one.

Your motivation in proposing it is largely irrelevant.

Then why did you point to it? When you claim that a person "wants" something out of self-interest, then you are impugning his motive.

Now we will turn to the larger straw man argument inherent in pretty much all of your posts.

Oh, "we" will? Shall his royal highness post any actual examples of these numerous "straw men," or would that be beneath him?

Finally, you reference a point about constitutional amendments being "tweaked".

I think when Gutmeister wrote that, he was actually referring to the Constitution itself being "tweaked" — not the amendments.

Any argument for change based on 2 changes in 50 years isn't the strongest argument.

That's a pedantic red herring, completely obscuring the point.

This is the part where I start to question whether English is your first language.

Language criticism is ironic and hilarious when coming from someone who apparently doesn't even grasp what a fallacy is! .

"well-established" means understood by all ...

You write as if an algorithm that is widely "understood by all" were automatically beyond reproach. You absurdly claim that what the players think about certain flaws in the game is "irrelevant" — which then begs the question of why there would be a forum for proposals and a process for voting on them.

Slavery was "understood by all." But if criticism and calls to eliminate it were on a "Do Not Discuss" list, would that have meant that what the abolitionists thought about it would have been "irrelevant"?

Your remarks exhibit an appalling and unimaginative acquiescence to authority.
.

 

[Freshmeboy]

Wow...for a subject supposedly on the DSNL this thread has produced 6 pages of quality debate...And I doubt it's done..

 

[DeletedUser31498]

I just don't get your guys' shrill, mindless automaton repetition of the company line. Your deference to authority, while admirable perhaps in the military, is pretty disappointing from a grown adult playing a game. Bravo for INNO brainwashing you all though!

Your remarks exhibit an appalling and unimaginative acquiescence to authority.
.

Agreed...

 

[lemur]

No, it's because you've repeatedly stated that it is your motivation.

Misinterpretation is a poor substitute for direct quotation.

We haven't avoided it, and it isn't the core issue ...

What?? The glaring inconsistency is exactly the core issue that I raised at length in the original proposal. To wit:

Why bother creating quality artwork if the game process then discourages players from creative design? It is as though the Programming Department at InnoGames does not communicate with the Art Department. We routinely see the absurd spectacle of InnoGames giving small decorations as prizes — such as the Nutcracker that was given to every player in December 2017 as a Christmas present — while still penalizing players for actually placing such decorations in their villages. Surely the artistic designers would rather not see their work languishing in player inventories like piles of junk mail.​

... it is a red herring to distract our attention.

Yes, that's it — a dastardly plot, a red herring within a red herring to distract readers from what you would rather discuss. .

I challenge you to watch the commercials for any computer/video game, and then try to find everything that is in the ad in the actual game.

This is a fallacy you should have learned from your mother when you were a child. I suspect that at some point she told you, "Just because your friends are doing it, that doesn't make it right."
.

 

[Graviton]

Wow...for a subject supposedly on the DSNL this thread has produced 6 pages of quality debate...And I doubt it's done..

Well...some of it's been quality, some of it hasn't. I am also enjoying the discussion, though. While I can see both arguments, I'm the camp that believes this proposal firmly falls under the DNSL as it exists now. Even so, there's nothing wrong with a discussion about whether it should or shouldn't be, and even whether the DNSL itself should be clarified or even modified. Inno gonna do what Inno gonna do; doesn't hurt to talk about it.

 

[lemur]

I don't think the Devs will change their mind even if this got past the DNSL barrier.

Then I wonder if the programmers and managers can be shamed into fixing the glaring hypocrisy of promoting decorations while punishing their actual use. InnoGames marketing is a bait-and-switch, because players attracted to the diverse artwork in the advertising then discover that much of it must be discarded, and visual design is actually discouraged.
.

 

[Freshmeboy]

I did my experiment on decos...no polishing was done on lower age (BA, IA) decos at all and the formula was as follows; Mote SoKs, first, then event buildings by highest age..then it polished my era's deco first shot out of the gate for two days before moving to housing and supply by highest age. It seems the algorithm from that small sample is running true to the devs ideal. My guess would be you can run out of age decos and still maintain some semblance of production but having 24 hour production times would work against you as the number of aids dwindles and there is little for the algorithm to mote. Like I said, small sample size but I won't redesign my city to check all the various strategies in deco use. Suffice it to say, the algorithm plays against the deco and creating your city to use them in concert with your design. They will remain, for now, obsolete....

 

[DeletedUser31882]

Then I wonder if the programmers and managers can be shamed into fixing the glaring hypocrisy of promoting decorations while punishing their actual use. InnoGames marketing is a bait-and-switch, because players attracted to the diverse artwork in the advertising then discover that much of it must be discarded, and visual design is actually discouraged.
.

Pointing out hypocrisy is fun, I just stop short when it comes to shaming. I agree that marketing, in general, is a bait-and-switch. For me the art is a secondary benefit to the primary staying power of game mechanics. Hence my propensity to champion the mechanic side of things.

 

[DeletedUser]

This proposal is about no longer penalizing those of us who value the artwork and value village design.

This is a direct quote from the conclusion section of your proposal. It specifically mentions taking away the downside ("no longer penalizing") of your choices ("those of us who value the artwork"). Nice try, though.

 

[DeletedUser]

This is a fallacy you should have learned from your mother when you were a child. I suspect that at some point she told you, "Just because your friends are doing it, that doesn't make it right."

And how exactly is pointing out that pretty much every game advertisement includes stuff that you don't find in the game a fallacy. Oh, I know, because it is inconvenient to your argument, that's why it's a fallacy.

 

[DeletedUser31440]

I like the current aid function, works real good, you just got to get rid of the pesky things that you don't want polivated and replace them with alchemists and then get all the alchemists aided. Once the alchemists are all aided no one can spread aids to you until you collect again, just make sure to wear protection until they can't spread the aids anymore.

 

[DeletedUser29218]

Once the alchemists are all aided no one can spread aids to you until you collect again, just make sure to wear protection until they can't spread the aids anymore.

I once forgot to wear protection after doing productions for a daily challenge and got aided. How can I get rid of it? Will the proposed refining of the aid algorithm help me get cured or it will be worse?

 

[DeletedUser31440]

I once forgot to wear protection after doing productions for a daily challenge and got aided. How can I get rid of it? Will the proposed refining of the aid algorithm help me get cured or it will be worse?

Worse, unspeakably worse.