.com Forum · Alpha Dog Forum
Replies in this thread : 99
Page : 1 2 3 4 5
<< prev page next page >>
| AquaNet Basic User Posts : 266  |
I strongly disagree with adding show payouts coming from the game. If you do, you would need another sink for money to be taken back out of the game. And I don't think anyone wants to pay higher dog food costs, entry costs, etc... to balance out the game economics. |
||
| Studio Dogs Basic User Posts : 500+ |
Folks who buy their judge are the ones that win, creating a circle that very few can then win enough money to ever get ahead. That being said it will probably never go away. Because of the no handler judges that are being bought, it just solidifies my point of handler over charges. Where do you suppose the money comes from for national specialty payouts? If we took your idea of being paid out because of not standing a chance at group level to make any money, I would still only enter one dog, one bitch special, unless the judge preferred males. And only 1 class dog or bitch. Because I cannot afford more then 4 handlers I cannot build my own majors. Therefore less entries........ In my breed, I'm stuck with players that don't use handlers no matter what. Which sucks because we can compete at group level. |
||
| rowanw Basic User Posts : 123 |
quoteI apologize if my comments were not clear. I'm not indicating that we should get payouts because we don't get group placements. I meant that if I lost the slim chance of a group placement it would take away one of the main reasons I show in the first place. I do think the money/reward system in the game needs to be rethought - but where I place in shows has nothing to do with it. |
||
| Studio Dogs Basic User Posts : 500+ |
Tonight's game..only the no handler judge will get the big entries, which is awesome- even if he'll be over bought during the course of the month, as will Jill quinton. So only those breeds that win under those judges will ever win under those judges and will be the only ones to make money. So, if I'm not mistaken, what you are proposing is a way to make the game payout to all the other breeds too? That is a lot of money, don't use mine, don't raise any of my fees doing it. If you can get the powers that be to create sd money out of thin air then yes I'm all for it. I hope Jeff reads this thread....! |
||
| Welsh Corgi Kennels Basic User Posts : 5,000+ |
Jeff said he'll get to this thread sometime soon, next week or so |
||
| Lilliput Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
Someone correct me iff I'm wrong, but I believe in the early years, sponsors could choose judges for shows and we could, for a fee, make them no handler, even the all breeds. At some point, this was taken away. For exactly the reasons that are cropping up now. Now that it's back in the game, it's once again become an issue. Players buy judges that they show well under, and give3n a chance, make everything no handler. It's taking away the strategy in the game, and it's not to anyone's advantage. |
||
| griffin Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
this post has been edited 2 time(s) quoteActually, the incentives to over-breed mean than even if everyone had a balance of $25,000 it is unlikely dog prices would be much higher than they currently are. The puppy market will always have over-supply dragging down prices. So I doubt whether this suggestion would screw up the SD economy more than it already is. Although I would personally set the payouts for show placements lower since the people who can get show placements regularly don't need an incentive to show. |
||
| Belushi Afghans Basic User Posts : 20 |
I would like to see the judges selected at random. That way, others would have a chance to get ahead and not just the same winners over and over. |
||
| rowanw Basic User Posts : 123 |
quoteI like this idea. |
||
| gaylanstudio Premium Member Posts : 2,000+  |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) I get the feeling that many folks are unhappy with how the "pick the judge" thing is working. I'm not really comfortable with the idea of messing with the economy by adding payments. Since I very rarely get group placements, my focus is mainly at the breed level. I like owner-judges - there is no race to get the best handler and that has got to be a good thing. My second favourite is the "not at all political" judge (if it is in fact working as I expect). In theory, a not political judge will give the handler advantage to the most skilled handler. The best handler is not limited to the one or two highest ranked in "the list". This opens up the handler selection - who's better (Julie, Ellen, Veronica, Justin, Roxanne, etc)? I'm not sure exactly - they are all in the top 5 or 10 at some point. The interesting feature here is that we can experiment a bit and see if we can find a hidden gem among the handlers. As it is the vast majority of handlers are almost never used unless they happen to be high on the preferred list of a number of political judges. (I'd like to see more variety in those preferred lists too.) To me, since there is no benefit to picking a judge, and I generally can't afford it anyway, I'd be quite happy to see the "pick a judge" feature removed or limited - perhaps once per month per user. And I admit, I don't know if that (limits) would solve the problem as I don't pay that much attention. If we were to go back to all random judges, I would like to see something in place that guarantees a selection of judges - 1 owner, 1 non-political, 1 very political, etc. - each night or some such. Perhaps it could be based on a week or month as far as that goes - 25% of shows are owner-judges, 25% not political, 40% the "not overt"/"not very" middle ground political, 10% very political with a goal of as much variety per night as possible. |
