[zvonimir]

Certainly gave you see that there are dynasty, which have one or two members.How is it dynasty?I him call name antidynasty. I think that dynasty, which has less than six members should not (could) take part in the overall state of dynasty.Such dynasty will not accept new members already healed frustration from the former dynasty that could not be number one.Them establish dynasty with another strong member of the goal to reach the first position by ave dynasty.
Their only aim is to be number one not choosing methods.To is not good for new members to Yarold.
With time up to lose the entire Yarold and no one gets.

1.MMC UBC And itself ,pray Yarold that reveals about it, what thoughts on such dynasty?
2.MMC UBC gives deadline of 3 days dynasty less than 6 members to receive more than 5 members in dynasty otherwise we will be forced stop alliance with them ..

3. I prayed the other dynasty to say what you think about small dynasty(antidynasty).




Conclusion: dynasty less than 6 members can not have a calculation of average as other real dynasty.

[Jeanne]

I too am against the system being abused but you can't say that dynasties with less than 5-6 members can't have their average calculated how will a new starting dynasty then ever make it? And sometimes it takes abusing the system to show the decision makers that something is wrong.

There could be separate ranking lists - 1 for small dynasties less than 10-15 members maybe or .....

when you leave a dynasty your average, that you have worked up in that dynasty, drops to zero so when you join a dynasty you have to start from scratch - something that would have stopped your dynasty from being where you are today I know - but will also stop the small 1-2-4- man dynasties from just popping up with high aves in a few days.

[zvonimir]

I know that you can calculate the average for any number of members but this should be prohibited .. Dynasty with few members should be eligible to compete separately ..

[DemonicJ]

[b][color=green]ok Zvon, I thank you in advance for you alliance. As I am one of the 3 allies (net freaks & happy clickers being the other 2) you have under your new imposed limit of 6 members. Now let me give you the flip side to your argument.

Your happy to support bigger dynasties & not help new dynasties. How is this good to new members of yarolds that want to start a new dynasty? Or are you saying its ok to ally with them till they look like passing your dynasty average?

I am trying to recruit, but greed has become such a huge thing here with bigger dynasties running comps for credits for doing all sorts of things, improve ave, improve care, beat the record etc. Makes it very hard for smaller dynasties to compete when there are big dynasties throwing thousands of credits around every day dont you think?

My dynasty, Eternity, was not set up to be a number 1 dynasty contender. If it becomes one shouldnt that be a credit to the dynasty & its allies?

So yes your subject for this is right, you appear to be antidynasty to anyone that may challenge you for top of the table[/color][/b]

[DemonicJ]

[quote]when you leave a dynasty your average, that you have worked up in that dynasty, drops to zero so when you join a dynasty you have to start from scratch - something that would have stopped your dynasty from being where you are today I know - but will also stop the small 1-2-4- man dynasties from just popping up with high aves in a few days.[/quote]

[color=green][shadow=green][b]when you left a dynasty you did have your average reset to 0, but that created its own problems back then!

If I remember correctly, UBC started with high average members & only a few members & there average jumped up rather quickly too! Guess whats good for some isnt good for others?[/b][/shadow][/color]

[MUSHpark]

[quote="zvonimir"]
Conclusion: dynasty less than 6 members can not have a calculation of average as other real dynasty.[/quote]
Why 6? Why not 7? Or 5? Or 3? Or 10? Or 20?

I think we all generally agree that it's very easy for a "dynasty" with a very small number of members to reach the top if they get the right set of allies.

But I think we all disagree on what "very small number" means. If that number is bigger than 4, then it's clearly someone angry of the size of the current dynasty at the top of the rankings. Or one rapidly rising through the rankings that will overtake them. Perhaps sour grapes that they are #2?

The current dynasty ranking system is not "antidynasty" it is "antinewbie". I have recently started taking on a lot of newbies, and my dynasty's average has suffered for it. As you imply, the dynasties with small membership making it to the top are doing so without taking on new members. Most of the ones at the top took transfers from other dynasties who already had a high average, or have been around a very long time.

