Advertisement
by Fauzjhia » Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:54 pm
by Benevolent 1 » Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:14 pm
Giovanniland wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:Let's have WA nations vote in a poll on this. Here you go...
https://www.nationstates.net/page=poll/p=176693
/notamod, but admins have stated before that decisions on game changes are made through compelling arguments and not polls. Sure, the choice of making it WA only prevents the puppet spam problem, but the other part of the fact still stands.
Anyways, strongly opposed. The gift tax is there for a reason, to make those who bypass the auction system pay for it, which is fair. Gifting gives you the ability of giving any nation with deck space any card, provided you can pay the tax. It's only fair to have this tax in exchange for a secure trade without the chance of having the bank or the card sniped - essentially I concur with One Small Island on this.
Casual players, like Galiantus said, own one or two nations and don't really focus on cards; it's not a casual player anymore if the puppets are there only to funnel cards to the main nation. And once someone reaches that point, the resources are there for those who want it: card guides, scripts, the Discord server marketplace with many experienced players that can offer advice. Soon they are managing a significant farm capable of generating a fair amount of bank, and gifting taxes aren't really the issue anymore. Even if one doesn't have a lot of time to put into card farming, doing so every now and then is still a nice boost for their bank.
The only effective change that would arise is that big farmers would have even less of a money sink. Gifting and capacity are the two only ways one can give bank to the game, and you're proposing to reduce one of these two money sinks, which would lead farmers to accumulate even more bank. And I say this as a big farmer that would profit from this, but I choose not to, and instead cast my opinion against this proposal.
by Trivalve » Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:25 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:No one is asking for the removal of the gift tax. This is untrue. Only a more realistic fee which is in line with the current needs of the game. Why should gifting nations pay such a high price for it? Who is benefiting from that and why do you insist that is fair? I see no solid ground to your argument thus far.
by Fauzjhia » Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:31 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:No one is asking for the removal of the gift tax. This is untrue. Only a more realistic fee which is in line with the current needs of the game. Why should gifting nations pay such a high price for it? Who is benefiting from that and why do you insist that is fair? I see no solid ground to your argument thus far.
Benevolent 1 wrote:Remember, card farms are likely to buy the farm, i.e. fade away, if Fris' Yahtzee Game becomes the method of drawing cards. It's time consuming by design. Scripting for it likely to be verboden. There is no guarantee of perpetual card farming at this point. As a result, no defensive argument is born there either.
by Benevolent 1 » Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:38 pm
Trivalve wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:No one is asking for the removal of the gift tax. This is untrue. Only a more realistic fee which is in line with the current needs of the game. Why should gifting nations pay such a high price for it? Who is benefiting from that and why do you insist that is fair? I see no solid ground to your argument thus far.
This argument can be said for the price of gifting something from the nationstates store. The price is there to stop people from abusing it. If there was no price for gifting postmaster, not only would nationstates not earn money but people would constantly just give out postmasters to everyone which would just ruin the game play. Same with the cards, the price prevents any abuse of gifting. If you want to card farm then you got to work for it. I see nothing wrong with the current price of gifting.
by Trivalve » Fri Sep 03, 2021 6:47 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:Trivalve wrote:This argument can be said for the price of gifting something from the nationstates store. The price is there to stop people from abusing it. If there was no price for gifting postmaster, not only would nationstates not earn money but people would constantly just give out postmasters to everyone which would just ruin the game play. Same with the cards, the price prevents any abuse of gifting. If you want to card farm then you got to work for it. I see nothing wrong with the current price of gifting.
By that logic, there should be a fee for using the auction bc people are abusing the auction by inflating worthless cards to enhance their DV.
https://www.nationstates.net/nation=ben ... id=1566222
I believe the gifting fee reduction proposal furthers enhances this scheme.
by Giovanniland » Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:10 am
Benevolent 1 wrote:Giovanniland wrote:/notamod, but admins have stated before that decisions on game changes are made through compelling arguments and not polls. Sure, the choice of making it WA only prevents the puppet spam problem, but the other part of the fact still stands.
Anyways, strongly opposed. The gift tax is there for a reason, to make those who bypass the auction system pay for it, which is fair. Gifting gives you the ability of giving any nation with deck space any card, provided you can pay the tax. It's only fair to have this tax in exchange for a secure trade without the chance of having the bank or the card sniped - essentially I concur with One Small Island on this.
