The reward system on Positions is now secure against attempts to obtain Units in an unfair way!

247 Replies
ONLINE.ALIEN
4 July, 2016, 9:12 PM UTC

what i read is that interest is up to 17% which makes sense rix with your calculations.

i also think the pp are balanced around the general, if u have maxed items u need to use less troops and will be same as before.


Without the items u will be loosing more then u gain. I guess they start to be helpfull once the coin stops coming in.

UTC +2:00
1
Lyderis
5 July, 2016, 8:09 AM UTC
hero, troop levels, elixirs and dominion, they all have nothing to do with pp. if u r maxed on those, u will be able to do more pp before u get paid, and that is it. fishguy is doin fine, and will continue up until he get's paid from lvl 139 or similar, let's name this pay out x, then he has to loose x+10%, but he will be paid only x, because of the limits (every pp level has a limit on how much u can get from it)
UTC +0:00
2
Kakos
5 July, 2016, 8:50 AM UTC

Lyderis said:


hero, troop levels, elixirs and dominion, they all have nothing to do with pp. if u r maxed on those, u will be able to do more pp before u get paid, and that is it. fishguy is doin fine, and will continue up until he get's paid from lvl 139 or similar, let's name this pay out x, then he has to loose x+10%, but he will be paid only x, because of the limits

(every pp level has a limit on how much u can get from it)

So many "experts" so many "statements" and NO one like EVER says why is what.. 

Vae victis
UTC +9:00
0
ThatBloke
5 July, 2016, 9:49 AM UTC

Exactly.


OK, Lyderis, let's got on your example with the 17K Proms.


Something we have to notice is when positions levels cap, the problem is you can't hope to get more from the top level than what you need to invest to pay back your previous bank.

Somewhere, it means you should almost stop playing once you've reached the maximum level.


However, the only goodies allowing to get a bit more are the partials you get before paying back the bank and reaching the payout point : they sill add up to your gains.

The real problem is they've actually been reduced a huge lot recently. Now I can hardly equal my investments, especially if I accidentally finish the cycle on a lower position than the bank's range maximum position level, while before they reduced the partials so much, it was much more forgiving (I could often get a 50% to 75% net benefit from the whole cycle, adding up all the losses and all the gains).


Still, from what I could (hardly, because nobody wants to talk, apparently) understand, some people here claim they could get more by not finishing positions on the go while paying back the bank.

Here i'd really like to understand : how did they that ? AFAIK, you can never get more from a position than what's pre-established (within a +/- 7.5% range around an average value gotten as an exponential function of the position level).

So what did you do ? Get more frequent payouts, maybe ?


Could someone finally explain with precise figures instead of just ranting and whinning, please ???


I pity the fool
UTC +11:00
1
Lyderis
5 July, 2016, 1:33 PM UTC

bloke- not that i have ever done that, but i would assume, if u got 17 k promachos, u prekill some pp to 1 bar, loosing like 18 k promachos, then get paid 17 k promachos, then kill all prekilled pp, propably would end up with 20 k of those then. and yes, it would be a good idea to stop playing pp after reaching cap of high lvl pp. this is why it should reset after hitting lvl 140 pp, but no1 wants to change that.

kakos- feel free to listen to any noob expersts u know.
UTC +0:00
0
Verrus
5 July, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

This game is driven by mathematics. Those who are proficient in math will perform better in the game than those who are not. The algorythm driving the PP's represents an mathematical function. Some players apparently have been succesfull in  cracking the code ( the algorythm) using mathematical analysis. So now plarium  has made a few changes to the PP algorythm which is in their interest only. 


Its is possible to win in PP play provided u got patience and skills.  I know in advance what i m going to lose when facing Xerxes and once every 10-15 turns they give me a big pay-out. My strategy, like Hacker's I presume,  is to build infantry units and exchange them for Phalanx and cavalry units. So plarium's changes dont effect my strategy....overall i m still winning against them .  
UTC +2:00
0
Kakos
5 July, 2016, 11:21 PM UTC

Lyderis said:


not that i have ever done that, but i would assume

kakos- feel free to listen to any noob expersts u know.