I think the system should be changed to reward both size and the top clickers, and not make a penalty when a dynasty accepts a newcomer who clicks well but has a "1" average because they just joined. The old dynasty system which rewarded bigger dynasty size by fixing the # of allies did that. The new system encourages lots of tiny dynasties and leaves newbies to hunt for a larger dynasty that doesn't compete for the top spot.

But until everyone can agree on what's the right size for a dynasty, we're not going to fix this.

[DemonicJ]

[quote]But I think we all disagree on what "very small number" means. If that number is bigger than 4, then it's clearly someone angry of the size of the current dynasty at the top of the rankings. Or one rapidly rising through the rankings that will overtake them. Perhaps sour grapes that they are #2?[/quote]
[b]
[color=green]Yes im sensing its more about the sour grapes than anything else. If the top dynasty had 9 members would "anit dynasties' be those under 10? [/b] [/color]:roll:

[bailey]

i dont have a problem with dynasties under 6, single member dynasties are wasting there own time but if you were to reach the highest peak of the dynasty average mountain then the strength of that dynasty should be by the numbers it holds, if not then you have achieved what i think is a small victory, an easy victory, i still have no problem in letting them have there time at the top but to stretch themselves a little more by trying to add more members

[DemonicJ]

[quote="bailey"]i dont have a problem with dynasties under 6, single member dynasties are wasting there own time but if you were to reach the highest peak of the dynasty average mountain then the strength of that dynasty should be by the numbers it holds, if not then you have achieved what i think is a small victory, an easy victory, i still have no problem in letting them have there time at the top but to stretch themselves a little more by trying to add more members[/quote]

[b][color=green]So well said Ash. If an under 6 member dynasty can make it to the top, yes it is a very hollow victory. When a larger dynasty can do it then it is a bigger acheivement.

The other point worth making is that some bigger dynasties only take on the under 6's out of greed anyways. Net freaks shows all links during happy hours (thats 40 links) & I know we do as well (thats 20 links). In total thats 60 extra links a day for those in bigger dynasties that can click them. Or put another way thats an extra +6 to personal average to every member that can click them (every 10 dynasty clicks = 1 point on personal average)! Calculate what that might do to your dynasty average if they arent there & the next biggest dynasty keeps the under 6's [/color][/b]

[DaBabes City]

[quote="zvonimir"]Certainly gave you see that there are dynasty, which have one or two members.How is it dynasty?I him call name antidynasty. I think that dynasty, which has less than six members should not (could) take part in the overall state of dynasty.Such dynasty will not accept new members already healed frustration from the former dynasty that could not be number one.Them establish dynasty with another strong member of the goal to reach the first position by ave dynasty.
Their only aim is to be number one not choosing methods.To is not good for new members to Yarold.
With time up to lose the entire Yarold and no one gets.

1.MMC UBC And itself ,pray Yarold that reveals about it, what thoughts on such dynasty?
2.MMC UBC gives deadline of 3 days dynasty less than 6 members to receive more than 5 members in dynasty otherwise we will be forced stop alliance with them ..

3. I prayed the other dynasty to say what you think about small dynasty(antidynasty).




Conclusion: dynasty less than 6 members can not have a calculation of average as other real dynasty.[/quote]


Our dynasty has had four members for months, and we have worked our way to being the "First to 500!" meaning the first Dynasty willing to work hard enough to attain a 500 average. We added a great clicker who has helped us, but another super one has left. We are actively recruiting more members, as we have been all along. Some people respect that we show more active links daily than some dynasties four or five times our size. Most have congratulated us graciously as our average surpassed theirs. Personally I am proud of our achievements, but then I know the thousands of hours of work!

[turdkey]

This thread shows how well the changes worked! Now we no longer have 5 super dynasties we have newer smaller ones popping up all the time. I am still waiting to see if a single member dynasty ever reaches the top though.

Let's all be happy we have somewhere to click in the first place!

This thread shows how well the changes worked! Now we no longer have 5 super dynasties we have newer smaller ones popping up all the time. I am still waiting to see if a single member dynasty ever reaches the top though.

