.com Forum · General
This thread is now closed
Replies in this thread : 204
Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
<< prev page next page >>
| Canyon View Kennels Basic User Posts : 144  |
quoteOnce again, it circles around to my previous statement: quote |
||
| Welsh Corgi Kennels Basic User Posts : 5,000+ |
I'm not trying to be rude at all Canyon, I guess I"m just trying to figure out where you're coming from. |
||
| Degree Premium Member Posts : 500+  |
Im under the impression that Canyon thinks its good for us that we've figured out a way to stay afloat financially. But those that can't (or in my opinion, refuse to) learn how to play should have an option to "refill" their accounts. I wouldn't have learned how to play if I had a bailout option. And now Canyon will say "good for me." Hm, I have some kennel cleaning to do to lower my food bill and save money. |
||
| Canyon View Kennels Basic User Posts : 144 |
quoteShouldn't be hard, being I've stated it over and over and over again. Running a source account, doing breeding within your own account, changing your session/salary ratio is something someone new to the game is going to necessarily know to do without trial and error and sticking with it over time. I do appreciate the posting of how you manage your kennel, being it's not my business nor do I care how you run your kennels. I have stated I'm not in debt, but can see the positives and think Jeff would take care of the negative concerns being raised. I'm done with this issue. |
||
| Canyon View Kennels Basic User Posts : 144 |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) quote You seem oblivious to the fact that people aren't staying around to play the game, hence learning the game. It is an OPTION for some people to stay and play... I do appreciate how you're trying to paint me and others that see the option as dense and would like to see a advantage for some to cheat and get ahead. Because if you realize it or not, that is how your comments do come across. ----- Last edited by Canyon View Kennels on 7/9/2013 1:43:02 PM |
||
| Welsh Corgi Kennels Basic User Posts : 5,000+ |
quoteThen to bad for them. Let them leave. This isn't Farmville. |
||
| Welsh Corgi Kennels Basic User Posts : 5,000+ |
this post has been edited 2 time(s) Also Canyon, we're allowed to disagree, Just like you're allowed to disagree. Being rude to everyone isn't exactly mature.. and I'm aware you're going to make a huge post that in a way, insults me  I'm ready. and I'm about done with this post. I'm going to suggest to Jeff to lock it. So if you have a witty comment, I wont ever see it. Good day  |
||
| Canyon View Kennels Basic User Posts : 144 |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) quoteRich coming from someone that stated: quoteAlready a closed kennel....Out and DONE with this.. ----- Last edited by Canyon View Kennels on 7/9/2013 1:45:04 PM |
||
| Degree Premium Member Posts : 500+ |
There has been a decrease in players in this game for.a long time. This will not solve that issue, sorry. Canyon, so long as I have a voice, we can agree to disagree. I love it |
||
| Basic User Posts : 1,000+ |
Everkai, just to point this out but not all source breeders can handle and maintain their money the way you do, so bravo for that. I for one source breed, and maintaining money isn't as easy as you say it is. Personally, I agree with Canyon. It IS a game, not real life and having the option to have some extra cash to help out your kennel won't damage the game if there are proper rules and regulations put in place by Admin. Thinking of solely improving the game, I believe that this if implemented could possibly raise our number of players, not to mention more money for the site creators. Ultimately the choice remains with Admin and I'll be happy with whatever is chosen. |
||
| Airyah Basic User Posts : 44 |
That was me, sorry, I timed out. |
||
| Lilliput Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
In my experience, the players who stay are the ones who are serious from the get go- who take the time to read the rules, study the game, and make smart choices. I never ran my kennel into debt starting out, instead I took my time and made smart choices and good investments. The other players I've met who end up staying and contributing, do the same. There is nothing stopping source breeders from maintaining or increasing their balance. It requires sacrifices- you can't keep or breed as many dogs, maybe have to maintain them on lesser food. But it most certainly CAN be done. Just because you can't manage to play within the confines of your budget, does not mean that the budget is the issue. In my own source/rare breed kennel, I was able to breed quite a bit thanks to taking a long time to build up a balance for that. Once that money was gone, I ran the kennel into debt, and then changed my money management practices so that is is now showing a nice positive balance and continuing to grow. Also, source breeders choose to play like that, it was never really the intent of the game. It's a strategy that takes a long time to see results in the ring- something source breeders know going into it. For me, I see where people will know they can buy more money, and thus breed recklessly and far into debt, with no consequences. Even if you put a limit on it- say, you can buy out once a year- that's still one time a year when I can recklessly spend my cash TO MY ADVANTAGE, and then not feel the consequences later. It's like a free giant spending spree- and I'm against it. It doesn't encourage good money management practices at all, which are a central part of this game. The difference between buying your way up, and old timers who have big bankrolls- is that those old timers started with exactly what you did- and then played wisely to get what they have today. You might even be surprised to know that those Old Timers do not necessarily HAVE big bank accounts. My kennel has been in debt more times than I can count, but it's always somewhat strategic, and then I work my way back out. I have slightly more than the average balance at the moment, but I'm hardly rich. The other thing is that there is a salary cap. Nobody on here works their way up to billionaire status. The salary is capped at $20,000? (I think, or maybe $25,000) in my 9+years, I've only ever reached it once, and then it involved severe cutbacks with the goal of just seeing if I could do it). which means the game prevents you from being TOO successful so the rich's detriment on poorer players is limited in that way. |
||
| Basic User Posts : 1,000+ |