Here you DO say that you "assume", whereas before you were presenting your statements as fact.

But if an assumption is to be taken seriously it needs to be supported by some valid arguments at least, otherwise it will be considered a "noob expert's" theory and rightly be dismissed out of hand..
Vae victis
UTC +9:00
0
Tonaya
6 July, 2016, 3:18 AM UTC

if you burn much more troops then needed,after you get big payout from 1 position under top position,you will get bigger payout from top position  when you going to reset bank,i think there is our chance to get more then you could from each lvl,i did that many times,so i know what i'm talking about^^

plarium,you should explane better,and not like you did,you should just post that interest is bigger now and not to tell players to play from 1 hit,because they already lost troops.1 more thing is very interesting,if someone play stormfall,just look how plarium explaned there:we  changed system because players got much more troops than you should,so i am sure that what nikita and friends posted in sparta is a LIE,and it is very wrong from plarium to do to players(costumers),if i am Leonidas,or someone from plarium i would apologize to all players and revive for free all troops to all players who listen to plarium "moderators" and lost all troops from 1 hit.moderators are just regular players who comunicate with us,but they dont know nothing how system works(only plarium knows that)and they shouldnt post anything here,just write:sorry,we dont know nothing,better then to tell players to play from 1 hit,which is pure suicide on high lvl positions!!!!

^^
UTC +0:00
0
GetintoIT
7 July, 2016, 12:16 AM UTC
thecousin1 said:

Dear Plarium, 

wouldn't it be wiser to publish an explanation that elaborates how the positions algorithms indeed are calculating gains, losses and transformations of troops, and for once explain how the "bank" works. 

We players would appreciate to know what we are in fact "playing" with and for - we'd like to gain from our efforts, and spending. 

Consuming time and money on your platform is no reward if it continues to look more like a rip-off than entertainment, and by understanding all the rules of play it would facilitate to enjoy what is supposed to be a tactical game.

I trust you understand our discontent position and will begin with better clarifications soon. Simply saying that some players figured a way to benefit from a flaw is not enough, we would like to know if the positions are a draining pit for troops (and for some their credit card) or not - and please do not reply that it is for us to figure this out on our own, thanks.

I suppose we are all anxious to see your response to the present inquiry, ignoring it would certainly not benefit you ..


This information is confidential. It is for internal use only. 

Positions have always been a riddle which our players were supposed to solve. 

And now that it is solved Plarium has changed the rules.
UTC +0:00
1
Appotox
7 July, 2016, 6:25 AM UTC

As GetInToIt said above the issue is not that the Persian Positions are a riddle to be solved, the issue is that every time the players manage to solve the riddle you change the riddle at the players expense.

Now doing so to prevent the use of an actual cheat or hack is one thing. But since you alone have continually both set and modified the riddle to be solved by the players themselves, the only blame and fault here is yours and yours alone. For which it is then absolute BS for you to state that any player has been purposely and unfairly exploiting the very riddle that you alone have set before them to solve and which they have simply and successfully solved on their own without a solitary clue or one bit of explanation, direction or guidance from you. And while this latest change may now prevent this so-called "exploration", that neither explains nor accounts for all the other continuous changes that have been made to the Persian Positions now does it?

For which and as evidenced here by a number of the responses above; most players do not have the basic knowledge, the time or the money to ever devote to, so as to have ever learned how to even basically play the Persian Positions with any degree of success at some point and time.

For which you not only keep changing the answer to the riddle thus making it only that much harder for them to ever do so. But which you continue to claim that each and every such new change is expressly for their benefit as to making things more fairer, fun and interesting whilst you sit back and watch them throw one army after another away in trying to solve your ever changing riddle.

