Joined: 09 Jun 2008 Posts: 241 Location: North Carolina, USA
Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 2:22 pm
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.
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.
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.
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.
[ Added: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:21 am ]
thepossum1 wrote:
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.
Thank you, Possum. Your alliance with us has proven to be be backed by your impeccable integrity! You have all of my respect.
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!
[ Added: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:19 pm ]
MUSHpark wrote:
zvonimir wrote:
Conclusion: dynasty less than 6 members can not have a calculation of average as other real dynasty.
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.
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!
[ Added: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:29 pm ]
DaBabes City wrote:
zvonimir wrote:
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.
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!
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!
[ Added: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:40 pm ]
DemonicJ wrote:
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.
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?
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!
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.
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!
_________________ Jassej, MMC UBC Founder
Last edited by jassej on Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
turdkey [Deleted]
Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 8:01 pm
Metalteo wrote:
You can still sort the dynasty page /dynasty.php?order=M]members[/URL] , total clicks ,
That one sounds best!
But in all honestly you will never please everyone and you know it Metalteo! So what we have is dynasties splintering and new ones being formed almost every day. I would not say that is too bad a thing and it will be interesting seeing where it all goes.
In the mean time I intend to click leisurely and just play this game for fun, after all folks it isn't like this is real life is it???
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.
DaBabes City,
First, congratulations on achieving 500. Yes, you are the first to do so.
But I'll take issue with your claim that you are the first "willing to work hard enough" for it. If I took the "top 4" of my own dynasty, who have been willing to work hard for it, we'd be at 550 by now. And still not nearly as high as the top 4 of other dynasties.
Try comparing your 4 members' averages with the top 4 clickers in many other dynasties and you'll find yourselves far from the top. Your best clicker (you) is #67 on the overall game's top clicker list. That means 66 yarold's members are "working harder" than the hardest-working member of your own dynasty. MMC UBC has 4 of the top 5 spots, all with 700+ average, so if they kicked all but the top 4 people, they'd shoot up towards a 700 dynasty average. If they kicked all but the top 4 right before reset tonight, they'll shoot up 20 spots on the board, and be "first to 517", and leave you in the dust.
Thankfully, I think they're about more than getting the highest average, they're also about building numbers. I think they're more than willing to work hard. But they also are willing to take on new members with lower averages.
DaBabes City wrote:
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.
There's a difference between actively recruiting members who already have high averages, and actively helping newcomers, who may click 500+ per day, but start out with a "1". You have not been open to allowing new members to join, no matter how well they click. Any new members you "recruit" will, by definition, be coming from another dynasty, yet you'll get the credit for their success.
DaBabes City wrote:
Some people respect that we show more active links daily than some dynasties four or five times our size.
Good for you, and thank you for doing that. Providing more links is definitely a good means toward getting a lot of good allies, and having enough allies for your members to all click above 500 is how you achieved your current rank. Well done!
DaBabes City wrote:
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!
Again, congratulations.
But again, you seem to take credit for "thousands of hours of work". DO you know how many thousands of hours of work my shoguns and I have spent helping newcomers and educating them on credits, links, browsers, resets, and the like? How much "work" do you put into educating your other 3 members? Seems the "work" is just in clicking.
Which is a lot of work, but I'll note that the 915,000 clicks that my dynasty's members have made are collectively many more thousands of hours of work than your 179,000. And by that measure, we must give major kudos to Gamers Alliance, who still sits well atop the heap at 7.25 MILLION clicks, thanks to a very newbie-friendly policy that doesn't much help their average but does help their size and longevity.
Given that total clicks seems to be the measure Yarold uses on a personal basis (VIP at 60K, for example), it seems a more appropriate measure of true dynasty greatness than whoever happens to currently hold the highest average.
Metalteo wrote:
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.
I like this idea, but it still will hurt the "just starting out" dynasties.
I would prefer a system where the dynasty average changed based on that day's clicks from members, rather than the dynasty average changing based on personal averages.
SO a new member who could click 500 would apply 500 to the dynasty average, not their personal average of 1 (or 50, since it would actually take those daily clicks into account).
It was amusing watching the "Taking on the Average" dynasty when nobody in it was clicking but their dynasty average was only slowly decaying. Amusing, but not really representing a dynasty's effort.
Another possible new system which would not punish dynasties for taking on new members, is to only count the top 10 (or 20 or some other number) members. Or only count members who had been in a dynasty for 10 days or more.
Ok, I made my mind and came to the conclusion that its NOT a good idea to say, that small Dynsties should not be in the ranking. Everyone should be in the ranking no matter if the Dynastie has 1 or 100 memebrs. Its not a good idea to split the ranking into 2 groups.
