Broken BG Proof

65 Replies
djmoody
25 April, 2017, 8:36 PM UTC

Eugenia Misura said:


Lord Djmoody, this statement is based on the fact that no issues with Battlegrounds haven't been detected. 

OMG

LOOK AT THE LOG - AN ISSUE HAS BEEN DETECTED


The evidence has been provided.

Bear in mind Oberon has confirm that this players log is correct to the extent that Plarium are able to find records (the players log is far more detailed than yours).

If you need an explanation of how BG's work or how to interpret that log then I am happy to provide it here, in PM, on Teamspeak, via Skype. Whatever it takes for you to understand, so that you can go back and force your colleagues to take notice.

This isn't a discussion, it's a fact.

That log isn't close to being explainable without a bug. In 1 cycle of BG's in 1 day the player lost over 100m resource (and by lost I mean went into the BG's and never came out over the next 8 months). Bear in mind the top level BG the player is at now (it was less when the loss occurred) has a 100m banking value. 

IMPOSSIBLE LEVELS OF LOSSES, OVER IMPOSSIBLY SHORT PERIODS OF TIME, THAT HAVEN'T CORRECTED THEMSELVES OVER MONTHS OF ADDITIONAL PLAYING

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
djmoody
25 April, 2017, 9:20 PM UTC

Oracle said:


property of inventor / league''. Players insist they must still yellow bar BG, and they must still use the maximum banking method. Which explain my question to DJ moody.

Forget the free troop trick for BG's. The trick is not accomplished by doing BG's normally. The trick exploits a mechanism in BG's that Plarium are now not aware exists (even though someone in Plarium must have coded it). It combines that mechanism with an unusual set of circumstances to produce a one off free profit. After that your bank is massively negative and you can't do BG's ever again.

Forget that for now.

This whole conversation is about doing BG's normally as intended. Hitting BG's loading resource and expecting that resource (or most of that resource) to come back to you at some point.

As the log proves conclusively the resource doesn't come back. It doesn't even come close to coming back. The reason is the bank tracking has a bug in it. You might play and not incur the bug, you might play for a long time without encountering the bug, or maybe it will happen to you very early on.

I can also tell you the bug when it happens affect the whole server, as many people experienced BG lost resource the same weekend The Beast did (from multiple leagues). It's just this player is the only person who has kept a perfect log of all BG resources for their entire playing history and therefore has complete and conclusive proof of the issue.

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
carolpringle59
26 April, 2017, 11:56 AM UTC

BGs are working as intended People kill their troops. people buy more troops and kill them rinse and repeat. Plariums Making money so what's the problem ??? Oh you thought this was a Free Game   PPPPfffftttt your free to throw away your money the only Bank your Filling is Plariums  :)

Do Have a nice Day !!!

UTC +4:00
TheBeast
27 April, 2017, 11:45 PM UTC

Just so all players know, Plarium refuse to acknowledge the facts and evidence provided.

They didn't look at the data and provide no explanation of how the set of results in the log could possibly be consistent with BG's "working as intended". Despite providing definitive proof was just fobbed off with the usual copy and paste BS as if I was a brand new noob with no knowledge and experience.

Why Plarium won't even engage with people who clearly know what they are talking about and have collected a vast amount of data to back up and prove their point is beyond me. 

Even if there was only the slightest chance of me being right, the hugely significant implications for thousands and thousands of customers would surely make it worthy of a proper follow up by Plarium.

A player has provided absolute proof of the problem. Plarium have been made aware of it. From this point on Plarium are willfully negligent for customer losses.

UTC +0:00
Juglar del Viento
Moderator
28 April, 2017, 10:06 AM UTC

TheBeast said:


Just so all players know, Plarium refuse to acknowledge the facts and evidence provided.

They didn't look at the data and provide no explanation of how the set of results in the log could possibly be consistent with BG's "working as intended". Despite providing definitive proof was just fobbed off with the usual copy and paste BS as if I was a brand new noob with no knowledge and experience.

Why Plarium won't even engage with people who clearly know what they are talking about and have collected a vast amount of data to back up and prove their point is beyond me. 

