Reduced Leet Conversion Hitting INTO Prosperous

[Crystopher]

How do I know that "penalty on ops has always been the same as the penalty on attacks"? I did not.
I rather assumed elite conversions were connected with the gains formula. The same mistake was made by a lot of people. Is it my fault or the fault of other players not to know deep game mechanics?

So let me get this straight:

1) You didn't know the ops penalty and the gains penalty were equal, although a quick look at the wiki (or a forum search thru age changes) would've shown you

2) You assumed leet conversions were tied with the gains formula. That assumption can easily be cleared up by searching or asking on the forums. Or better yet, experimenting within the game, which is something Utopia is notorious for anyways (many formulas are still unknown and/or being tested).

3) It is your fault if you don't know the deep game mechanics. You have the wiki, for one. If the wiki doesn't have the answer, you search the forum. If you don't find the answer, then you ask the playerbase. If they don't know, then you experiment into you discover the answer, at which point it can be added to the wiki. This is literally how Utopia has been for YEARS, being a hardcore strategy game and all.

Btw, it took me all of 5 seconds via a forum search to find the answer to whether leet conversions are affected by fort:

http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...onversion+fort

[MeIkor]

Of course its your fault for making an assumption rather than taking the time to learn the answer. If you dont know the answer and just assume things the fault always lies at your end.

The situation that we need to make assumptions about the effects of a new stance is the characteristic of a questionable communication.

[MeIkor]

So let me get this straight:

1) You didn't know the ops penalty and the gains penalty were equal, although a quick look at the wiki (or a forum search thru age changes) would've shown you

2) You assumed leet conversions were tied with the gains formula. That assumption can easily be cleared up by searching or asking on the forums. Or better yet, experimenting within the game, which is something Utopia is notorious for anyways (many formulas are still unknown and/or being tested).

3) It is your fault if you don't know the deep game mechanics. You have the wiki, for one. If the wiki doesn't have the answer, you search the forum. If you don't find the answer, then you ask the playerbase. If they don't know, then you experiment into you discover the answer, at which point it can be added to the wiki. This is literally how Utopia has been for YEARS, being a hardcore strategy game and all.

Btw, it took me all of 5 seconds via a forum search to find the answer to whether leet conversions are affected by fort:

http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...onversion+fort

Again, I am not alone in being surprised. A lot of surprised customers ist the characteristic of a questionable communication.
It is very respectable to stand behind and support the new developers in this way. But a company who wants to make money to keep servers running and employees paid needs some honest feedback.
Ignoring misinterpretations of a lot of players, seeing the faul in the players inability to recognized their own false assumtions and remedy this by working themselfs through fansites does not seem like very strong approach.

[Korp]

The situation that we need to make assumptions about the effects of a new stance is the characteristic of a questionable communication.

No just you being lazy. The necessary information is available it's just not being spoonfed to you.

[MeIkor]

No just you being lazy. The necessary information is available it's just not being spoonfed to you.

Of cause, why stay factual when you can be personal.

[Korp]

Of cause, why stay factual when you can be personal.

I am staying factual every post that you have made so far indicates that you feel that you shouldnt need to make any effort at all. There is no need to make assumptions cause you have the necessary information available. Even if things arent chrystal clear you have the ability to ask clarification from the people in command. So there is absolute no need to make haflassed assumptions that just ****in lazy.

[MeIkor]

I am staying factual every post that you have made so far indicates that you feel that you shouldnt need to make any effort at all. There is no need to make assumptions cause you have the necessary information available. Even if things arent chrystal clear you have the ability to ask clarification from the people in command. So there is absolute no need to make haflassed assumptions that just ****in lazy.

I neither like your profanity nor your attempts to make this personal, I end this discussion here.

[Korp]

I neither like your profanity nor your attempts to make this personal, I end this discussion here.

Isnt that a bit hypocritical coming from you since you dont seem to have any issues of bashing the admins? Seems you just ran out of arguments.

[Aha]

Stop picking on the new guys Korp! Bully!!

[MasterShake2129]

The issue is the double talk from the new owners. You can't make the argument that we didn't state it because it didn't change. And then not say anything about ops into prosp and change those. The "same as gains" for ops is NOT the same as tied to the gains formula which is the last excuse offered when comparing converts to credits generated

If some changes aren't going to be announced why bother announcing any of them...

[umajon911]

Stop picking on the new guys Korp! Bully!!

yeah korp!!!! stop being a big bad bully!

[Aha]

yeah korp!!!! stop being a big bad bully!

Yea!!

[DavidC]

Since it's been mentioned by several I won't quote directly to respond but rather just say this:
Taken from the Age 73 Final Changes: Attacks into Prosperous will have no gains penalty; Attacks while your Kingdom is Prosperous will have reduced gains of -20% (instead of -50%)

It could be noted that "attacks" should include any hostile actions. A thief operation is an attack on the opposing province/Kingdom, same as with a sorcery spell. You'll notice we didn't say 'combat gains' or 'military attacks' to specify that only military attacks (Trad March, Abduct, etc) are affected, rather using the vague term of 'attacks' to include all methods of interacting with the opposing Kingdom.
I do also believe that it's been documented fairly well that elite conversions is not tied to the gains formula even though it may utilize some of the same factors in determining the result.