Casual players, like Galiantus said, own one or two nations and don't really focus on cards; it's not a casual player anymore if the puppets are there only to funnel cards to the main nation. And once someone reaches that point, the resources are there for those who want it: card guides, scripts, the Discord server marketplace with many experienced players that can offer advice. Soon they are managing a significant farm capable of generating a fair amount of bank, and gifting taxes aren't really the issue anymore. Even if one doesn't have a lot of time to put into card farming, doing so every now and then is still a nice boost for their bank.
The only effective change that would arise is that big farmers would have even less of a money sink. Gifting and capacity are the two only ways one can give bank to the game, and you're proposing to reduce one of these two money sinks, which would lead farmers to accumulate even more bank. And I say this as a big farmer that would profit from this, but I choose not to, and instead cast my opinion against this proposal.
Poll voter discouragement? Hey, the poll might be faked. But no horde of farm puppets is allowed to cast votes. WA voters only! Polls can be parts of compelling arguments. No doubt polls alone don't stand the test.
Benevolent 1 wrote:No one is asking for the removal of the gift tax. This is untrue. Only a more realistic fee which is in line with the current needs of the game. Why should gifting nations pay such a high price for it? Who is benefiting from that and why do you insist that is fair? I see no solid ground to your argument thus far.
Benevolent 1 wrote:Remember, card farms are likely to buy the farm, i.e. fade away, if Fris' Yahtzee Game becomes the method of drawing cards. It's time consuming by design. Scripting for it likely to be verboden. There is no guarantee of perpetual card farming at this point. As a result, no defensive argument is born there either.
Benevolent 1 wrote:The auction could use some better competition at this point bc small deck/bank players need an improved gifting option. This proposal primarily makes the gifting option better for them by denying the auctioneer a few cards. That's a win-win.
by Benevolent 1 » Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:21 am
Giovanniland wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:
Poll voter discouragement? Hey, the poll might be faked. But no horde of farm puppets is allowed to cast votes. WA voters only! Polls can be parts of compelling arguments. No doubt polls alone don't stand the test.
I never tried to discourage anyone to vote, just wanted to point you out to a staff post that says polls don't have any weight on decisions so you would know.Benevolent 1 wrote:No one is asking for the removal of the gift tax. This is untrue. Only a more realistic fee which is in line with the current needs of the game. Why should gifting nations pay such a high price for it? Who is benefiting from that and why do you insist that is fair? I see no solid ground to your argument thus far.
I didn't say either that you were proposing to remove the tax, just to reduce it as the title says. And people have explained multiple times in this thread that the gifting tax is a fee one has to pay to avoid the risk of the card or bank being stolen in an auction. Making the gifting fee so low will discourage auctions - the main aspect of a free market - and possibly bring upon us a decline of the card game.Benevolent 1 wrote:Remember, card farms are likely to buy the farm, i.e. fade away, if Fris' Yahtzee Game becomes the method of drawing cards. It's time consuming by design. Scripting for it likely to be verboden. There is no guarantee of perpetual card farming at this point. As a result, no defensive argument is born there either.
That is true, but looking at the other side of the coin, less card farms also means less gifting, as there's an incentive to use a single nation to play the Yahtzee game and only win cards there. This renders most gift trades obsolete, and thus the main cause behind this proposal.Benevolent 1 wrote:The auction could use some better competition at this point bc small deck/bank players need an improved gifting option. This proposal primarily makes the gifting option better for them by denying the auctioneer a few cards. That's a win-win.
It's a loss for the game, though, as the amount of auctions will decline. And it will hardly benefit casual players as you insist to believe.
by Giovanniland » Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:31 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:What you'd inferred concerning the poll and "removal of gifting fee" needed to be addressed. Glad to see you've clarified your earlier statements.
We don't want gift exchanges to become obsolete, that's exactly why I've put forth this proposal.
Interestingly, you have provided another reason to support lowering the gifting fee. There is no doubt that gifting exposes the networks of card farming puppet masters. These people won't be gifting as it provides linkage between themselves and their numerous farms. The auction serves them as a free laundromat. It obliterates the point of origin of their cards. Additionally, destruction of this information has value and should come at a cost. Auction fees would serve that purpose.