Let's all be happy we have somewhere to click in the first place!

[Ferrari]

Of course a single member dynasty will reach the top :!:
If i make a dynasty now, and take no members, but have enough allies than i can reach the top, look to Eternity they are now 5, tomorrow 4 (than i am 5 grin) and in a week they are 1, maybe 2 weeks.

[engelina]

okay, my opinion to this: (( its mine, not my dynasty's, beware of that))

all dynasty's start small. most grow beyond that sooner or later. some stay small, but are good allies to have.


As i see it,t here are two kids of smaller dynasty's. the ones that have members that are willing to click, and thus also make good allies, since they have links to click, and the ones that simply do nothing.


i have some small dynasty's as allies. i have seen some of those small dynasty's grow to the bigger ones they are now. i think we all should remember that what now is a 2 man dynasty, might be a bigger one later. the only cap i put on accepting allies is that i don't want to get too close to the 400 limit, and that the new ally is not negative a lot.


the only idea i would like to see is more then one ranking table. we currently have the one we all know. i am not talking about removing that one, but adding a few, or at least two: a top average page for bigger dynasty's and one for the smaller. and maybe a few that are based on other factors then average.

[Roman]

I think thats its not a good idea to say that Dynasties with a certain amount of Members can not participate in the ranking system.

But perhaps there would be a way to make a new ranking system?

The Points get calculated by the Average of all members and the amount of members. I just calculated that all Dynasties that exist on Yarolds have an average of 12 mmebers. So perhaps its possible to give a positive Bonus to Dynasties with more members and a negative Bonus to Dynasties with less members.

So both counts. Amount of memebrs and Average of all members.

P.s.
That would mix it up a bit more. For me personally RMV is still Number 1 in the ranking system. Many members + great average!

[Metalteo]

[color=darkred]Originally dynasty were ranked on members count, but that was changed a while ago.

You can still sort the dynasty page on [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php?order=M]members[/URL] , [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php?order=T]total clicks[/URL] , [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php?order=N]name[/URL].

What could be possible is adding a new ranking, that calculates total clicks done by all members in day.

In other words, it would be the sum of all members average or dynasty avg * total members.
It's all the same.

This would reflect the most active dynasty more based on the amount of members they have.

This calculation has no bad effect when accepting new members with low average. Infact even a new member with 1 avg, will still add 1 to the total.

this is just an idea.[/color]

[zvonimir]

[quote="DemonicJ"]

If I remember correctly, UBC started with high average members & only a few members & there average jumped up rather quickly too! Guess whats good for some isnt good for others?[/quote]


I am not talking about the average members but average dynasty.
MMC UBC launched dynasty of 10 members and this number increase over time.

I do not want to break Ally easily, but I want to Ally that all dynasty develop normally.
Two members can drive two-seater kayak and not be a dynasty.

[DemonicJ]

[b][color=green]Mate, I hate to break it to you but 1 person can be a dynasty here.

I chose to start a dynasty & am recruiting by advertising in this forum only. It wasnt started by mailing members & getting them to improve their averages in another dynasties before moving to the newly created dynasty. Yes your dynasty has grown, might have something to do with a rapidly increasing average? Im sure as my average increases so will the members in my dynasty (or maybe I can mail members in other dynasties to join me when they have a big average?). :roll: [/color][/b]

[b][color=olive]My point being, your dynasty was a planned thing from the beginning, mine isnt & will grow as its noticed by others they arent in dynasties or or unhappy in whatever dynasty they maybe in. we all started from an idea.[/color][/b]

[zvonimir]

[quote="Metalteo"]Originally dynasty were ranked on members count, but that was changed a while ago.

You can still sort the dynasty page on [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php?order=M]members[/URL] , [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php?order=T]total clicks[/URL] , [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php?order=N]name[/URL].

What could be possible is adding a new ranking, that calculates total clicks done by all members in day.

In other words, it would be the sum of all members average or dynasty avg * total members.
It's all the same.

This would reflect the most active dynasty more based on the amount of members they have.