*puts on philosopher's hat* I think the fundamental issue here is how people see the game. -------------------------------------------------- AGAINST the proposal: I, an old timer against this proposal, see the game as one of strategy. It is a HARD game to play, because it is hard to keep you kennel balance in the black, which is why I like it. In addition, it is also a FAIR game, since all premium players pay the same amount to play (not since the pay for more kennel space - but I was against that too). So regardless of how much money I have IRL to invest in the game I'm not at a disadvantage compared to other player. Thus I can feel proud of my achievements in the game because I have earned them through skill, not because I happen to have spare money I can pump into the game. Every additional feature which give more advantage to players who are able to pay more takes away from that and "cheapens" the success I have worked hard to achieve. -------------------------------------------------- FOR the proposal (this is not my personal opinion so if someone in the for camp can articulate this better please do so): The game is one of fun. It is a FUN game because of all the things you can do in the game (breed, show, source breed, etc...). To keep yourself from going into debt you have to restrict the things you do which makes the game less fun, thus less enjoyable. Having the option to bail yourself out would mean you could do more which would make the game more fun. The game, as it is, is not fair because older players have had more time to learn the best strategies during a time when more people were learning the game so making mistakes was not so costly. Therefore letting players buy SD money would make the game more fair because newer players who could afford it could reduce the cost of their mistakes. The lack of activity, due to lack of money/players, reduces the ability to get many achievements by newer player (eg. S/DOM, top all-time showing etc...). Any changes which make this easier actually make the game more fair. -------------------------------------------------- grif, |
||
| griffin Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
That was me I timed out. I could also do a list of possible outcomes of implementing this proposal but I think we need to acknowledge the value differences before we start arguing about the details. grif, |
||
| Hazygate Basic User Posts : 500+ |
The only way I'd be in favor of this is if there were limitations on it as far as # of times you can do it per month, limits on the amount (say $1000 only) and maybe a requirement that your balance be under $1000 or maybe even below 0. Like, allow you to buy enough to bump you back into the black if you mismanaged your kennel, but not so much that you never feel a need to sell dogs or put dogs at stud (bc you can only buy money every X number of months) |
||
| Degree Premium Member Posts : 500+ |
I was just thinking about when I first started playing seriously in 2007, a lot of the features we have today have made the game 'easier'. The biggest one for me is the fact that litters settle on the date. I remember waiting to check the puppies between 0-2 days for low SS to FH them and that anticipation of day 10. I used to feed all my dogs on Pet House and I didn't understand custom rations at all for a long time. I feel that a lot of the new players are spoiled. O/H judges are available so those that don't wish to participate with handlers don't have to. Kennel limits can be increased so no worries about having 30+ dogs. SOPs are readily available so no going back and forth between a calculator. Nothing is wrong with these things, but I can appreciate the challenge. The last thing left is not having to worry about finances, which is probably the biggest aspect of this game. No money means I have to change my approach. The ability to buy money means I can continue to run myself into debt. So to this: quoteThat's right. I'll call my situation nostalgic but that's why I still play. And thanks for the breakdown, griffin. |
||
| Little River Kennel Premium Member Posts : 1,000+ |
this post has been edited 1 time(s) No, that reminds me too much of iPhone games where it's simply too easy to get further in the game if you pay for currency/items/etc....no real challenge in those games. Although, if you were to make it so that you could only buy currency if you had less than $500 in your account, that might be better, to encourage people to keep playing once they get more money. ~HG ----- Last edited by Holy Grail Shepherds on 7/21/2013 3:22:51 PM |
||
| Crush Kennels Basic User Posts : 5 |
Well realistically MANY top winning show dogs in RL are such through advertising, they get the dogs name and face in all the big magazines and judges see that, the people pay hundreds and hundreds campaigning show dogs, tons of extra money goes into it, far more than your everyday dog show exhibitor. It would be a way in the game to help those in debt and yes some may find a way to use it as an edge but it wouldn't really be any different than RL, most top winners campaign extensively throughout the dogs career. The managed budgets of those who do not utilize this part of the game would have just a good a chance as in RL against a popular known advertised dog. If people didn't advertise their dogs, many many many of those dogs would probably not stick out quite as much (as they probably wouldn't show as much). Those who do utilize the part of the game would have a little extra money for entering more shows. I definantly think a cap and some restrictions should be in order. Have a cap at the amount of money allowed to be purchased at one time, maybe even just make a thing for those in debt, they can pay a fee once every so often if they've been stuck in debt for x amount of time to bring it back to $2,500, basically starting over, or maybe even just up to $1000. Either way I see a lot of benefit to adding at least something like this. |
||
| phildeco Basic User Posts : 4 |
I understand where people are coming from, as the only time my accounts have been above 2000 was when they were new. My kennels have been number 1 in different breeds at different times, because I have to stop showing some breeds while I focus on another breed in my kennel.When I get back to the other breeds it's like starting all over again as I have to prep new dogs to show. May be if we increased the breed amounts that are paid out for best in breed. I might be able to keep showing my winning dogs while I use my other funds to bring along the other breeds. Just a suggestion . |
||
| griffin Basic User Posts : 3,000+ |
quoteAnd IRL serious/top dog fanciers are upper middle class, nouveaux rich, and established aristocrats. There are signs all over the place in RL dog showing from when it was an exclusively upper class pursuit. Given the horrible levels of inequality all over the world (which have only gotten worse in recent years) I would prefer that element of RL to stay out of the game. grif, |
7/9/2013 1:22:01 PM
|
This thread is now closed Replies in this thread : 204
Thread Closed |