But I also think, that higher membered Dynasties should get a positive Bonus and lower membered Dynasties a negative Bonus.
So I did following in an Excel file:
- I calculated the average amount of all 78 exisiting Dynasites. Which is 11,67 members per Dynasty
If you have more than that you get a positive Bonus
If you have less than that you get a negative Bonus
- I now calculated the difference between each Dynasties amount of members and the above calculated Average of all Dynasties and multipied the result by 2 (*1). The result is shown in the column "Factor members"
(The result is positive for higher membered and negative for lower membered Dynasties)
- I added this result ^^ to the Ave/day which is shown in the column "Rating"
- On the right side of the Excel file you can see the old ranking, new ranking and the difference for each Dynastie besides it. The difference will not be that much but its still a difference. RMV would be Nr1 which is also my feeling. They have a great Ave and a high number of members! Also the Penalty ist not that hard to let small Dynasties fall down to the end of the Ranking.
-------------------------------------------
(*1)
The multplying factor of 2 is only a feeling. It can also be 1 or 3. The higher this muliplier is the more it hurts the smaller Dynasties. The 10 days which are used for the calculation of the Ave/day is also only a feeling. It could also be 1, 5 or 20 days.
Age: 51 Joined: 13 Jan 2006 Posts: 1541 Location: Australia
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 12:21 pm
Roman,
averages as worked out are fine now. All I have heard is how the numbers dont work for bigger dynasties etc. Guess what number everyone has so far failed to point out???
The number of allies! There is no maximum number of allies any dynasty can have as long as the total does not exceed 400 alliance members! Net freaks, got to the top because it has a lot more allies than MMC UBC, MMC UCB (based on current member numbers) will stay in front of RMV as it can fit in extra allies. Like it or lump it, thats the issue, smaller crews can fit all the bigger, active, show 10 links during happy hour types of allies!
to level the playing field a bit, there needs to be a maximum amount of allies one can have, say 8 allies. There are enough dynasties of all different sizes to cater to those who prefer small dynasties & those that prefer large dynasties. Yes we had similar before, 4 allies was the limit there & yes it created 4 big dynasties & basically nothing else. Now we have a 400 max alliance bring in 8 as a max amount of allies. I doubt you will not get 8 dynasties all allied together to help each other. A few emps tried to get 5 together, needless to say that didnt last (dynasty x has more members than dyn y so they should drop members when maxxed etc). Plus when we had a maximum of 4 dynasties allied we didnt have this many members in dynasties by a long shot
to give you the hard data, I currently have 15 allies!!! Think I would do it this easy if I had a limit of only 8 allies? No I dont have the most allies either, but im sure you know that anyway
_________________ Do it Legit. You break the rules, don't expect a pleasant outcome
“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
Proudly the Emperor of The MOB. The oldest surviving & most successful large dynasty
- if you get down to lets say a maximum of 8 allies it would be the same as it was before last rule change. Before the last rule change we had 4 to 5 Top big Dynasties and then long nothing.
- If you go back to a maximum of 8 Dynasties in an alliance there would perhaps be 8 big Top Dynasties and then long nothing. Not a big change isnt it?
(Lets take J4f, my Dynasty: We now have 12 Alliances. If you max it to 8 we would have to kick many smaller Dynasties of our Alliance and take a bigger one instead.)
Jay and me just had a small discussion on the Yarolds Chat, which was quite interesting. We came to the conclusion that if we max the amount of Dynasties we also would have to max the total amount of members in the whole alliance system down to lets say 300 or 350.
Jay also told me about an idea from Mushpark (I hope you dont mind when I post your idea here):
Dynasties with an lower amount than 10 members get a penatly which woud look following:
For every member you have less than 10 members the missing members have a Ave/day of 1.
Which means for a 8 membered Dynastie following:
Member 1: 502 Ave/day
Member 2: 498 Ave/day
Member 3: 450 Ave/day
Member 4: 449 Ave/day
Member 5: 423 Ave/day
Member 6: 398 Ave/day
Member 7: 391 Ave/day
Member 8: 375 Ave/day
Member 8: 1 Ave/day -> the missing member
Member 10: 1 Ave/day -> the missing member
Well I like that idea too. But this one would hurt very low membered Dynasties very, very hard!
Greetings Roman
P.s.
I calculated what Ave/day Net Freaks or Eternity would need to get to the Top spot in my Excel file:
Net Freaks: 585 Ave/day with 4 memebrs to get First
Eternity: 589 Ave/day with 2 memebrs to get first.
Still not impossible and for sure simple to be done by both of them.