In summation, a lowered gift fee won't be helping any remaining farmers in S3. These players will continue to prefer eradicating the evidences of their card farms. As a result, the gifting fee is already obsolete for the vast majority of large card farmers, such as yourself. Lowering the gift fee to 20% mainly enhances the ability of the small deck/bank player (who maintains his deck below deck capacity) to avoid the auction risks discussed earlier. Thereby, the reduced gift fee is a tool for keeping the cards of casual players cards safe from nefarious bidding practices seen at auction with the additional benefit of helping them in conserving their small banks.
The game has been in decline for well over a year. Many players have abandoned the card game. What you are truly saying is the predatory style of play which has been encouraged by various groups of well heeled players within the game will decline. This result would be a positive development for the over all vitality and future of the game.
by Benevolent 1 » Sat Sep 04, 2021 2:22 pm
Giovanniland wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:What you'd inferred concerning the poll and "removal of gifting fee" needed to be addressed. Glad to see you've clarified your earlier statements.
We don't want gift exchanges to become obsolete, that's exactly why I've put forth this proposal.
Interestingly, you have provided another reason to support lowering the gifting fee. There is no doubt that gifting exposes the networks of card farming puppet masters. These people won't be gifting as it provides linkage between themselves and their numerous farms. The auction serves them as a free laundromat. It obliterates the point of origin of their cards. Additionally, destruction of this information has value and should come at a cost. Auction fees would serve that purpose.
In summation, a lowered gift fee won't be helping any remaining farmers in S3. These players will continue to prefer eradicating the evidences of their card farms. As a result, the gifting fee is already obsolete for the vast majority of large card farmers, such as yourself. Lowering the gift fee to 20% mainly enhances the ability of the small deck/bank player (who maintains his deck below deck capacity) to avoid the auction risks discussed earlier. Thereby, the reduced gift fee is a tool for keeping the cards of casual players cards safe from nefarious bidding practices seen at auction with the additional benefit of helping them in conserving their small banks.
The game has been in decline for well over a year. Many players have abandoned the card game. What you are truly saying is the predatory style of play which has been encouraged by various groups of well heeled players within the game will decline. This result would be a positive development for the over all vitality and future of the game.
I'm not sure where you got the argument of farmers "eradicating the evidences of their card farms", because for most people it isn't like that. Firstly, it doesn't really matter whether gifts or auctions are used to move cards from two nations controlled by the same person. If I see the sell history of a card farm and what I see is many cards being funneled to a single nation, either by gifts or trades, it is most likely a puppet. Secondly, there is a puppet spreadsheet linking over 50,000 puppets to their masters, which operates together with a script people can use to easily identify a puppet in an auction. This can be useful to know whether a trade is a bank transfer or a legit sale between two players, for example, and most additions to the spreadsheet were voluntary. Therefore, most farmers in fact do the opposite of eradicating evidence.
As for myself, I do still have to pay the gifting fee when, for example, moving legendaries to a storage puppet so that they can be sold there, and then the bank moved to my main nation. This happens similarly with other big farmers without capacity, such as Koem Kab/Greatest Chernobyl, Mikeswill/MikesHope, Seanat/Grey Iree. What you call "nefarious bidding practices", I call something perfectly normal considering even the official FAQ says that "the auction system is designed to force trading at true market prices, reducing the ability of puppet nations to feed valuable cards to their masters." There's a game incentive to make transferring through auctions hard, forcing players to either take the auction risk or pay a fair fee to use the alternative method. There is no change needed.
And as for the game's decline, I believe one major factor is the extended period of time between seasons, and not that gift fees are too high as you say - in fact, many big farmers have gone inactive, and they can definitely afford gifting fees. The decline I mention would be the reduction of auctions as most trades would move to a cheaper gift system, making the game more boring, since one of the fun things to do in trading cards is to participate in auctions.
by Galiantus III » Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:12 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:It's widely known most farmers prefer keeping their numerous card farms disconnected from their main.
Most of the card farmers won't use the gifting feature often and won't care.
Look, the balance between the two distribution methods needs to be rectified. And because of the well known "despicable bidding practices" seen at auction, and the auction's ability to override deck capacity, the 100% gifting fee is not a fair fee and should be reduced. This is the best way of recalibrating the dynamic between the two card distribution systems. In all fairness, the many differing styles of play should be better accommodated in S3.
