Good day #gotchigang. We have now had time to actually experience harvesters/reservoirs, the realization of the actual cost of building these installations quickly became apparent to a lot of parcel owners who had not been closely following installation gameplay. This has given rise to multiple conversations on how this should be address going forward and there has been talk of even providing a “rebate” for those parcel owners that build reservoirs ahead of any recipe changes that might happen. The timeline for any changes to reservoir recipes is unclear so it could be some weeks given the current list of tasks that are currently being done by the DEV team.
With this being said, I do believe that we are in a good position now to adjust the spillage rates of reservoirs. First being that they are not yet “live” and also it would not cause friction with currently established tokenomics. From a buyer’s prospective, it really does not matter how much your “bag” costs if there is a giant hole in it and currently our reservoirs’ spillage rates make building them on anything but a spacious an act of sheer folly. We have had members come up with very detailed simulations on the various approaches that players may use to farm their parcels and a level 3 reservoir comes out as the best choice. However, a level 3 reservoir has up to a 55% spillage rate. That is 55% being spilled every time it is being emptied until there is no more tokens to be farmed on that parcel no matter how long it takes.
This is why I am proposing that the reservoirs’ spillage rate be changed to the rates currently being used by the altars. First reason being is that these are spillage rates are already known and accepted by the community. Secondly, it gives a better scaling on levels by being a universal constant rather than based on the individual token.
My hope is that if we get enough “community support”, we could get a rare instant coreprop to address this and maybe have it “live” before RF 4 starts.
Would you want this expedited?
Yes I would want this expedited
No I do not think this should be expedited
0voters
EDIT
I am in NO WAY saying that these changes should supersede the harvester/reservoir launch planned next week. I am hoping these changes come within a week or 2 of them going live.
Currently the reservoir spillage differ depending on what type of token you are harvesting so the least spillage rate of a level 1 is 63% (kek) to the highest at 77% (alpha). I would like to change all of them to begin at a flat 50% and drop it by 5% increments until we reach 10% like we are currently using with altars.
Do you think the spillage rates should change?
Yes Change the Reservoir Spillage Rates to Those of the Altar
This is only an issue if spillage is off. With hot zones, you have this massive pile of alch landing at your feet, and there will be a very fun scramble to get as much as possible and max your yields. We’ve turned a game where you teleport in with your squad, check to make sure coast is clear, and then do your smash and grab operation, into hitting the “E” key and wondering if anything happened.
EDIT: As Nihiminimalist said… the numbers are so specific that it clearly shows modeling was done and the spillage was the thing they already tweaked, to go with our harvester recipes. They clearly made a decision to not adjust the prices, but to make the spillage be the thing that you are paying for with the leveling up.
If your recipe shows a L3 as the optimal reservoir, it is not the best recipe, because it has you spilling too much.
Quincy…please avoid wording your posts with loaded statements. Titling something as “extremely high” warps people’s opinions before even reading the text. Also you stated “the actual cost of building these installations quickly became apparent to a lot of parcel owners who had not been closely following installation gameplay” You didn’t have to be closely following to know reservoir spill rates we’ve been actively advertising it for ages. This looks to me like yet another case of "oh I didn’t realize this let’s change stuff last minute and then complain about delays a week later.
I was under the impression, that the peculiarly differing and progressing spillage-rates are the result of extensive modelling by PC. I assume the particular rates are intimately tied to other values like the ones recently changed with the Haarvester-recipes. Wouldn‘t a major alteration like the introduction of a flat-rate warrant extensive (re-)modelling too?
I think, the consideration of a base-economic alteration of this sort prohibits any expedition. What are your estimates about the changes, that the introduction of flat-rates would have on the overall Alchemica-Economy?
Well i guess this is where we differ. The recipes were “finished” quite some time ago if i am not mistaken so for the issue that it is now too high with the release next week does definitely suggest that. The spillage rates had been in question for quite awhile with it being posted as “official” July 8. I do not see where I had said anything about delaying anything, in fact I said I would like to have it “live” before RF 4 if possible. This IMO is not something that should delay anything.