Even if there was only the slightest chance of me being right, the hugely significant implications for thousands and thousands of customers would surely make it worthy of a proper follow up by Plarium.

A player has provided absolute proof of the problem. Plarium have been made aware of it. From this point on Plarium are willfully negligent for customer losses.

Dear lords

Telling the truth we cant, as players, be absolutely certain that something is wrong with the mechanism. As the moment we dont know anything about how it Works we cant asure that we are doing this in correct way. Till now we were able to approach our system to the real system but it seems that now he must review all we know and readapt the system.

On the other hand, i suppose devs and support must have any kind of logs or traces to asure 100% that the mechanism Works as intended. I suppose also the should have any big level account to test by theirselves, not only logging and testing the algorithm if not doing them  testing the highest levels of bgs doing as we do, i mean sending troops to kill all them.

For them could be easy test this as the moment they are supposed to know how really Works and in fact, seeing the results they got and tracing the logs of the algorthim if it pays nice or not. Come on guys you could use ur own accounts where u can put on it the troops you want to testing them.

I could ask for some things i would like to say for testing but as always that asking could be dust in the wind so i hate wasting time to repeat once and once again.

As always: Squeeze is not always the right strategy, even on poker u have to be real sure when use it.

Regards


Resistance Is Futile
UTC +1:00
djmoody
28 April, 2017, 9:22 PM UTC

Juglar del Viento said:


Telling the truth we cant, as players, be absolutely certain that something is wrong with the mechanism. 

Actually you don't need to understand the mechanics to draw a conclude. The log speaks for itself. Either:

- "Working as intended" includes the intention to steal entire armies overnight

- There is a bug

Neither is acceptable for players. Something should be done about it.

For those who haven't reviewed or analysed the log. 50/60m army reduced to 20m. BG'd done since major bank problems 100+ over months. The resource is never coming back. The problem points in the log are just a couple of specific days where it appears the game simply didn't register banking. Other than those couple of specific days the BG's operated normally.

Like I said, if "operating normally" means, as Plarium would have us believe, you get out what you put in over time (maybe with a small couple of % points tax) then being 250m resource down on account with a max BG on 97 should be impossible (the loss is twice the average banking value of the top level BG for gods sake)

Bear in mind the points where bank is dropped seem to be a couple of days. This isn't errosion via tax over months/years. It's losses of 100m+ virtually in 1 day, which has happened twice.

The problem is so obvious from the evidence provided I can't believe Plarium keep denying it. It's a total no brainer.

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
IronApex Turok
29 April, 2017, 4:49 AM UTC

plarium doesnt care.


elyona said a couple months ago that support doesnt even read BG tickets. and im pretty sure their news blog corroborated that


plarium doesnt care and refuses to acknowledge. they are spending their time developing mobile games and apps. this old clunker of a game is scheduled for collapse according to interviews by Avi Shaleel (owner of plarium)
UTC +0:00
BiohazarD
Moderator
29 April, 2017, 5:19 AM UTC

Juglar del Viento said:


TheBeast said:


Just so all players know, Plarium refuse to acknowledge the facts and evidence provided.

They didn't look at the data and provide no explanation of how the set of results in the log could possibly be consistent with BG's "working as intended". Despite providing definitive proof was just fobbed off with the usual copy and paste BS as if I was a brand new noob with no knowledge and experience.

Why Plarium won't even engage with people who clearly know what they are talking about and have collected a vast amount of data to back up and prove their point is beyond me. 

Even if there was only the slightest chance of me being right, the hugely significant implications for thousands and thousands of customers would surely make it worthy of a proper follow up by Plarium.

A player has provided absolute proof of the problem. Plarium have been made aware of it. From this point on Plarium are willfully negligent for customer losses.

Dear lords

Telling the truth we cant, as players, be absolutely certain that something is wrong with the mechanism. As the moment we dont know anything about how it Works we cant asure that we are doing this in correct way. Till now we were able to approach our system to the real system but it seems that now he must review all we know and readapt the system.