This calculation has no bad effect when accepting new members with low average. Infact even a new member with 1 avg, will still add 1 to the total.

this is just an idea.[/quote]

Existing calculation by state dynasty is good I do not have anything against him.
I am against small dynasty (1-5 members). I think that such a dynasty not be put along with higher dynasty (20 members or more). Dynasty to 5 members would not be at on [URL=http://swle.yarold.eu/dynasty.php]this[/URL] table ,Or 10 in future.Not only one or two members.



[b]I suggest This calculation for the state dynastyes;[color=orange] ave dynasty +number of members dynasty = total ave dynasty[/color][/b]

[DaBabes City]

[quote="bailey"]i dont have a problem with dynasties under 6, single member dynasties are wasting there own time but if you were to reach the highest peak of the dynasty average mountain then the strength of that dynasty should be by the numbers it holds, if not then you have achieved what i think is a small victory, an easy victory, i still have no problem in letting them have there time at the top but to stretch themselves a little more by trying to add more members[/quote]
Thank you, Bailey, that is exactly what we have done. We have worked our way to the top, then added another member who is a credit to us. Sadly, our long time kampaku reached the goals he had set for himself and left or we'd still be five, and we are actively seeking more members. When another applies whose work ethic agrees with ours we will take them on, our average will drop, then we will work our way back up to the top.
Our allies will get a credit for each click as long as I am Emperor, and we encourage each of our members to show ten links at Happy Hour or some other time each day. Some may critique our Dynasty size, but our work ethic has been unimpeachable.

[zvonimir]

[quote="DaBabes City"]
Thank you, Bailey, that is exactly what we have done. We have worked our way to the top, then added another member who is a credit to us. Sadly, our long time kampaku reached the goals he had set for himself and left or we'd still be five, and we are actively seeking more members. When another applies whose work ethic agrees with ours we will take them on, our average will drop, then we will work our way back up to the top.
Our allies will get a credit for each click as long as I am Emperor, and we encourage each of our members to show ten links at Happy Hour or some other time each day. Some may critique our Dynasty size, but our work ethic has been unimpeachable.[/quote]


I am amazed your work and have nothing against .Your work is really great..I you sympathy from the beginning but I'm sorry that your dynasty is not growing.

[thepossum1]

Just throwing my 2¢ worth of opinion in now that I've read the whole thread.

I recall when jassej began his dynasty, there were less than 3 members. All dynasties begin that way. We readily accepted alliance to allow his dynasty to grow. Some grow quickly, some do not, some choose to remain small, some want to have as many members as the alliance total rule will allow, some want to be in the middle. The dynasty alliance rule was adjusted to allow small dynasties a chance to compete by allowing no limit on the number of allies, just a fixed number for the total. Under the previous dynasty/alliance rules, small dynasties had no chance because the large dynasties allied with each other leaving no room for small ones since you could only have 4 allies.

IMHO if we want to compete, we all play by the same rules/calculations. If a dynasty happens to have a good set of allies and motivated clickers who have high averages why should they be penalized for working hard simply because they are small?

The easiest way to raise your dynasty average is to assist your members to become excellant clickers. If your members all have personal averages over 400, the dynasty average will be over 400 whether you have 2 or 200 members. Help those who may be new to know how to stop the drain on their credits by showing to dynasty only, to try to click during the Happy Hours/Times when additional links are available to click, to not show more links than they can support through their own clicking. For me, it more critical that a member not go minus than have an outrageously high personal average--I want to be able to click their links. More links to click equals higher average both personal & dynasty.

[DaBabes City]

[quote="zvonimir"][quote="DaBabes City"]
Thank you, Bailey, that is exactly what we have done. We have worked our way to the top, then added another member who is a credit to us. Sadly, our long time kampaku reached the goals he had set for himself and left or we'd still be five, and we are actively seeking more members. When another applies whose work ethic agrees with ours we will take them on, our average will drop, then we will work our way back up to the top.
Our allies will get a credit for each click as long as I am Emperor, and we encourage each of our members to show ten links at Happy Hour or some other time each day. Some may critique our Dynasty size, but our work ethic has been unimpeachable.[/quote]


I am amazed your work and have nothing against .Your work is really great..I you sympathy from the beginning but I'm sorry that your dynasty is not growing.[/quote]

Thank you, Zvonimir, for the respect you have shown us. Our dynasty will grow at its own natural pace. Our Team's main interest is in what we consider to be excellence, and we will admit only those members who can match us, or have the sincere desire to learn. On the other hand we will not fault those who choose to have a more laid back dynasty. This is a game, after all. :)

[size=9][ [i][b]Added[/b]: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:21 am[/i] ][/size]
[quote="thepossum1"]Just throwing my 2¢ worth of opinion in now that I've read the whole thread.

I recall when jassej began his dynasty, there were less than 3 members. All dynasties begin that way. We readily accepted alliance to allow his dynasty to grow. Some grow quickly, some do not, some choose to remain small, some want to have as many members as the alliance total rule will allow, some want to be in the middle. The dynasty alliance rule was adjusted to allow small dynasties a chance to compete by allowing no limit on the number of allies, just a fixed number for the total. Under the previous dynasty/alliance rules, small dynasties had no chance because the large dynasties allied with each other leaving no room for small ones since you could only have 4 allies.

IMHO if we want to compete, we all play by the same rules/calculations. If a dynasty happens to have a good set of allies and motivated clickers who have high averages why should they be penalized for working hard simply because they are small?

The easiest way to raise your dynasty average is to assist your members to become excellant clickers. If your members all have personal averages over 400, the dynasty average will be over 400 whether you have 2 or 200 members. Help those who may be new to know how to stop the drain on their credits by showing to dynasty only, to try to click during the Happy Hours/Times when additional links are available to click, to not show more links than they can support through their own clicking. For me, it more critical that a member not go minus than have an outrageously high personal average--I want to be able to click their links. More links to click equals higher average both personal & dynasty.[/quote]
Thank you, Possum. Your alliance with us has proven to be be backed by your impeccable integrity! You have all of my respect. :)

[jassej]

We all have once dynasty founded, and of course everybody needs help at home and MMC UBC will continue to support this dynasty under our Facilities (400) but man needed little time to see whether the dynasty wants to grow (or can) or not because 1, 2,3,4,5 man dynasty, I do not accept and will ally with those ends! So everyone needs help and we will continue to help as long as we do not begin to benefit from!

[size=9][ [i][b]Added[/b]: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:19 pm[/i] ][/size]
[quote="MUSHpark"][quote="zvonimir"]
Conclusion: dynasty less than 6 members can not have a calculation of average as other real dynasty.[/quote]
Why 6? Why not 7? Or 5? Or 3? Or 10? Or 20?

I think we all generally agree that it's very easy for a "dynasty" with a very small number of members to reach the top if they get the right set of allies.

But I think we all disagree on what "very small number" means. If that number is bigger than 4, then it's clearly someone angry of the size of the current dynasty at the top of the rankings. Or one rapidly rising through the rankings that will overtake them. Perhaps sour grapes that they are #2?

The current dynasty ranking system is not "antidynasty" it is "antinewbie". I have recently started taking on a lot of newbies, and my dynasty's average has suffered for it. As you imply, the dynasties with small membership making it to the top are doing so without taking on new members. Most of the ones at the top took transfers from other dynasties who already had a high average, or have been around a very long time.

I think the system should be changed to reward both size and the top clickers, and not make a penalty when a dynasty accepts a newcomer who clicks well but has a "1" average because they just joined. The old dynasty system which rewarded bigger dynasty size by fixing the # of allies did that. The new system encourages lots of tiny dynasties and leaves newbies to hunt for a larger dynasty that doesn't compete for the top spot.