We don’t need to change spillover rates, we need to work out how to get spillage turned on so players that are engaged in the game can capitalize on their yields…
I started with 50% because Dan mentioned that they would not be opposed to changing it to that. This would be more of a scaling issue so I am not really sure where the amount spilled would affect the economy other than giving more tokens to the individual that actually purchased them.
When have you seen the DAO move fast enough to discuss and then implement something in less than 5 days? I don’t think that’s realistic unfortunately… And that doesn’t address the fact that these numbers are calculated carefully on the back end and coming to the DAO with an arbitrary % change hoping to change spillage 5 days before launch is bound to put an unfair and unnecessary amount of stress on the DAO and the devs
As I understand it, the „amount spilled“ is a key factor for Alchemica-prices by incentivizing upgrading and thus bolstering demand. Furthermore it is a the motor for the social aspect of the game and the Lending-Market.
As I perceive these things as being closely tied together, I would see the most potential traction for this discussion, if it was embedded in the discussion of turning spill-over again.
Until the re-launch of spill-over the spill-over rates are merely „loss-rates“ of undefined value…
for the adjustment of my personal „retention-rate“ of Alchemica I would want to use the borrower-split.
Hmm and i was under the impression it was how much you could extract since it was the basis of going through the trouble of revising the harvesters’ extraction rates. IMO it seems the spillage rate has somehow being more associated with what “workers” are able to pick-up rather than parcel owners “loosing” more tokens than they are keeping. I understand that everyone wants to look out for the little guy but if the most parcel owners choose not to build installations because of these high spillage rates, they will get nothing or would end up fighting parcel owners to get the tokens that are being dropped.
I GTG to work, but I have a way that we can make spillage an owners party and owner on owner play instead. Will make a proper post with diagrams later, but basic concept is that we cut the altar spill radius to be what the reservoirs are, and cut the reservoir radius to be about 4 spacious wide at L1 and 2 reasonable wide at L9, and until we get cartridges, only owners can pick up spillage.
this makes upgrades very appealing, and it makes it so teamplay matters, and it makes it so we’re not losing all the alchemica from our smol lands.
Yes. It definitely depends on how you perceive/define the function of spillage.
Seen as a socio-economic mechanic, it is the propeller for my revenue-stream as an owner of Gotchi-Assets.
The lower the level of my reservoir the more weight I am attaching to the exposure to this particular mechanic and accordingly higher the scope whithin I can adjust my revenue-stream – the portion of the borrower-split I give to the „worker“/“scholar“/“gamer“ are my administrative costs as a „small-business-owner“.
I see that same way, but I also see ZERO chance of getting that interaction level back until Caartridges or PoE is implemented. However, I DO see there being lots of support for us playing VS each other. Owners only spillage is a nice placeholder for PVP, especially if its all within a range where you can be sure you swept the whole area.
If we are trying to sell upgrades, then we need the visual and the dopamine, and the feeling if regret that you didn’t upgrade more. The very fact that Quincey didn’t notice this until he went and tried the reservoirs and saw the spillage, is proof that people don’t inherently understand numbers on spreadsheets the way they inherently understand visual feedback.
Yes, my ponderings are based on the assumption that the hot-zone-mechanic is also applied to reservoir-spillage. Indeed, from this perspective spillage is the instantly gratifying visual (and accoustic) representation of this socio-economic carnival. Lights and sounds…. And don‘t even ask, what you can do with just a little bit of the casually picked-up Alchemica in those cute laandmark circus-tents.
To be clear, I’m not just talking about the hot zone. I mean shrink the whole radius, so it’s all within a range a team could recover. Some sort of inverse ratio, like… L1 is going to need 8 frens to squad up, and l9 is totally fine solo as long as there is no one on your screen.
The district sized spillage of crappy altars, would provide enough of us roaming about to make it ‘dangerous’ to just empty your reservoirs without checking the area for muggers’
The area that spillage may or may not drop is irrelevant at this point being that spillage is currently off. The spill rates are being discussed because they affect what owner’s are actually getting from their individual parcels.