On the other hand, i suppose devs and support must have any kind of logs or traces to asure 100% that the mechanism Works as intended. I suppose also the should have any big level account to test by theirselves, not only logging and testing the algorithm if not doing them  testing the highest levels of bgs doing as we do, i mean sending troops to kill all them.

For them could be easy test this as the moment they are supposed to know how really Works and in fact, seeing the results they got and tracing the logs of the algorthim if it pays nice or not. Come on guys you could use ur own accounts where u can put on it the troops you want to testing them.

I could ask for some things i would like to say for testing but as always that asking could be dust in the wind so i hate wasting time to repeat once and once again.

As always: Squeeze is not always the right strategy, even on poker u have to be real sure when use it.

Regards


As someone who's worked in software development, I can assure you that bugs do sometimes slip through testing, especially when those bugs only occur when multiple conditions are present simultaneously. 

The glitch (or intentional loss, if the bgs are working as intended and it's supposed to be there) is known to certain players and we also know how to avoid it (thank you djmoody and thebeast), but if you don't believe it exists feel free to use your own troops how you like. 
UTC +0:00
Juglar del Viento
Moderator
29 April, 2017, 9:47 AM UTC

BiohazarD said:


As someone who's worked in software development, I can assure you that bugs do sometimes slip through testing, especially when those bugs only occur when multiple conditions are present simultaneously. 

The glitch (or intentional loss, if the bgs are working as intended and it's supposed to be there) is known to certain players and we also know how to avoid it (thank you djmoody and thebeast), but if you don't believe it exists feel free to use your own troops how you like. 

Well, then i ask how that possible glicth could be reproduce to pass it to devs to test if really its a glicht


Resistance Is Futile
UTC +1:00
Oracle
29 April, 2017, 10:52 AM UTC

BiohazarD said:

As someone who's worked in software development, I can assure you that bugs do sometimes slip through testing, especially when those bugs only occur when multiple conditions are present simultaneously. 

The glitch (or intentional loss, if the bgs are working as intended and it's supposed to be there) is known to certain players and we also know how to avoid it (thank you djmoody and thebeast), but if you don't believe it exists feel free to use your own troops how you like. 

Then these post have no meaning, If you have proof there is a glitch and you know how to avoid it, and players complain about that, its only logical that you present your knowledge to the community, and plarium about such glitch and how to avoid it. 

Because saying the is a fault and I know what is the fault, and I will let you continue with that fault, because its up to you, its not Helping at all.

These is why community managers close BG topics

Most comments are nonconsecutive and arbitrary with the aim to solicit a sporadic, continuous attention. 

If The beast knew that there is a fault, and how to avoid it, why post about the fault, and not how to avoid it. 
Gedleyihlekisa: Oracle the postremogeniture
UTC +2:00
Oracle
29 April, 2017, 10:58 AM UTC

Juglar del Viento said:

Well, then i ask how that possible glicth could be reproduce to pass it to devs to test if really its a glicht


I am also willing to help in such regards. 

I thought the error was caused by our way of doing BG, but if there is a real error, and ways to avoid it, then I am willing to learn of said ''error'' and how to ''avoid said ''error''

I honestly don't believe the said error exist.

BG are working, as intended, and people post BG rewards in the level 170 in the game. 
Gedleyihlekisa: Oracle the postremogeniture
UTC +2:00
Jezebel
29 April, 2017, 8:10 PM UTC
give me a free account with unlimited troops and i will try to reproduce the glitch!!!
UTC +0:00
djmoody
29 April, 2017, 10:10 PM UTC

I will also take up that challenge. I don't mind doing a hundred hours or more of free testing for Plarium if it means helping to make what is already completely obvious to players, obvious to Plarium.

We already have one perfectly logged account proving there is a problem. Lets add a couple more.

So come on Plarium what have you got to lose (or hide?).
Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
djmoody
29 April, 2017, 10:14 PM UTC

Oracle said:


I honestly don't believe the said error exist.

