ANSWERED:Time-based egg slot

[Imzadi]

I, on the other hand, am greedy and want more. A slot for fogballs, or for more breeding, or for catching new eggs...it doesn't matter which.

Edited September 7, 2014 by ainisarie

[_Sin_]

About fairness... As someone else said, life happens. Someone that I know from the forum ( has been active for years and has a gold trophy) got an assignment in the middle of nowhere. Phone reception is awful and he can't log from work either because the access to gaming sites is restricted. I don't think that would be fair if he wouldn't get the additional slot upon his return.

And since we don't know the circumstances of people that weren't active for a bit or a while, why should we be upset if they get additional slots? That wouldn't impact us.

[Fuzzbucket]

fuzzy if an inactive account gets a slot upgrade after 4 years it will not affect us at all, we won`t know it, we won`t feel it.

And as for TJ`s suggestion i don`t care if we get a new slot or not, but i would rather not have it cause there is something magical in #7, and it makes things more interesting for me.

Oh I KNOW - I don't care if inactive players DO get them. I just want one for ME - and I AM active !

 

AS to the scroll locked thing - there won't be anything to do when you are locked with an extra slot either. HOWEVER many slots we get many of us will always be locked.

 

Sometimes I consider doing more descriptions - but I have about 3000 with none and the mods would hate me for EVAH !

[Aurora-Silver]

If I have 21 growing hatchies on my scroll, I'll be locked for 3 days.

While this, the only thing I can do is breeding, doing BSAs, check my Action Log, Naming, Freezing... but I'm not able to collect Dragons. That's why the other Actions have to count.

[_Sin_]

What I'm puzzled about here is that some suggestions are deviating strongly from initial TJ's, a very straightforward one. Even if I don't know the internal mechanisms (and in no way underestimating his workload) it would seem that registration date and number of dragons are the only two variables needed.

Instead, if actions were to count, action history would be needed. For how long? What about storage issues?

I'm a firm believer on KISS and I would be extremely happy getting an extra slot. Doesn't bother me if people that are inactive get one or more too. Even from a selfish point of view: if they are inactive they aren't competing! And if they are active now why should i care if they weren't for a while for whatever personal reasons?

Again, I would be very disappointed if, just to avoid giving slots to other players, the requirements would be so cumbersome that TJ would just tell us to stuff it.

Edited September 7, 2014 by _Sin_

[Cinnamin Draconna]

<snip>

Again, I would be very disappointed if, just to avoid giving slots to other players, the requirements would be so cumbersome that TJ would just tell us to stuff it.

Totally agree with this. Folk need to quit being so persnickity. Only TJ can deal with multi-scrollers.. and you generally don't know who they are anyway. So why worry about them? Same goes for the inactive folk... you usually don't know who they are, and nothing they do or don't do can bother us anyway. So why worry about them?

 

If TJ wants to be nice and GIVE us a bonus slot, QUIT ARGUING ABOUT IT, before he changes his mind.

 

*and for those few naysayers, I seriously doubt you would not use the extra slot*

[olympe]

Agreed. Could you put that in big, bold letters, please?

[Melika]

What I'm puzzled about here is that some suggestions are deviating strongly from initial TJ's, a very straightforward one. Even if I don't know the internal mechanisms (and in no way underestimating his workload) it would seem that registration date and number of dragons are the only two variables needed.

Instead, if actions were to count, action history would be needed. For how long? What about storage issues?

I'm a firm believer on KISS and I would be extremely happy getting an extra slot. Doesn't bother me if people that are inactive get one or more too. Even from a selfish point of view: if they are inactive they aren't competing! And if they are active now why should i care if they weren't for a while for whatever personal reasons?

Again, I would be very disappointed if, just to avoid giving slots to other players, the requirements would be so cumbersome that TJ would just tell us to stuff it.

Riiiight. I don't understand how it switched from "Hey to all you who have played for a long time- how about an extra egg slot?" to "Those who aren't on daily shouldn't get any rewards because I play more"???

 

Why not just accept TJ's suggestion. I think it's great! I myself play in spurts, so having an extra slot for playing since, I dunno, 2008, is fantastic!

 

I don't see why it would have to be restrictive. It's just a nice bonus and a GREAT idea.

[GathersScrolls]

An extra egg slot would be awesome!

[prpldrgnfr]

If TJ wants to be nice and GIVE us a bonus slot, QUIT ARGUING ABOUT IT, before he changes his mind.

QFT, and should be in big neon hit-you-upside-the-head letters.

 

Just being able to have an even 8 for Halloween gives me warm fuzzies.

[TJ09]

If TJ wants to be nice and GIVE us a bonus slot, QUIT ARGUING ABOUT IT, before he changes his mind.

The big assumption in this statement is that I want to do it.

 

As the first post says, it was a passing thought that I threw out there. There is absolutely no guarantee it will ever happen.

[prpldrgnfr]

The big assumption in this statement is that I want to do it.

 

As the first post says, it was a passing thought that I threw out there. There is absolutely no guarantee it will ever happen.

This is why we can never have nice things. *

 

I know you've said before the limits would not be raised from where they are now, and I don't even care about hatchie/freeze/kill slots, but can we pleasepleaseplease have eight for eggs?

 

 

 

*totally teasing, there are *plenty* of nice things here.

Edited September 8, 2014 by prpldrgnfr

[olympe]

The big assumption in this statement is that I want to do it.

 

As the first post says, it was a passing thought that I threw out there. There is absolutely no guarantee it will ever happen.

Well, you did throw it out there as one of several options, so we actually hope you do want to do it. If we stop arguing, that is.

[DigitalGarden]

...still support. More blue caveblockers for me d:

[cyradis4]

Re the whole active / inactive argument:

Someone who created a scroll, played for 1 month, then hasn't even logged into their scroll for 4 years then comes back suddenly I don't think should get the time bonus. And there are people like that.

 

On the other hand, you don't want the "activity checker" to be too complicated.

 

Finally, TJ can already track long-ons over the long haul. He used to use it to determine if someone was inactive in order to wipe dragon names. That I think was every two months?

 

Anyway, in short:

I think that that 2 month log-in is all that needs to be accounted for, in regards to the time bonus. If a person has logged in every 2 months for 4 years? Then sure, they should get the time bonus (whatever it is) for that time, even if they weren't actively raising dragons for most of it.

 

Cheers!

C4.

 

 

[JavaTigress]

Riiiight. I don't understand how it switched from "Hey to all you who have played for a long time- how about an extra egg slot?" to "Those who aren't on daily shouldn't get any rewards because I play more"???

 

Why not just accept TJ's suggestion. I think it's great! I myself play in spurts, so having an extra slot for playing since, I dunno, 2008, is fantastic!

 

I don't see why it would have to be restrictive. It's just a nice bonus and a GREAT idea.

This. IF TJ decided to this, and has he pointed out, he hasn't yet... it would be a GIFT to us.

 

They say you shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth. That applies here, I would say. TJ is under no OBLIGATION to give us a single thing, strictly speaking. IF he decides to be nice and give us something extra, why whine about what others get or don't get? Seems to me I would just be grateful I got an extra egg slot and not WORRY about what other people have. I mean, as someone else pointed out... why worry about folks that are inactive? They aren't hurting me in any way. As far as multis go... I don't see that this would ENOURAGE it. Anyway, it is up to TJ to deal with those. Regardless, though, all this haggling about it just seems ridiculous... why not just accept a good thing , again, if it comes, instead of trying to make it uber limited and hard to get? Just my two cents, for what they are worth.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Silverswift

[edwardelricfreak]

Re the whole active / inactive argument:

Someone who created a scroll, played for 1 month, then hasn't even logged into their scroll for 4 years then comes back suddenly I don't think should get the time bonus. And there are people like that.

 

On the other hand, you don't want the "activity checker" to be too complicated.

 

Finally, TJ can already track long-ons over the long haul. He used to use it to determine if someone was inactive in order to wipe dragon names. That I think was every two months?

 

Anyway, in short:

I think that that 2 month log-in is all that needs to be accounted for, in regards to the time bonus. If a person has logged in every 2 months for 4 years? Then sure, they should get the time bonus (whatever it is) for that time, even if they weren't actively raising dragons for most of it.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Maybe have it so if they've been inactive for over a year/two years that it "wipes" their previous "activeness" and they'd have to log on and actually be active for another 2 months or whatever to get it, even though their scroll is over a year old?

[_Sin_]

While I didn't change my mind and still think that people should just say "yes, please please please" to TJ's potential gift (that is seeming less possible by the moment) instead of demanding additional coding efforts I'm kind of curious about the application of those demands.

So let's see the case of the user I was referencing before: joined in 2008, was extremely active and helpful but, this year, because of an work assignment in the middle of nowhere, can't access the cave. For more than 2 months. More like 5. So, upon his return, he can't have the additional slot for another year??? How is that fair?

And I'm pretty sure there are many, many other cases. I'm just referencing one that I know.

Edited September 9, 2014 by _Sin_

[Tehya Faye]

I don't support taking things away from people for inactivity. There's no telling the difference between those who want to play but can't and those who grew bored of the site. There is no reason to take things away from the former group just to punish a group of people who couldn't care less that they're losing something.

[Fiona]

I doubt if there is a way to fairly cover every case of active/not-active/active again with any kind of activity check. What constitutes inactive long enough to incur the penulty of not getting the extra egg slot for that year's of scroll age? If you're active for three years then inactive for 6 months does that wipe out any extra egg slots? If you're active for two years then inactive for 2 years? It could be completely crazy trying to figure out a fair way to handle it for every case. TJ deciding case by case could just suck up time better spent elsewhere, so that won't work.

 

The only cases put forward for justifying an activity check talk about making a scroll years ago, playing for a very short time, then being gone for years before picking it back up. But that's not the case across the board. We'd have every permutation of here and gone and here again, more than likely.

 

My question is, say someone did play for just a few months then was gone for 4 years. What does it harm anyone if they get the extra slots? You say, "They're a reward for loyalty." Well, really? Or are they a gift of extra space? It won't hurt my ability to play the game by letting someone else who created a scroll then was gone for a significant amount of time have those extra slots. Who knows, it could even inspire her to get more involved and stay.

[Fuzzbucket]

The only cases put forward for justifying an activity check talk about making a scroll years ago, playing for a very short time, then being gone for years before picking it back up. But that's not the case across the board. We'd have every permutation of here and gone and here again, more than likely.

 

My question is, say someone did play for just a few months then was gone for 4 years. What does it harm anyone if they get the extra slots? You say, "They're a reward for loyalty." Well, really? Or are they a gift of extra space? It won't hurt my ability to play the game by letting someone else who created a scroll then was gone for a significant amount of time have those extra slots. Who knows, it could even inspire her to get more involved and stay.

This, very much so. An inactive player isn't going to USE the slot, and a meh player might notice it and decided to play again. Either way - who cares ? It makes no difference to me or to you. So how is it unfair ?

 

PLEASE can we have this TJ - 8 slots would make SUCH a difference for linage building.

[edwardelricfreak]

Well, I think if they got a slot, it shouldn't be taken away if they go inactive. o3o But I do think that, someone who plays for a couple of months, goes inactive for at least a year+, then comes back WOULDN'T get the slot; since their account is now over a year old, all they really have to do is be somewhat active for a month or two and then have access to that new slot. Or something. idk.

 

But I don't want anything too crazy. I'd rather not have any limits than have anything too complicated.

[_Sin_]

I doubt if there is a way to fairly cover every case of active/not-active/active again with any kind of activity check. What constitutes inactive long enough to incur the penulty of not getting the extra egg slot for that year's of scroll age? If you're active for three years then inactive for 6 months does that wipe out any extra egg slots? If you're active for two years then inactive for 2 years? It could be completely crazy trying to figure out a fair way to handle it for every case. TJ deciding case by case could just suck up time better spent elsewhere, so that won't work.

 

The only cases put forward for justifying an activity check talk about making a scroll years ago, playing for a very short time, then being gone for years before picking it back up. But that's not the case across the board. We'd have every permutation of here and gone and here again, more than likely.

 

My question is, say someone did play for just a few months then was gone for 4 years. What does it harm anyone if they get the extra slots? You say, "They're a reward for loyalty." Well, really? Or are they a gift of extra space? It won't hurt my ability to play the game by letting someone else who created a scroll then was gone for a significant amount of time have those extra slots. Who knows, it could even inspire her to get more involved and stay.

Exactly!!! That was my point, thank you for expressing it quite better than I could. My English is awful, sorry.

People are forgetting that this isn't a reward for something they earned/accomplished. This is/could be (if we do not peeve TJ too much) a GIFT. If I understood his first post (and I realize he didn't promise anything) a gift with one condition: 1 egg slot per scroll year up to not more than 8/24 slots.

I can't wrap my mind around the demands for more conditions.

[cyradis4]

Peeps, they aren't demands, they are discussions. And TJ didn't post this to hear "yes yes yes!", he posted this to hear discussion of it and the pros and cons as other people view it. All this sucking up I personally find in really bad taste.

 

Having said that, an "activity checker" could check for positive actions, not negative ones. So you'd get it for time played. It wouldn't matter how inactive you'd been. If you were active for at least 4 years worth of time, you'd get the 4 slots. If you were active for 1 year before going inactive? You'd get 1 slot. If you were active for 2 months, then went on hiatus? You'd have to be active again for at least 8 months before getting the extra slot.

 

Basically:

You log in once a month every month for a year, you get +1 slots permanently.

You then go on hiatus for 3 years.

You come back, and play for another year, and at the end of that year you get another +1 (putting you at +2, since you've actually played for 2 years even though your account is 5 years old).

And so on.

 

As for the talk of "coding difficulty", TJ has said in the past that he prefers us to leave that up to him to determine. For myself, I can think of a couple of easy ways to implement the above scenario. I'm sure that TJ, as a programmer (I'm just a dabbler), can think of dozens of more ways to do it.

 

As for why to do it?

Because giving people +4 slots for abandoning the game then rediscovering it sits ill with me. The rest of us actually were here and played. Treating someone who wasn't here at all to the same *time based* benefit just feels wrong.

 

Or look at it this way:

Someone who's logged in every month that they've been here, call it 2 years, has +2 slots.

But someone who made an account 4 years ago and didn't log in for 3.5 yrs straight gets +4 slots.

How is that fair to the person who's been playing those two years?

 

If we were talking about *just* +1 slot, I wouldn't care. But we're not... We're talking about *giving away* Gold Trophy slots, not to people who've been playing for 4 years... but to those who haven't been active for 4 years.

 

Either way it doesn't effect me. I'm so far above both the time limit and the Gold Trophy status that if an extra slot comes out, I'll be getting it by virtue of just how very active I've been.

 

Cheers!

C4.

[Rosedamai]

This may be a minority opinion, but I don't personally really see the need as to why we'd need more than 8 spots. I think something like 10 would be too overwhelming for me personally. Other people may need these spaces, but for me I personally don't.

 

So I'm going to stay neutral in the + more than 1 spot discussion.