Right move but very odd statement, lets break this down a bit.
Dear players, There has been a lot of justifiable unrest regarding changes made with Update 2.6. We greatly value all of the feedback you have provided us and understand that these changes were not properly communicated in the update notes.
I get bored of reading this about communication, its being appauling since day one and hasn't improved a bit.
Taking all of your feedback into consideration, we have now evaluated the situation with the team and have decided to temporarily bring back the healing times back in line with the healing times used in Update 2.5.
Temporarily why temporary you nobbled the figures this update, are you going to nobble them again, they were fine before you decided to to fiddle with them.
We are planning on further investigating the different solutions to this so we can ensure the benefits of the hospital work fairly for all players.
There is no solution as there isn't a problem other than the one you've made up. Hospital works fairly for all players, err what do some have a special hospital or something, are we all playing different builds of the game, im very confused by this statement.
We’d also like to take a moment to address the feedback regarding the returns of retiring survivors. Our stance is that the current values reflect a fair return on investment.
Remind me to never ask you for financial advice.
However, we’ll be keeping a close eye on the value return for retiring Survivors and the healing time calculations, as well as your feedback, over the coming months in regard to possible future changes.
Close eye surly the figures are static, it is what it is, do they mysteriously increase and decrease as if they have a life of their own, again a very puzzling statement.
We’ve learned from your feedback and any possible changes will be clearly communicated in good time before they go live.
No you haven't & no you wont based on past performance.
Thank you all again for all the feedback regarding Update 2.6. During times like these it’s apparent how much of a passionate and committed community we have. We hope you have as much fun playing the Highlights missions and other new features as much as we did making them and we’re very excited about the future of No Man’s Land. Can’t wait for you all to see what we have next in store.
You should be lucky that TWD has such a passionate fan base as many many groups wouldnt put up with these constant shenanigans each and every update.
I do take exception that 15% is a fair return on investment. It is not a return on investment as in return on investment, in this case, you would get 15% of the tokens back on top of everything you put in upgrading the survivor. That is ROI.
This is a salvage rate and a 15% salvage value is pitifully low, especially since in game scrapping rates of 1 thru 3 star gear in end mission chests compared to XP chests is anywhere from 45% to 95%. Agreed, that's a tough comparison, but its the best in game example to show that there are significantly higher salvage rates in the game.
@Shteevie@Teeceezy Rates should never decrease with an update. If you had made a mistake in the past, you live with it. I used to get 365 tokens for a legendary survivor that has been upgraded from epic--this was well appreciated because of how many times we need to find an epic survivor with ideal traits (from a call) to roll on that fifth trait (730 token investment and 365 salvage if we didn't get a useful fifth trait). Now I get 237 for retiring the legendary survivor that I upgraded from epic (not even the 256 that a legendary survivor would give me).
The most I used to get from retiring a 6 star survivor brought up from epic was 522 tokens, which now I only get 500 (the least was 412). Moving forward should not take steps backward, especially when you add new traits and expect us to be able use those survivors on our missions. It will take months, if not more, to be able to utilize the strategies given to us using survivors with new traits.
Fixing the hospital shows that you understand that we the players should not have an update make things go backwards. Why for the hospital but not for tokens?
@sbf I believe this change was done regarding token retirement values because
1) nobody can pull a survivor higher than a legendary 2) what token value can you give to a survivor higher than legendary.
It seems the math always factored in 15% of the tokens you have spent in investment. Upgrade an epic to Legendary spending 730 tokens you get a 15% return (110) + The value of the legendary survivor at the time of retirement which is 256... 256 + 110 = 366 for retiring a found epic that was just promoted to legendary.
version 2.5 and prior would give you 15% of the tokens you've invested plus the amount of tokens you'd receive of the rarity of the survivor at the time it was retired.