Just review the log at the start of the thread. It's not about belief, you simply need to review the facts already supplied. There is a major problem, evidence to prove that already provided. All that remains is how long Plarium want to continue to deny the obvious.

FYI I think you job as a moderator is to push and push Plarium to review that log. It's a gold mine of data that is being utterly ignored atm. They need to be held to account for solving this issue.
Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
Juglar del Viento
Moderator
30 April, 2017, 8:01 AM UTC

djmoody said:


Just review the log at the start of the thread. It's not about belief, you simply need to review the facts already supplied. There is a major problem, evidence to prove that already provided. All that remains is how long Plarium want to continue to deny the obvious..

Lord djmoody

just to say that log only could be comprensive for those who uses it to trace their bank, although it is one of the clearest i have seen, but i think devs could not find it useful or clear for them to control this possible issue, besides the amounts we use are not the same as really used.

i suppose they do the test tracing the looses with their own logs and if they, using this method, check that all works as intended, then be sure that all works as intended. However, if this possible bug, glitch or error exists then first we have to set in which conditions this error occurs and then say them to try to reproduce and check if really is a bug. meanwhile they couldnt reproduce it or find it if it is so hidden then all works as intended.

remember the famous bug from moscato, how many time it tooks to be reproduced and repaired.

also i want to say i dont know the amounts to bank for levels from 101 to 170 and dont know if really 250M banked are enough for a payout on levels Lord Mark or Lord TheBeast do (170). i think so, but i can talk properly as the moment i dont know that data.

Regards


Resistance Is Futile
UTC +1:00
Hooverssmallengines
30 April, 2017, 10:19 AM UTC
and now the BGs either raised the strength of Baldurs troops or Lowered the strength of our troops as it take more units to clear them than before !!! this is a tested Fact !!!
UTC +8:00
Sir Dan Saul Knight
30 April, 2017, 7:01 PM UTC
Please listen Plarium

UTC +0:00
Walgor
1 May, 2017, 8:48 AM UTC

The BG Payout mechanics seems to change from time to time. Therefore we can not be sure if it's a bug or if it's intended. We can not know, if the lack of payout is due to a bug or due to the new payout mechancis.

I noticed a change when BG limit was extended to 160. Repeatedly killing level 160 BG cost me a good part of my army ... maybe it's still storted in the bank, maybe not. If not: maybe that's due to a glich, maybe to changed game mechanics - there is no way to be sure. 

A recent event proves, that changes are taking place: When the limit was at 160/165 my lowest BG was 80+. Getting the dected BG Number lower than 100 and adding 20 new BGs always left to level 80+ BGs.

 2 days ago low BGs started to pop up as well, Yesterday, the number of detected BG was at 100, when i finished doing BG. Today 13 new BG popped up (detected BGs are 113 now) and some of them are as low as level 3 ! This is completely new and proof, that there are some background changes are taking place in the BG mechancis. So how can we be sure, that the banking system was not changed as well ?

UTC +0:00
djmoody
1 May, 2017, 9:12 AM UTC

Walgor said:


or due to the new payout mechancis.

Plarium CM's have repeatedly stated that BG mechanics haven't changed. Have to take that at face value

While it's easy for Plarium to get a lot of things wrong about BG's, knowing whether or not a dev update has been focused on BG's would be extremely easy for the CM's to know (the dev timetable would be published internally within Plarium).

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
djmoody
1 May, 2017, 9:16 AM UTC

Walgor said:


Yesterday, the number of detected BG was at 100, when i finished doing BG. Today 13 new BG popped up (detected BGs are 113 now) and some of them are as low as level 3 ! This is completely new and proof, that there are some background changes are taking place in the BG mechancis. So how can we be sure, that the banking system was not changed as well ?


FYI it has always been the case you get 12 new BG's a day. The "extra" one is probablty due to killing a top level BG somewhere in the mix, which always spawns 2 new BG's, an off and a def.

Everyone has a right to an opinion. No one has a right to their opinion being respected by other if it can't be backed up with rational and logic explanation
UTC +0:00
1663385 users registered; 33852 topics; 252798 posts; our newest member:Castle №10910071