||
| Summerwind Kennels Basic User Posts : 500+ |
I think random judges is a way better idea also, but I still think there needs to be something to encourage more active participation in the game. As someone said before the existing players need to be maximized as well as attracting new players. And if the current players were more active that would likely be more attractive to new players. The BOB payout for national specialties is great but it only benefits one person once a month and most often one of the established kennels in any given breed. There needs to be something more often as an incentive for more players in all breeds. I've also asked before for more options to give show payouts, for example, BOS, 2nd-4th in group, RWB and RWD in specialties etc. that way people like myself who regularly add payouts could help more people that way as well. I still like the incentives mentioned at the beginning of this thread as well and am in total support. I know that the lack of ways to make money and the cost of feeding/showing, etc is one of the most frustrating things for people in the game and push come to shove people aren't going to pay for something they find frustrating. I'm not saying take away all the money strategy but there definately needs to be some added incentives for the bulk of players to encourage more active play across all breeds and the game in general. We used to win 10s of thousands of dollars with god specials dogs and in breeds that didn't necessarily go BIS, this game needs to get back to that point, where it's fun and competitive no matter what breed you're in. |
||
| Studio Dogs Basic User Posts : 500+ |
an aside from this comment <quote>#1 we have to attract new players, convert those players to subscribing full time players and retain existing full time players. Why do players leave? What works in the game, what doesn't?</quote> Showdog just awarded a ten year to a person that is a basic- has all but 5 dogs for sale.... jus' sayin' |
||
| Degree Basic User Posts : 500+ |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) quotetzuvan? Are you kidding me? That user seems newly basic for whatever reason. 228 champions over the course of 10 years on this site plus that. That's hundreds of dollars in a premium account most likely. Most of the All Time Top Shih Tzu's are of their breeding. Well deserved, even if they are no longer playing. |
||
| Welsh Corgi Kennels Basic User Posts : 5,000+ |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) quoteYou can even look at the dogs ages that are for sale, the first one I clicked on was only 69 days old! They're currently second in their breed and 12 dogs of merit. So what do you mean by this? |
||
| Welsh Corgi Kennels Basic User Posts : 5,000+ |
quoteWay better said than I did. |
||
| Shadowstorm Kennels Basic User Posts : 301 |
Lets not point fingers at people, please. |
||
| Studio Dogs Basic User Posts : 500+ |
this post has been edited 2 time(s) just pointing out how people abuse it. no telling how long it had been since they logged in before they got the message of kudo's. Hell, I log in every once in a while to my show horse account, still I don't play like I'm a basic. third row could probably use they money that they are skipping out on... tell me is this a wrong image to imply that I am a mentor?  |
||
| Lilliput Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
quoteNo way. It used to be, a no handler specialty and the SDWC were real treats. You looked forward to them because they were the only no handler shows you got. 25% is WAY to frequent. It's killing the game. There's no strategy in no handler judges. Plus, if there's one no handler judge a night, we all know which show is going to be getting the most entries. |
||
| Studio Dogs Basic User Posts : 500+ |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) hence, SD sponsoring a show a night and charging an entry fee... even a $20 fee, can trickle down to bos, wd, wb and bow for that show ETA Sorry Boksu, I didn't mean to hijack your thread. I am just as passionate about this as you are :} |
||
| Lilliput Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
quoteThat's not the point. The point is, there's no strategy in no handler shows, and they get the overwhelming share of the entries. |
6/17/2013 7:59:24 AM
|
Replies in this thread : 99
Post Reply |