I am not trying to be hostile or whatever else you are implying with my response, as I also noted we do use our best efforts to effectively communicate everything that has taken place within the age changes we've performed and use the correct language to properly communicate those things as accurately as possible. As was also mentioned by others, there is a portion (I would think lofty) of players that enjoy the mystery of certain aspects of the game and the element of trying to figure out how things work that are not publicly available.
We are human and will make mistakes from time to time; if things are mis-communicated we will acknowledge our mistake and correct it as soon as we become aware. We hope that everyone knows we do not intentionally leave out or attempt to deceive any part of the community when it comes to age changes or mechanics of the game. Again, we put forth our best effort to ensure all changes made are communicated as clear and concise as we can. If you look back through some of our age change posts we've even found weird things within the code that were affecting common areas of the game that had never been communicated before, once discovered we made the changes to produce a properly functioning mechanic or alerted the community as to it's actual functions (easiest case of this is the Fanaticism mechanic we discovered and changed in our first 2 weeks of ownership).

We have been very open, and very active in communicating with the community. We have a multitude of options available to ask questions directly and have even brought in others to help (PersainCAT and AquaSeaFoam as Strategy Moderators) field questions from the community. We have direct email via UtopiaSupport, the Questions and Answers sub-forum, the Strategy sub-forum, the Bug Reports forum if you feel what you've found might actually be a bug in addition to the live streaming broadcasts we've been doing via Twitch where we provide specific forum threads for community members to ask direct questions. In addition to all these venues our team regularly idles and chats in IRC where we openly converse with people on just about any topic. If there are questions you'd like us to answer or feedback you'd like to provide there are plenty of options available to communicate with us and we welcome any suggestion(s) you may feel will help us better provide an enjoyable service to the world.

On another side note, I would like to provide better methods of communicating age changes and am actively working on this; reading the massive wall of text which is the age change list is cumbersome and without a doubt needs improvement. Suggestions are welcome!

[Pillz]

Since it's been mentioned by several I won't quote directly to respond but rather just say this:
Taken from the Age 73 Final Changes: Attacks into Prosperous will have no gains penalty; Attacks while your Kingdom is Prosperous will have reduced gains of -20% (instead of -50%)

It could be noted that "attacks" should include any hostile actions. A thief operation is an attack on the opposing province/Kingdom, same as with a sorcery spell. You'll notice we didn't say 'combat gains' or 'military attacks' to specify that only military attacks (Trad March, Abduct, etc) are affected, rather using the vague term of 'attacks' to include all methods of interacting with the opposing Kingdom.
I do also believe that it's been documented fairly well that elite conversions is not tied to the gains formula even though it may utilize some of the same factors in determining the result.

I am not trying to be hostile or whatever else you are implying with my response, as I also noted we do use our best efforts to effectively communicate everything that has taken place within the age changes we've performed and use the correct language to properly communicate those things as accurately as possible. As was also mentioned by others, there is a portion (I would think lofty) of players that enjoy the mystery of certain aspects of the game and the element of trying to figure out how things work that are not publicly available.
We are human and will make mistakes from time to time; if things are mis-communicated we will acknowledge our mistake and correct it as soon as we become aware. We hope that everyone knows we do not intentionally leave out or attempt to deceive any part of the community when it comes to age changes or mechanics of the game. Again, we put forth our best effort to ensure all changes made are communicated as clear and concise as we can. If you look back through some of our age change posts we've even found weird things within the code that were affecting common areas of the game that had never been communicated before, once discovered we made the changes to produce a properly functioning mechanic or alerted the community as to it's actual functions (easiest case of this is the Fanaticism mechanic we discovered and changed in our first 2 weeks of ownership).

We have been very open, and very active in communicating with the community. We have a multitude of options available to ask questions directly and have even brought in others to help (PersainCAT and AquaSeaFoam as Strategy Moderators) field questions from the community. We have direct email via UtopiaSupport, the Questions and Answers sub-forum, the Strategy sub-forum, the Bug Reports forum if you feel what you've found might actually be a bug in addition to the live streaming broadcasts we've been doing via Twitch where we provide specific forum threads for community members to ask direct questions. In addition to all these venues our team regularly idles and chats in IRC where we openly converse with people on just about any topic. If there are questions you'd like us to answer or feedback you'd like to provide there are plenty of options available to communicate with us and we welcome any suggestion(s) you may feel will help us better provide an enjoyable service to the world.

On another side note, I would like to provide better methods of communicating age changes and am actively working on this; reading the massive wall of text which is the age change list is cumbersome and without a doubt needs improvement. Suggestions are welcome!

tl;dr

You (munk more likely) renamed 'Fortified' to 'Prosperous' in the code, and only altered the attack gains variables related to it (not intending to alter economic benefits). You forgot about elite conversions entirely, leaving them unchanged, and didn't notice until after the issue had been made public well into the age, and now you're refusing to admit your fault or correct the mistake.

When it was first brought up, you could have fixed it. At the very least you could have admitted your mistake in overlooking conversions.

Of course the alternative is that you somehow felt a stance that was (im paraphrasing) really strong because it only offered -20% gains for 'full' Fort econ bonuses, also needed the additional protection of being an unappealing target to Undeads... of course your failure to mention this nuance in #tactics or in the discussions that centered around Prosp when it was proposed (Imagine some of the crying you could have quelled when it was still -50% and later -20% gains if you mentioned Undeads got -80% conversions hitting in) leads me to believe that my initial theory, that you'd forgotten about this mechanic entirely, is true.... and not that you were stupid and feigning ignorance collectively for a week while people **** on the stance (more than many would have otherwise) just so that they could have reason to **** on you separately...

[Korp]

I love that Steel bases his whole argumentation around "I know you forgot!" Thats some next level mindreading he has going on there.