UTC +0:00
0
ThatBloke
7 July, 2016, 9:42 AM UTC

Lyderis said:


bloke- not that i have ever done that, but i would assume, if u got 17 k promachos, u prekill some pp to 1 bar, loosing like 18 k promachos, then get paid 17 k promachos, then kill all prekilled pp, propably would end up with 20 k of those then. and yes, it would be a good idea to stop playing pp after reaching cap of high lvl pp. this is why it should reset after hitting lvl 140 pp, but no1 wants to change that.

kakos- feel free to listen to any noob expersts u know.

Actually, figures like that are impossible, at least not if we're talking about payouts.


I mean, a payout is always worth something like 10 times the necessary troops to take down the position that gives it, so you can't calculate over just one position.

Your 18K proms necessarily have to be lost over several positions first.

And as a matter of fact, your total reward to compare to your total losses has obviously to be the payout + all the partials, as they are rewards as well anyway.


Now the discussion seems to be about finishing then or not before hitting that last position that will give the payout.


Tonaya was talking about the difficulty to finish high level ones in one hit. Actually, this is not what Plarium said. They rather said you had to finish them in turn before finishing the final (payout) one instead of leaving them unfinished, but they never said you couldn't grind them in several attempts.


Actually, once they're ground down to one bar (and even hopefully to almost nothing left, as we used to do in the old times when we didn't get any partial at all), the fact you finish them before or after the payout has no importance at all, as you could even finish them with a pinchul of swords, so the actual expense is not the matter here.


If I've understood right, there seem to have been a flaw allowing to get more (and here is my question : how much ?) if not finishing all the chipped ones first.


And now they say you should get the same reward as before if you played finishing them first, then hitting for the payout, which is what I've been doing anyway since they've added the systematic partial rewards, over a year ago now.


Actually, the real problem for me is they have dramatically reduced those partials a few months ago, so I'm now really earning much less. I actually even earn less than my expense if I'm unlucky enough to get an unexpected payout from a too low level position, because I was thinking I was currently still paying back the bank and didn't expect the payout to drop right now.

With the former big partials, the process was much more forgiving and all my cycles were always beneficial, and sometimes very beneficial (it could sometimes go up to +150%).


So I'd really like to get precise answers to my questions, as i'm quite unable to evaluate what you lost there.


So could someone please explain to me what you actually got more :

- Better payouts ?

- Better partials from the chipped positions after getting the payout ?

- More frequent payouts (out of paying back less than 100% of the previous bank, as we're supposed to do) ?


Because what has actually changed is totally unclear, since nobody seems to be able to provide figures proving it.

All I'm reading here are complaints and no data at all.


BTW, providing figures about how it's going now would help me understand as well.

As I said above, I've been playing by fnishing positions on the go (the fact I'm killing them in one ore several shots is irrelevant : the result is exactly the same anyway), so I couldn't see the least damn difference so far.


Thanks.



I pity the fool
UTC +11:00
0
Lyderis
7 July, 2016, 12:05 PM UTC

i just told u how to get more troops than your reward... u r fooked after getting 17 k promachos anyway, so u can collect partials and end up with a bit more than u had.

and 17 k promachos is possible reward, not from lvl 80 ofcourse, but lvl 139 should do it. and u should delete oracle after getting pay out from lvl 135-140.
UTC +0:00
2
Tonaya
8 July, 2016, 12:20 AM UTC

bloke,we didnt get nothing more,that is only in plarium's mind,and as i said,they lie!if you look explanation in solders inc,you will see.they said there:we are changing system because you get much more troops then you should.and here in sparta,they said some players cheated somehow and got who knows how many troops,i think its a LIE.if you burn troops on few positions its not cheating,you send troops to die to fill the bank,and then go for payout,if we got 10-20% more its not cheating and its not unfair way,like nikita said.i play persians a lot,not now,and i try a lot different things,you cant get more then system give you.plarium made this game to make money,thats why you need weeks,months,or a year to build some troops,or you can just put some money in plarium pocket and poof..here they are,you have troops,plarium have money.i ask 100 times from plarium on facebook group,on forum,sending msg to Leonidas,to speed up building troops,because its not normal to take soo much time,day to make some promachos,or agema,and all build speed in academy is on max lvl,they didnt do anything,all they changed in last year is just to take more money....skethes,generals,everything...its only about money.if you read here on forum,you can see few players listened to plariums moderators and played positions from 1 hit and they lost all troops and stop'd to play game,look on map how many USER DELETED are there.as i can see,when you get good payout on 135-140lvl,just STOP WITH PERSIANS FOREVER,its useless to play after