What's changed in 2.6 is you are still getting 15% of the tokens you've invested but also the amount of tokens you're receiving is of the rarity of the survivor at the time it was found
I believe this change is mainly because there is no way the radio tower can have you find a 6+ star survivor and therefore because of that it's impossible to give it a fair "retirement" value.
in 2.5 if you retired a common survivor you got 2, in 2.5 if you retired an uncommon survivor you got 8 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote in 2.5 if you retired a rare survivor you got 32 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote in 2.5 if you retired an epic survivor you got 128 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote in 2.5 if you retired a legendary survivor you got 256 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote in 2.5 if you retired a 6*, 7*, 8*, 9*, 10* survivor you got 256 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote
in 2.6 if you retire a common survivor you get 2, in 2.6 if you retire an uncommon survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8) in 2.6 if you retire a rare survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32) in 2.6 if you retire an epic survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32, epic=128) in 2.6 if you retire a legendary survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32, epic=128, legendary=256) in 2.6 if you retire a 6*, 7*, 8*, 9*, 10* survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32, epic=128, legendary=256)
in 2.5 & in 2.6 if you promote an epic to legendary you spend 730. 15% of 730 is 109.5 (rounded to 110
in 2.5 you got 366 tokens upon retirement = 256 (legendary retire level tokens) + 110 (15% return on investment) in 2.6 you get 238 tokens upon retirement = 128 (epic found level tokens) + 110 (15% return on investment)
We are no longer getting the number of tokens that the rarity of the survivor used to give but rather are now getting the rarity of the survivor it was found at.
I hope that explains exactly why the numbers are lowered.
| OG | NOC | USA | UK | CA | CQR | UC | RAD | ZEN |
I'd also like to point out that tokens came about in version 1.1 which was released in June of 2016
2.0 in July 2016 2.1 in August 2016 2.2 in October 2016 2.3 in November 2016 2.3.3 in January 2017 2.4 in February 2017 2.5 in March 2017 2.6 in June 2016 which says...
"Fixed a bug that caused the number of tokens refunded when a player retired a survivor to be calculated incorrectly."
The "bug" was calculating the survivor's scrap value at the time of retirement instead of the scrap value at the time of being found.
| OG | NOC | USA | UK | CA | CQR | UC | RAD | ZEN |
@DLich I understand the math easily enough but your reason as to why it is that way is not present. NG gives us new traits but they give us less tokens to actually use those traits? It's absurd. Why take away 128 tokens from players (in retiring an epic survivor to legendary) when you want them to continue playing?
Of course you can't get an elite survivor from the radio tower. That doesn't explain why we are getting less tokens than before from our survivors after an "update". A legendary survivor should always give you at least 256 tokens. That's how it's been, why take that away?
To quote what I already wrote: Fixing the hospital shows that you (NG) understand that we the players should not have an update make things go backwards. Why for the hospital but not for tokens?
NG shouldn't expect us to know beforehand that they are going to nerf survivor retirement, and sure as hell should not expect us to get rid of legendary or pink-starred survivors before being able to promote a new survivor (that we hadn't gotten yet) closer to that level. The new survivors are useless until they reach a level that will actually make sense to use on missions. If I'm retiring a single pink survivor, I'm going to wait until I can promote a legendary survivor to single pink to take their place.
What's the solution for the players? NG seems to think that we should buy radio bundles.
The saying is, "You've made your bed, now lie in it." But NG is saying, "We used to make our uncomfortable bed for you to lie in. But post 2.6 we've made that bed, which we filled with feces, sand, and glitter, and now you have to lie in it."
@sbf I completely agree a legendary should always retire as a legendary. I'm not a programmer and my words aren't meant to "speak for NG" in any way. I'm just using the mathematical analysis to show what changed to bring about the lower token scrap values in 2.6
Why NG chose to change it and then call it a bug I have no idea.
As many on the forum know I'm big on making excel spreadsheets. If the data in the cell is incorrect it's because the calculation I told that cell to formulste is incorrect. By fixing the formula within the cell will fix the output I want to achieve.
This isn't a bug. It's changing the data that's compounded.
Once we can understand that the data being compounded was changed we have to try and figure out why NG changed it. I could search the forum tirelessly looking for examples of players saying the retirement values of 2.5 and prior for 6+ star survivors should give more. And I could search the forum tirelessly for admins or mods explaining why it's incorrect etc.
But I don't think anyone believed it would be less tokens in 2.6 than it was in 2.5 and prior. Since I have figured out what exactly changed the only logical thing I can think of as to why NG did it (and again I'm not speaking on behalf of NG) is rather than formulate a base value for 6+ star survivors that players and devs would think is fair they'd change the way it's formulated to just give 15% + 'found' value.
If we followed the trend that NG had set then 6 star base would be worth 512. 7 star base would be worth 1024. 8 star base would be worth 2048. 9 star base would be worth 4096. 10 star base would be worth 8192.
Rather than go in the direction of giving everyone more they changed the formula and then called it a bug.
That's my $.02 anyway.
A found epic turned to 6 star would be 512 + (2480 x .15 = 372) = 884
In 2.5 it was 256 + (2480 x .15 = 372) = 628
In 2.6 it's 128 + (2480 x .15 = 372) = 500
Rather than follow their own pattern they changed the way it's formulated. The players expected higher star survivors to scrap for more but didn't have a number.
| OG | NOC | USA | UK | CA | CQR | UC | RAD | ZEN |
In my opinion they should return token retire amount to what it was FOR THE LAST YEAR SINCE INTRODUCED instead of changing it.
The players say we don't get enough tokens and they fixed something that wasn't broke I agree.
There was no need to change the formula computation. If anything when players saw the word "bug" you'd think it was fixed for the better not for the worse.
| OG | NOC | USA | UK | CA | CQR | UC | RAD | ZEN |
Following Barney Stinson, I came up inventing my own word for you @DLich, since every word out there in every spoken / written language is not enough to describe your awesomeness-ity. This forum and of course the game itself would not have been as good as it is (was) till 2.6! Thanks for all your effort.
@DLich I could tell you were more offering collected data, and I very much appreciate what you bring to the forum (genuinely and without sarcasm) but since you said: "I hope that explains exactly why the numbers are lowered" it came across more as an attempt to explain without actually offering an explanation. It was a little confusing since I've seen where you stand on the update and other issues, that it is fraught with bugs and we shouldn't expect any action on many of the issues. I agree that pink stars retirees need to have a retirement cost that makes sense, but going from epic to legendary should not have changed--the best way to get a strong survivor, in my experience, is to find an epic from a radio call and take a chance with 730 tokens on that fifth trait. When that last trait isn't a good one, the 365 tokens that we used to get from retiring that survivor made it easier to find another epic and roll the dice on them.
I agree that calling it a "bug" is a total cop out, and my honest guess is that lowering the scrapping costs is just a ploy to increase revenue. If I were to offer an item of lesser value and quality in my personal business for a higher cost, I would be laughed out of the room and likely blacklisted, so the fact that NG thinks that this is okay is beyond my comprehension. As you (and so many others) note, the token economy was already broken and they've unfortunately made it worse. #BrokenTokenEconomy
@Teeceezy Would it be possible to introduce in a future updare, the option of swapping out an existing trait, for a new one when survivors get a pink star promotion. This would allow some of the players who have invested time levelling survivors to experience any new traits that are introduced, and also to replace traits that are made ineffective as the game is devolped.
One doesn't need empirical data to know exactly, precisely, what NG does each week, almost each day, simply by feel. Bugs impact the basic game function. All the other aspects are easily and regularly manipulated. We all feel it when they turn down radio delivery. For a couple weeks only we actually received reasonable token crates in the challenge... turned down again. All the other factors are simply point, click, enter new value, save, execute. ALL of it designed to give as little as possible, and ever decreasing values to boot, all explained away in BS rhetoric that would embarrass even Trump!
As NG obviously doesn't understand the principles of Economics 101, how about Agriculture 101... You water a fruit tree, it grows, and grows and bears fruit. The more it grows the more fruit it bears. You starve the tree of water, no fruit (and for the boardroom at NG, fruit = your income, water = fair play, honesty and respect) and the tree dies, no more fruit. GET IT?
Same was with gear. For many months we received almost nothing after scrapping gear. Now similar situation affect tokens. 15% is not acceptable at all!
Beside all nerfs, buffs and retrograde steps I found this improvement which is very useful. We don't have to go forth to survivor section and back to see how many token we already collected per each class.
Thanks.
One doesn't need empirical data to know exactly, precisely, what NG does each week, almost each day, simply by feel. Bugs impact the basic game function. All the other aspects are easily and regularly manipulated. We all feel it when they turn down radio delivery. For a couple weeks only we actually received reasonable token crates in the challenge... turned down again. All the other factors are simply point, click, enter new value, save, execute. ALL of it designed to give as little as possible, and ever decreasing values to boot, all explained away in BS rhetoric that would embarrass even Trump!
As NG obviously doesn't understand the principles of Economics 101, how about Agriculture 101... You water a fruit tree, it grows, and grows and bears fruit. The more it grows the more fruit it bears. You starve the tree of water, no fruit (and for the boardroom at NG, fruit = your income, water = fair play, honesty and respect) and the tree dies, no more fruit. GET IT?
Right move but very odd statement, lets break this down a bit.
Dear players, There has been a lot of justifiable unrest regarding changes made with Update 2.6. We greatly value all of the feedback you have provided us and understand that these changes were not properly communicated in the update notes.
I get bored of reading this about communication, its being appauling since day one and hasn't improved a bit.
Taking all of your feedback into consideration, we have now evaluated the situation with the team and have decided to temporarily bring back the healing times back in line with the healing times used in Update 2.5.
Temporarily why temporary you nobbled the figures this update, are you going to nobble them again, they were fine before you decided to to fiddle with them.
We are planning on further investigating the different solutions to this so we can ensure the benefits of the hospital work fairly for all players.
There is no solution as there isn't a problem other than the one you've made up. Hospital works fairly for all players, err what do some have a special hospital or something, are we all playing different builds of the game, im very confused by this statement.
We’d also like to take a moment to address the feedback regarding the returns of retiring survivors. Our stance is that the current values reflect a fair return on investment.
Remind me to never ask you for financial advice.
However, we’ll be keeping a close eye on the value return for retiring Survivors and the healing time calculations, as well as your feedback, over the coming months in regard to possible future changes.
Close eye surly the figures are static, it is what it is, do they mysteriously increase and decrease as if they have a life of their own, again a very puzzling statement.
We’ve learned from your feedback and any possible changes will be clearly communicated in good time before they go live.
No you haven't & no you wont based on past performance.
Thank you all again for all the feedback regarding Update 2.6. During times like these it’s apparent how much of a passionate and committed community we have. We hope you have as much fun playing the Highlights missions and other new features as much as we did making them and we’re very excited about the future of No Man’s Land. Can’t wait for you all to see what we have next in store.
You should be lucky that TWD has such a passionate fan base as many many groups wouldnt put up with these constant shenanigans each and every update.
@Teeceezy@Shteevie
Hi guys did you mentioned the number of post regarding this update in this thread? We are now at page 10. there were times player post a lot more! I think its a sign that some loose their passion towards this game and they think its worthless to complain anymore because no change will come or its getting worser. I will look to your quarterly earnings in the next months maybe we will see it there too. You have done a great job to your loyal player base! - Dont take this too seriously
Im so amazed how so many complain about this and that, updates to fast, etc..just play at your speed when your ready upgrade your council, if not dont. The whole point to game is to collect food, ammo, XP, gear and so on so you can upgrade camp and surivors and everything, Enjoy the game. If you feel its unfair, bogus or whatever your complaint is move on to a new game.
Positive changes warrant positive praise. Negative changes warrant negative criticism. If you don't like it don't comment on it, see what I did there. You have your opinion and others have theirs. Get off your high horse.
@ladyfarleigh13 you think the change to the hospital was great for long time players? What about the survivor token return? Again everyone makes the argument oh you don't like it well leave, well guess what other people invested plenty of time building up these characters and camps just to have something labeled a bug fix so you can modify it to meet your requirements to earn money with trickery and deceit. Please don't give me that lazy statement about move on from the game.......geez.
Not sure where to post this or how to start a thread discussion but for those in favor please support this idea!!! In memory of the late George Romero (r.i.p.) TWDNML should honor him by including a character in the game based off of him. He should be a special character (maybe a healer or necromancer type character) that is different from every other survivor/hero similar to how "Rufus" is. Without George there would be no TWD or TWDNML so I think it's only fair the dev's should add a George Romero hero!!!!!! Please spread this idea and have him recognized in TWD community through this game. In loving memory of my childhood icon Mr. Romero.
Thank you!!!!
And the stuntman John Bernecker in TWD TV show accidentally die recently during the filming of this show, he as a hero behind the scene didn't even get mentioned by NG in the in game news like George A. Romero.
And the stuntman John Bernecker in TWD TV show accidentally die recently during the filming of this show, he as a hero behind the scene didn't even get mentioned by NG in the in game news like George A. Romero.
NG caring about people is something I have to live to see... Guys come to the forum to confront players that are dedicating time and effort to analyze data they are supposedly getting paid to do and can't. What to expect?
NG caring about people is something I have to live to see... Guys come to the forum to confront players that are dedicating time and effort to analyze data they are supposedly getting paid to do and can't. What to expect?
Believe it or not we're not monsters, but actually just normal people like everyone else here.
NG caring about people is something I have to live to see... Guys come to the forum to confront players that are dedicating time and effort to analyze data they are supposedly getting paid to do and can't. What to expect?
Believe it or not we're not monsters, but actually just normal people like everyone else here.
Of course you are not. I'm just salty and spreading like a machine gun. There are reasons for that though.
> @Teeceezy said:
> Believe it or not we're not monsters, but actually just normal people like everyone else here.
George A. Romero didn't directly involved in TWD & he didn't like the series, but on the other hand, John Bernecker was the stuntman in the TWD TV show.
Why the differential treatment between George A. Romero & John Bernecker by NG? Don't you think it's unrespectful that NG paid respect to George A. Romero but didn't do it too for John Bernecker? Is it because he's not famous?
Comments
There has been a lot of justifiable unrest regarding changes made with Update 2.6. We greatly value all of the feedback you have provided us and understand that these changes were not properly communicated in the update notes.
I get bored of reading this about communication, its being appauling since day one and hasn't improved a bit.
Temporarily why temporary you nobbled the figures this update, are you going to nobble them again, they were fine before you decided to to fiddle with them.
There is no solution as there isn't a problem other than the one you've made up. Hospital works fairly for all players, err what do some have a special hospital or something, are we all playing different builds of the game, im very confused by this statement.
Remind me to never ask you for financial advice.
Close eye surly the figures are static, it is what it is, do they mysteriously increase and decrease as if they have a life of their own, again a very puzzling statement.
No you haven't & no you wont based on past performance.
You should be lucky that TWD has such a passionate fan base as many many groups wouldnt put up with these constant shenanigans each and every update.
The most I used to get from retiring a 6 star survivor brought up from epic was 522 tokens, which now I only get 500 (the least was 412). Moving forward should not take steps backward, especially when you add new traits and expect us to be able use those survivors on our missions. It will take months, if not more, to be able to utilize the strategies given to us using survivors with new traits.
Fixing the hospital shows that you understand that we the players should not have an update make things go backwards. Why for the hospital but not for tokens?
You call this fair? Despicable.
1) nobody can pull a survivor higher than a legendary
2) what token value can you give to a survivor higher than legendary.
It seems the math always factored in 15% of the tokens you have spent in investment. Upgrade an epic to Legendary spending 730 tokens you get a 15% return (110) + The value of the legendary survivor at the time of retirement which is 256... 256 + 110 = 366 for retiring a found epic that was just promoted to legendary.
version 2.5 and prior would give you 15% of the tokens you've invested plus the amount of tokens you'd receive of the rarity of the survivor at the time it was retired.
What's changed in 2.6 is you are still getting 15% of the tokens you've invested but also the amount of tokens you're receiving is of the rarity of the survivor at the time it was found
I believe this change is mainly because there is no way the radio tower can have you find a 6+ star survivor and therefore because of that it's impossible to give it a fair "retirement" value.
in 2.5 if you retired a common survivor you got 2,
in 2.5 if you retired an uncommon survivor you got 8 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote
in 2.5 if you retired a rare survivor you got 32 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote
in 2.5 if you retired an epic survivor you got 128 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote
in 2.5 if you retired a legendary survivor you got 256 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote
in 2.5 if you retired a 6*, 7*, 8*, 9*, 10* survivor you got 256 + 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote
in 2.6 if you retire a common survivor you get 2,
in 2.6 if you retire an uncommon survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8)
in 2.6 if you retire a rare survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32)
in 2.6 if you retire an epic survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32, epic=128)
in 2.6 if you retire a legendary survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32, epic=128, legendary=256)
in 2.6 if you retire a 6*, 7*, 8*, 9*, 10* survivor you get 15% of any tokens spent to upgrade/promote + the amount of tokens of the rarity it was found (common=2, uncommon=8, rare=32, epic=128, legendary=256)
in 2.5 & in 2.6 if you promote an epic to legendary you spend 730. 15% of 730 is 109.5 (rounded to 110
in 2.5 you got 366 tokens upon retirement = 256 (legendary retire level tokens) + 110 (15% return on investment)
in 2.6 you get 238 tokens upon retirement = 128 (epic found level tokens) + 110 (15% return on investment)
We are no longer getting the number of tokens that the rarity of the survivor used to give but rather are now getting the rarity of the survivor it was found at.
I hope that explains exactly why the numbers are lowered.
MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
| My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |
Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
2.0 in July 2016
2.1 in August 2016
2.2 in October 2016
2.3 in November 2016
2.3.3 in January 2017
2.4 in February 2017
2.5 in March 2017
2.6 in June 2016 which says...
"Fixed a bug that caused the number of tokens refunded when a player retired a survivor to be calculated incorrectly."
The "bug" was calculating the survivor's scrap value at the time of retirement instead of the scrap value at the time of being found.
MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
| My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |
Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
Of course you can't get an elite survivor from the radio tower. That doesn't explain why we are getting less tokens than before from our survivors after an "update". A legendary survivor should always give you at least 256 tokens. That's how it's been, why take that away?
To quote what I already wrote:
Fixing the hospital shows that you (NG) understand that we the players should not have an update make things go backwards. Why for the hospital but not for tokens?
NG shouldn't expect us to know beforehand that they are going to nerf survivor retirement, and sure as hell should not expect us to get rid of legendary or pink-starred survivors before being able to promote a new survivor (that we hadn't gotten yet) closer to that level. The new survivors are useless until they reach a level that will actually make sense to use on missions. If I'm retiring a single pink survivor, I'm going to wait until I can promote a legendary survivor to single pink to take their place.
What's the solution for the players? NG seems to think that we should buy radio bundles.
The saying is, "You've made your bed, now lie in it." But NG is saying, "We used to make our uncomfortable bed for you to lie in. But post 2.6 we've made that bed, which we filled with feces, sand, and glitter, and now you have to lie in it."
#BrokenTokenEconomy
Why NG chose to change it and then call it a bug I have no idea.
As many on the forum know I'm big on making excel spreadsheets. If the data in the cell is incorrect it's because the calculation I told that cell to formulste is incorrect. By fixing the formula within the cell will fix the output I want to achieve.
This isn't a bug. It's changing the data that's compounded.
Once we can understand that the data being compounded was changed we have to try and figure out why NG changed it. I could search the forum tirelessly looking for examples of players saying the retirement values of 2.5 and prior for 6+ star survivors should give more. And I could search the forum tirelessly for admins or mods explaining why it's incorrect etc.
But I don't think anyone believed it would be less tokens in 2.6 than it was in 2.5 and prior. Since I have figured out what exactly changed the only logical thing I can think of as to why NG did it (and again I'm not speaking on behalf of NG) is rather than formulate a base value for 6+ star survivors that players and devs would think is fair they'd change the way it's formulated to just give 15% + 'found' value.
If we followed the trend that NG had set then 6 star base would be worth 512. 7 star base would be worth 1024. 8 star base would be worth 2048. 9 star base would be worth 4096. 10 star base would be worth 8192.
Rather than go in the direction of giving everyone more they changed the formula and then called it a bug.
That's my $.02 anyway.
A found epic turned to 6 star would be 512 + (2480 x .15 = 372) = 884
In 2.5 it was 256 + (2480 x .15 = 372) = 628
In 2.6 it's 128 + (2480 x .15 = 372) = 500
Rather than follow their own pattern they changed the way it's formulated. The players expected higher star survivors to scrap for more but didn't have a number.
MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
| My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |
Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
The players say we don't get enough tokens and they fixed something that wasn't broke I agree.
There was no need to change the formula computation. If anything when players saw the word "bug" you'd think it was fixed for the better not for the worse.
MAVERICK'S 1 Million Star Club | OG | USA | NOC
Analyze This with ALF4reals | v1 | v2 | v3 |
| My YouTube Videos | My 1st Interview | Best Analogy Award!! |
Freemium... the "mium" is latin for 'not really'
Following Barney Stinson, I came up inventing my own word for you @DLich, since every word out there in every spoken / written language is not enough to describe your awesomeness-ity.
This forum and of course the game itself would not have been as good as it is (was) till 2.6!
Thanks for all your effort.
I agree that calling it a "bug" is a total cop out, and my honest guess is that lowering the scrapping costs is just a ploy to increase revenue. If I were to offer an item of lesser value and quality in my personal business for a higher cost, I would be laughed out of the room and likely blacklisted, so the fact that NG thinks that this is okay is beyond my comprehension. As you (and so many others) note, the token economy was already broken and they've unfortunately made it worse. #BrokenTokenEconomy
As NG obviously doesn't understand the principles of Economics 101, how about Agriculture 101... You water a fruit tree, it grows, and grows and bears fruit. The more it grows the more fruit it bears. You starve the tree of water, no fruit (and for the boardroom at NG, fruit = your income, water = fair play, honesty and respect) and the tree dies, no more fruit. GET IT?
Thanks.
It's called refuckulating.
Mavericks Guild Family
Hi guys did you mentioned the number of post regarding this update in this thread? We are now at page 10. there were times player post a lot more! I think its a sign that some loose their passion towards this game and they think its worthless to complain anymore because no change will come or its getting worser. I will look to your quarterly earnings in the next months maybe we will see it there too. You have done a great job to your loyal player base! - Dont take this too seriously
There are only so many ways of saying that you're disappointed......
Thank you!!!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/10436738/George-A-Romero-Why-I-dont-like-The-Walking-Dead.html
And the stuntman John Bernecker in TWD TV show accidentally die recently during the filming of this show, he as a hero behind the scene didn't even get mentioned by NG in the in game news like George A. Romero.
Mavericks Guild Family
Mavericks Guild Family
> Believe it or not we're not monsters, but actually just normal people like everyone else here.
George A. Romero didn't directly involved in TWD & he didn't like the series, but on the other hand, John Bernecker was the stuntman in the TWD TV show.
Why the differential treatment between George A. Romero & John Bernecker by NG? Don't you think it's unrespectful that NG paid respect to George A. Romero but didn't do it too for John Bernecker? Is it because he's not famous?