But until everyone can agree on what's the right size for a dynasty, we're not going to fix this.[/quote]

I need no permission from anyone ally to stop it is more concerned dynasty opportunities to enter into ally to stay! Course there are intentioned Net freaks and Eternity and for so long was only Net freaks "antidynasty" has gone but now we have second 3.4 Such dynasty soon and it is simply not fair!
We should all think and give suggestions for a fair rule because this is not it!
One possibility would be for only days click dynasty ave to be calculated according ... Second best opportunity of sports, 1 and the second league to establish which is updated monthly and after certain number of members directed ... Third ave the opportunity for smaller dynasty differently calculated and more
So we all know this rule is not fair and because we should all work to improve!

[size=9][ [i][b]Added[/b]: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:29 pm[/i] ][/size]
[quote="DaBabes City"][quote="zvonimir"]Certainly gave you see that there are dynasty, which have one or two members.How is it dynasty?I him call name antidynasty. I think that dynasty, which has less than six members should not (could) take part in the overall state of dynasty.Such dynasty will not accept new members already healed frustration from the former dynasty that could not be number one.Them establish dynasty with another strong member of the goal to reach the first position by ave dynasty.
Their only aim is to be number one not choosing methods.To is not good for new members to Yarold.
With time up to lose the entire Yarold and no one gets.

1.MMC UBC And itself ,pray Yarold that reveals about it, what thoughts on such dynasty?
2.MMC UBC gives deadline of 3 days dynasty less than 6 members to receive more than 5 members in dynasty otherwise we will be forced stop alliance with them ..

3. I prayed the other dynasty to say what you think about small dynasty(antidynasty).




Conclusion: dynasty less than 6 members can not have a calculation of average as other real dynasty.[/quote]


Our dynasty has had four members for months, and we have worked our way to being the "First to 500!" meaning the first Dynasty willing to work hard enough to attain a 500 average. We added a great clicker who has helped us, but another super one has left. We are actively recruiting more members, as we have been all along. Some people respect that we show more active links daily than some dynasties four or five times our size. Most have congratulated us graciously as our average surpassed theirs. Personally I am proud of our achievements, but then I know the thousands of hours of work![/quote]


As seriously as you want to say you deserved first place? I can not believe you really think!
You say many hours have needed much work for this success? What do you think how much time a day I consume only in order to write mails? And I wil not even think how much time is needed in RMV or J4F! Thinking you also working on new contest, as members can motivate, how different group in the dynasty to unite? course, consumers also a lot of time to completely new to learn and have to explain what is yarold!
I have really great respect for you but for me, you never have been the first special Mob or RMV ... I envy me before RMV, so many members and always at the top, because man needs much work and many hours of unbelievable!

[size=9][ [i][b]Added[/b]: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:40 pm[/i] ][/size]
[quote="DemonicJ"][quote]when you leave a dynasty your average, that you have worked up in that dynasty, drops to zero so when you join a dynasty you have to start from scratch - something that would have stopped your dynasty from being where you are today I know - but will also stop the small 1-2-4- man dynasties from just popping up with high aves in a few days.[/quote]

[color=green][shadow=green][b]when you left a dynasty you did have your average reset to 0, but that created its own problems back then!

If I remember correctly, UBC started with high average members & only a few members & there average jumped up rather quickly too! Guess whats good for some isnt good for others?[/b][/shadow][/color][/quote]
UBC was not established from frustration but long time planned and on the first day UBC it had 13 Members! And there were not only members with large ave but also newbis were there only for what UBC have registered as Dreamsattown, and also members Tzvrchak space in which no other dynasty had as Soltok ...
And I do not expect that everyone does as UBC, several members immediately but I can not and will not even wait for months to a dynasty grows!

[DaBabes City]

Jassej, I believe communication between you and I suffers in translation, or in the lack thereof. I was raised in Texas, in the United States of America, so my English is imperfect at best. Our little forum has some of the best clickers I have seen as yours has, yet we have not been on Yarolds long enough to make as many friends and connections as you have.
Whatever the case, we will continue to give positive credits for clicks, and ten links per member, to those who to link to us.

[jassej]

I must give you fairly , sorry for my bad English :roll:

MMC UBC is founded as a forum dynasty and this is obviously a big advantage for us but everyone is welcome even newbis and there are Net Freaks and UBC totally different! I am sure the many new in the first attempt to come dynasty on what first place and that ye!