I do agree there needs to be a more regularity the future seasons lengths and I also am of the opinion a card game off-season is in order. However, I think you are missing the boat on the idea of reducing the gifting fee. As for what is boring at auction, constant, unrelenting inflation is boring and has turned many casual players off completely. And also many of the more active players. This game is not all about you or the players that play the game like you do. The game encompasses many differing styles, all of which should be taken into account by the game's developers when re-formatting for Season 3. That's what amounts to fair in my view.
Frisbeeteria wrote:For some reason I have a mental image of a dolphin, trying to organize a new pod of his fellow dolphins to change the course of a nuclear sub. It's entertaining, I'll give ya that.
Ballotonia wrote:Testing is for sissies. The actual test is to see how many people complain when any change is made ;)
by Giovanniland » Sat Sep 04, 2021 3:13 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:It's widely known most farmers prefer keeping their numerous card farms disconnected from their main. It's evident when searching their buys and sells. That's not the point. All the stuff players who think, drink, breathe and eat cards everyday do is mostly immaterial to the overall question. There are many differing styles of play involved. Most card game players are of the small deck/bank variety and we've lost the majority of them. The gifting fee reduction is a good policy for that large demographic in player style. Most of the card farmers won't use the gifting feature often and won't care.
by Benevolent 1 » Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:01 pm
Galiantus III wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:It's widely known most farmers prefer keeping their numerous card farms disconnected from their main.
Well that's just blatantly false. Anyone can look at your trades list and see the nations you frequently gift cards with. Want to know where my card farming puppets are? I have 25 here, 60 here, and 10 for R/D purposes here (all their flags look like this). It being "widely known" that farmers prefer to keep their numerous card farms disconnected from their main is projection at best, and denial of reality at worst.
You want to know which players actually try to keep puppets disconnected from their main? Raiders. And for the most part they don't even try, because most of their puppets are used for tag raiding which isn't exactly secretive.
Galiantus III wrote:As Gio pointed out, the point of gift fees is to discourage players from using gifting as much as possible, and encourage them to go to auction. Your assets are vulnerable at auction. Having cards go to auction is an equalizer. It increases the chances of people being able to buy cards they want. Lowering the gift fee according to your request will just make it five times easier for players who manage lots of puppets to keep everything organized and ready to go. It means they can save more bank for transfer to their main. And this in turn means more inflation, which is far more harmful to new players than big card farmers.
by Benevolent 1 » Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:19 pm
Giovanniland wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:It's widely known most farmers prefer keeping their numerous card farms disconnected from their main. It's evident when searching their buys and sells. That's not the point. All the stuff players who think, drink, breathe and eat cards everyday do is mostly immaterial to the overall question. There are many differing styles of play involved. Most card game players are of the small deck/bank variety and we've lost the majority of them. The gifting fee reduction is a good policy for that large demographic in player style. Most of the card farmers won't use the gifting feature often and won't care.
If it's "widely known" and "evident", then why does all evidence point to the contrary? I take it you've just ignored what I posted in my previous reply.
And about the rest of your post... nice deflection. Inflation is not the issue at hand here, the gifting fee is, and there is another topic on inflation.
Anyways, I think I've finished stating my point here - and many other farmers also said the same thing, which you don't seem to listen to. Oh well.
by Galiantus III » Sat Sep 04, 2021 7:59 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:I have some faith these obscenely large card farms may biting the dust in S3. You apparently don't. We disagree on the fundamentals of the game and the direction it will go. Once again, get over it. My opinion is different from yours and that hive.
Frisbeeteria wrote:For some reason I have a mental image of a dolphin, trying to organize a new pod of his fellow dolphins to change the course of a nuclear sub. It's entertaining, I'll give ya that.
Ballotonia wrote:Testing is for sissies. The actual test is to see how many people complain when any change is made ;)
by Coffin-Breathe » Sat Sep 04, 2021 9:44 pm
by Fauzjhia » Sat Sep 04, 2021 11:25 pm
Coffin-Breathe wrote:I guess, you´re all missing the valid point in this : the ability to gift cards from one nation to another was created and meant as an option for players willing to support some other players collections, not as a way for safe rearrangement of cards from or between puppets; and the fee also has been installed for a reason (since farming puppets are, though technically legal, nevertheless an abusement of the system and therefore not wanted ), which is to discourage/partially prevent exactly such "rearrangements".
by Benevolent 1 » Sun Sep 05, 2021 8:21 am
Galiantus III wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:I have some faith these obscenely large card farms may biting the dust in S3. You apparently don't. We disagree on the fundamentals of the game and the direction it will go. Once again, get over it. My opinion is different from yours and that hive.