ps sorry for my bad english ^^


Tonaya

UTC +0:00
2
ThatBloke
8 July, 2016, 3:05 AM UTC

In this case, what the hell are you expecting ???


If you didn't get more, then what was the point of playing that mysterious way nobody wants to explain me ???


You still have to send troops to fill the bank, nothing has changed.


Now you tell me you got 10-20% more : how ???


Could please give me a screen showing you earned 10-20% more troops than the expected payout for the same level, please ?


I pity the fool
UTC +11:00
0
Lyderis
8 July, 2016, 7:48 AM UTC

bloke, u r a moderator, ask leonidas then :D

there is no way u can get more than the cap from pp depending on it's level. and this is what fooks up the game, it has to reset after lvl 140 or bank should have the same limits as lvl 140 pp, cause now u will be loosing 10 % of your troops after getting big pay out on each cycle.

i still have emails from plarium that i will get all what i lost in pp, but that is just another lie, propably by moderators who have no idea how pp works
UTC +0:00
2
an AHOLE
9 July, 2016, 3:00 PM UTC

You guy's are correct, once you hit the ceiling on max levels it's game over for Persians.  I have seen it time and time again on Facebook how many players get maxed out and the next payout is equal or lesser in value and resources paid back are far greater.

Payout 1



then the next payout:

Bank was paid back with interest and the payout was 21 million resources less than the 1st but he was able to save 3,000 mounted pelts from the previous payout (according to him) which makes up for the 21 million resource shortfall of the payment.  It's clear to see the payouts are capped.  There is no point in him continuing to play unless he manages to squeeze a decent payout like this using the least amount of troops possible with the most amount of resources but at what cost and how much time?

UTC +0:00
1
lil_uzi94
9 July, 2016, 9:02 PM UTC
I quit sparta for two months after the second PP tweak. No one was cheating anyone. You cant just decide to do PP one day and a month later end up with 500mil army. We spent a lot of time trying to understand PP and any gains,which were usually within a few million overall, were a result of our "hardwork".. I returned when a friend told me they tweaked PP again. This is worse. way worse. No profit in PP anymore. I dont even understand why anyone would want to covert lights/heavies into phalanx/cavalry - Unit dismissal is no longer a problem and lights/heavies are better for pvp/pp. What lyderis is saying is 100% correct. first time l140 payout= x. second time u repay x+20% and recover x. third time you repay 120% of x+20% and only recover x. losses start increasing exponentially. This is why we needed the previous partial system. at this point I probably have to invest 300mil to recover from PP. No single position will give me that much....
UTC +5:00
1
turkmenoktem
10 July, 2016, 3:17 AM UTC

All the complicated math is enlightening but obviously a waste of valuable time that can be well spent on anything other than explaining plarium's dirty tricks. Plarium already gave us the "pay-or-leave" message with their shiny anniversary tournaments.

This change obviously aims to lower the gains of free (and therefore hard working) players not because plarium wants to be "fair to all" but to keep the paying (but not so hardworking/knowledgable) players happy by robbing the free players off of their few remaining methods to get troops. Actually the one-bar-method is simple enough for anyone with basic computer skills and a standart IQ so basically it is not exclusive for free players at all. Anyone can use it. And almost all players I know - including coiners - did. But still plarium has the nerve to label 1000s of players using the one-bar-method as "thieves" under the pretense of "exploiting a vulnerability" although it could be used by simply anyone. Why bother changing the mechanics instead of including the method in their official tutorials and being fair to everyone?

To increase profits?... You think?.... Nooooo!

UTC +5:00
0
ThatBloke
10 July, 2016, 12:18 PM UTC

Hades said:


You guy's are correct, once you hit the ceiling on max levels it's game over for Persians.  I have seen it time and time again on Facebook how many players get maxed out and the next payout is equal or lesser in value and resources paid back are far greater.


Payout 1



then the next payout:


Bank was paid back with interest and the payout was 21 million resources less than the 1st but he was able to save 3,000 mounted pelts from the previous payout (according to him) which makes up for the 21 million resource shortfall of the payment.  It's clear to see the payouts are capped.  There is no point in him continuing to play unless he manages to squeeze a decent payout like this using the least amount of troops possible with the most amount of resources but at what cost and how much time?

Thanks, at least some information.


OK, so my data above level 104 are not precise, as they're a projection.


I've been working on data collected by players over time up to level 104 and consising into a collection of minimum and maximum values.

I've copied all of them in a spreadsheet, then cacluated the average value for all of them and drew a graph (x=level, y=average payout value) from all this.


The graph shows a very precise exponential curve. The maximum and minimum values are always exactly 7.5% below and above the average value.


Unfortunately, I had no data above level 104, so, since the upper levels were in the quasi straight part of the curv, I used a linear regression using the last 3 data.

This gave an approximate value for the next levels, that I recently extended up to level 140, of course.


The approximation is in the use of a straight line, where the real exponential should raise faster, meaning the values I got over level 104 are actually inferior to the real values.


However, your post does give interesting information :


- Your payout from level 136 is superior to the estimated maximum for this level, which is never supposed to happen, BUT remember my sheet uses a projection and may not be accurate enough.

You got 184 365 000 from that level 136, which is tremendous, and far above the estimated maximum, which equals 164 170 798 according to my projection, with an average value of only 152 717 021  for that level.

I can still guess it comes from the linera regression inaccuracy, but 13.22% more than the estimated average value, or 12.30% above the estimated maximum is still gigantic and can hardly be explained by just the difference between the expential asymptote and the linear regression (until I've understimated the exponential increase in this area).


- However, your payout from the level 140 fits right in the middle of my estimation, with a value of 164 726 677 , where my projection gives an average value of 163 246 201 , a minimum of 151 002 736 and a maximum of 175 489 666 .


So yes, your first screen really seems to prove you could earn more than allowed, and your second screen shows you earned a nice payout located in the top tier of the expected payout range.

The second one is a normal and rather good payout, while the first one appears totally twisted, especially towards other palyers who were not informed and playing "normally".


In the end, from what I've understood, Plarium should now have made the payouts fair for everybody : either you finish the positions or not, you're now paying back the bank the same way. I mean, actually, you did, but because of some bug, it looks like it made the payout larger.

Actually, +13% is gigantic at level 140, but probably much less noticeable at lower levels, so it mostly made a difference at those higher levels.

Note that you can still play that way if you want : it's only you won't get an unfair advatage over players who just finish off positions on the go.


Now I'm actually wondering if it really made it larger. Maybe it just gave you the partials at the same time, explaining the difference.

Except you could ALSO get those partials a second time by finishing off the chipped positions. That's probably where the bug was. And it was a bug, not a function. It probably came with the introduction of systematic partials in 2015. I guess they didn't expect this and forget a loophole there...


Anyway, thanks for having allowed me to understand. :)


I pity the fool
UTC +11:00
1
turkmenoktem
10 July, 2016, 10:45 PM UTC

ThatBloke said:


That's probably where the bug was. And it was a bug, not a function. It probably came with the introduction of systematic partials in 2015. I guess they didn't expect this and forget a loophole there...
Don't play naive. The video tutorials for that method are on youtube for years and on many languages. Plarium is certainly not that blind. They just realized the method is becoming more and more popular and they felt like doing something about it.
UTC +5:00
0
1778593 users registered; 48156 topics; 286353 posts; our newest member:barny8