(so around 100 Ave/day more than RMV has to get to the Top - quite fair in my opinion)
So to point it out again I dont want to hurt small Dynasties with my system down to the end. It just makes it a bit harder for them to get to the Top spot.
P.s.
Thanxs Jay for discussing this with us even if it may hurt your Dynasty too (like Mushparks idea or your own idea of maxing the allies)
formula of Eurul me like, I have only one question: Why Factor Members: (Members - Dyn members Avergae) * 2? Why not just Factor Members: (Members - Dyn members Avergae)?? .. That means no one * 2, I think that it is superfluous *2.
_________________ Proud Shogun MMC UBC Dinasty and Ex Kampaku Ex Shogun MMC MOB Dynasty
formula of Eurul me like, I have only one question: Why Factor Members: (Members - Dyn members Avergae) * 2? Why not just Factor Members: (Members - Dyn members Avergae)?? .. That means no one * 2, I think that it is superfluous *2.
Thats why I have written:
(*1)
The multplying factor of 2 is only a feeling. It can also be 1 or 3. The higher this muliplier is the more it hurts the smaller Dynasties. The 10 days which are used for the calculation of the Ave/day is also only a feeling. It could also be 1, 5 or 20 days.
Means you can also do it without a multiplier but the higher the multiplier the more worse it is for small Dynasties.
Last edited by Roman on Fri Nov 14, 2008 2:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Today in the early Yarold at 6:30 you have written to agree with the're Mushpark shed and now it's gone
[ Added: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:41 pm ]
DaBabes City wrote:
Jassej, I congratulated you on breaking the 500 average by mail, but wanted to do so on the forum, too. Your Dynasty is a fine one!
Thank you very much
[ Added: Fri Nov 14, 2008 4:56 pm ]
Is best for me Mushpark proposing is simple and reward active clicker and automatic no longer discriminated against newbis Members, in other words, dynasty which takes newbis will therefore no longer be punished!
I like it even proposing Roman, at least from Table looks fairly!
In all cases both are better than current ranking system!
Now is Yarold on train, it should finally meet ranking system come !!!!!!
Today in the early Yarold at 6:30 you have written to agree with the're Mushpark shed and now it's gone
Yes its gone because i don't quite understand all the maths involved in what is talked about.
Anyway, my thought is that the personal ave is the struggling thing.
Age: 45 Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 405 Location: Belgium
Posted: Sat Nov 15, 2008 1:45 am
I was talking to a few people aboput something similiar Met.
I'd love to see average calculation changed. The actual average changed. No more personal average period. I say take all the clicks done by the dynasty, divide by the members and then on that new day that decides the leader board. Everyone has an equal and fair chance. Be it 1 member dynasty or 100 or whatever... but with me I suppose its just wishful thinking and fairy tale dreaming.
So many people forget that its about getting clicks for the games and making new friends.. its become so bloody cutthroat lately.. the fun is slowly being leeched out of it.
_________________ ..No One Special..
Leader of the *~Unity~* Dynasty
Just my two pence.
I am a World of Warcraft Player and there you need 10 people to found a guild.
OK, thousands of people are playing WoW and Yarold just have even thousand
But what about the idea, that you need a spacial amount of members to found a Dynasty which appears in the ranking-system. (for example 5 - I think 5 is not to much and not to less for a "Dynasty" or a "Guild").
_________________ Real eyes,
realize,
real lies!!!
Dynasties with an lower amount than 10 members get a penatly which woud look following:
For every member you have less than 10 members the missing members have a Ave/day of 1.
Yes, that was part of my idea but you missed the other part which was more important. I was suggesting you just base the dynasty average on the top ten clickers.
So dynasties with more than 10 members would not have to count the lower members at all. A newcomer with low personal average wouldn't hurt.
The above explanation is only if we insist on using personal averages... but I think we should not use personal averages as input to the dynasty average. No matter how good a newbie is (or even a really good clicker who goes on vacation for a week) they will hurt the dynasty average.
I agree with WT's post that we shouldn't bother at all with personal averages... the average daily clicks should be what's important. Whether a daily changing average without tracking past history, or the current setup but using average clicks instead of average of personal averages...
MMC UBC this moment is interrupted alliance with all the dynasty, which have fewer than 10 members. We are such a dynasty will not take into Ally if them do not think increase the number members.We gave them a chance and they are not to use.We will receive the Ally all small dynasty (less than 10), provided that they expand over time and if not we will terminate alliance with them.
I think that all the dynasty must give chance to all members who it wish.I tell; at least a chance.
This is the only solution we have for now for 'small' dynasty that dynasty which will not receive new members
_________________ Proud Shogun MMC UBC Dinasty and Ex Kampaku Ex Shogun MMC MOB Dynasty
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