What I find particularly troubling is that you are one of those players at the top. Anyone who has been around for a while understands you would profit from this kind of change. Yet you presented this as if it would help new and casual players. Why is that? Did you think you could trick new players into begging for a proposal that would benefit you at their expense? I would give you the benefit of the doubt and say this is a matter of ignorance, but your experience card farming and gifting cards between your nations proves otherwise.
Galiantus III wrote:
But let's get more to the point. Here is the logic that has me confused about your claims this would help new players, and why I think it would harm them:
Casual players don't often gift cards. But big card farmers often do. So the gifting fee matters a lot more to card farmers than casual players. Lowering the gifting fee benefits players with puppets, and raising it hurts them. Therefore, for anyone hoping to level the playing field to help new and casual players, lowering the gifting fee is counterproductive. It would only help big players.
Galiantus III wrote:Woah, dude. Hold it right there.
by Enzonar » Thu Sep 16, 2021 5:50 am
by Benevolent 1 » Thu Sep 16, 2021 8:05 am
ENZONAR wrote:All new players could just junk useless cards. That's how I got started. The only thing this will benefit is big game card farmers like Koem Kab and Mikeswill to transfer large amounts of cards out of puppet's.
by Galiantus III » Thu Sep 16, 2021 9:05 pm
Benevolent 1 wrote:The argument that big card farmers will benefit from a reduced gifting fee has no credibility.
Frisbeeteria wrote:For some reason I have a mental image of a dolphin, trying to organize a new pod of his fellow dolphins to change the course of a nuclear sub. It's entertaining, I'll give ya that.
Ballotonia wrote:Testing is for sissies. The actual test is to see how many people complain when any change is made ;)
by Benevolent 1 » Fri Sep 17, 2021 8:53 am
Galiantus III wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:The argument that big card farmers will benefit from a reduced gifting fee has no credibility.
It's what everyone has been telling you from the beginning. Casual players don't gift lots of cards. Big card farmers do. You plugging your ears and going "la, la, la" isn't an argument. As a matter of fact, you have never addressed the argument at all. You just keep deflecting with irrelevant statements about auctions and card dropping. From this it is clear you haven't made any effort to consider the consequences of this proposal beyond your own preconceptions about what it would do.
This would cause even more inflation across the board, making it ever harder for average players to enter the market. If you seriously want to help new players, abandon this for a different idea, like modifying auction mechanics, or getting rid of card farms, or something that is actually relevant. Just because you say this idea is relevant (and/or honestly think it is) doesn't mean it is.
by Galiantus III » Fri Sep 17, 2021 11:32 am
Benevolent 1 wrote:The Hive knows they can't interfere with gifted transactions.
Who cares if it helps an occasional farm boy?
Once all the changes are place, small/medium size players will see the advantage.
Another idea is to subsidize small players with compensatory bank (like a stimulus check) and to tax players with absurd bank which they have amassed by abusing TCALS and the mofo's controlled auction funnel.
Frisbeeteria wrote:For some reason I have a mental image of a dolphin, trying to organize a new pod of his fellow dolphins to change the course of a nuclear sub. It's entertaining, I'll give ya that.
Ballotonia wrote:Testing is for sissies. The actual test is to see how many people complain when any change is made ;)
by Benevolent 1 » Mon Sep 27, 2021 3:01 pm
Galiantus III wrote:Benevolent 1 wrote:The Hive knows they can't interfere with gifted transactions.
You are out of touch with reality.Who cares if it helps an occasional farm boy?
"Occasional"? This would make tons of card farming efforts more efficient. They would gather more bank on their puppets, giving the biggest players even more buying power at auction. For someone claiming to care about the little guy, you are really good at ignoring what would hurt them.Once all the changes are place, small/medium size players will see the advantage.
How, though? Myself and others keep asking for an explanation, and you keep deflecting and making blatantly false claims. You are either unwilling or unable to explain why your proposal would do what you believe it would do.Another idea is to subsidize small players with compensatory bank (like a stimulus check) and to tax players with absurd bank which they have amassed by abusing TCALS and the mofo's controlled auction funnel.
If you're serious about this, it just shows how out of touch you really are.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement