PDA

View Full Version : Suggestion about age 4 beta. (Clicking) - Poll



Shane-
26th September 2009, 06:34 PM
I'd have posted this in the 'Age 4 Beta' topic made by Tap, but I feel the nature of this suggestion, and the possible impact it can have on the game as a whole is more important than 'Sharing a thread', which will soon get spammed, therefore leaving the suggestion/proposal away from public eye.

One of the reasons I, and others don't even bother playing this game is the nature of how the click system works, which ends up having a impact on almost all other areas of the game....

A game like Ruins Of Chaos is suppose to be build around alliances, attracting new players (Outside and inside) to play with you and your chain, and that doesn't really happen too much, as if the player wants to do much, he/she has to have no life

This game is way too focused on clicking, clicking is almost the only aspect of the game, and really?... how many people want to spend hours and hours clicking? - Sure clicking is a relevantly easy task, but its also a boring one that takes up a lot of time.

An alliance is suppose to be many people working together, and when the days come that you've got 3-4 people clicking 150k a day, then the aspect of an alliance is almost altogether gone, those 3-4 people are pretty much doing everything, that doesn't promote an alliance other than petty click deals where x and y work together for a small period of time, and then go their separate ways.

I can't really see the need for allowing someone to click so much, In general it has a negative impact on the game, Imagine you're a new player, and you've just clicked 2k, you're thinking 'meh, this clicking thing sucks, but /win, I've got 2,000 new soilders!, I'm doing good' - then you go and see people clicking 150,000 - You just know that what you've done in pretty poor... your motivation drops to click drops, causing your motivation to grow drops, which indirectly effects your game play as a whole, as less growing = less stats, etc etc etc, and over time, you end up losing interest in the game.


So, make the game as a whole less depending on clicking, maybe cap clicking at x per 24 hours, or after x has been clicked, make "clicking" give something else in the game (For example x gold, or every y clicks promotes z% towards an upgrade). I'm not really sure what, but do something that prevents people spending hours and hours and hours clicking....

The game needs to be more focused on alliances and other aspects of the game, you need to attract new players to the game, and a new player who hasn't played RoC/KoC before isn't going to be a huge fan on clicking, so their not going to stay around for too long, As it stands now, the game doesn't get too many new players due to its nature, and the new players that it does get don't tend to be too hardcore.

This game starting of pretty well as it used the KoC userbase, players who already understood clicking, players who already clicked, so clicking in a game didn't come as anything new, But now the game has the same problem as KoC, user base is dropping, any new players that do join don't find anything too attractive, thats worth staying for.

I'd imagine, If the game wasn't centralized around clicking, and more focused on alliances, then people would be recruiting more, which brings people into alliances, and that helps the community, once you're in an alliance, you use their forums, irc channels, and just get involved more....

You'd also have more motivation to recruit people outside the game (Old koc players, players from other games, friends, family).


Anyways, What to change, implement, add/remove - I guess is for you players to suggest, something that doesn't screw clickers, but something that doesn't make clicking the one and only aspect of the game (Ruins of Chaos - Huge lot of chaos in clicking numbers eh?)


General ideas:
1. Cap clicking at x per 24 hours
2. Automatically assign x% of clicks to officers
3. Clicking helps/gives other things other than growth
4. Add something thats an alternative to clicking - Something like those gay flash games, I'm sure someone could theme a pacman / poker into the RoC theme (Security an issue), but its possible)

I'm sure that you (The players) will be able to make better suggestions on how to make the game better, and less focused on clicking, As it is you guys who sit back and watch people click 10-20 times more than you (Lol)


Shane

pigsfoot
26th September 2009, 06:52 PM
That's one hell of a long post Shane :rolleyes1 I'm pretty sure if you had just said "clicking is fucking the game up" it would have been less of a read and made the same point ;)

fistsofthor
26th September 2009, 08:27 PM
That's one hell of a long post Shane :rolleyes1 I'm pretty sure if you had just said "clicking is fucking the game up" it would have been less of a read and made the same point ;)

Nah, I am a fan of long posts that explain exactly what the poster means. (that's why I make moderately long posts on occasion)

Another one of the issues is that the top unit production (30720) Is equal to slightly over 300 minutes clicking at 100 cpm (yes, people can get up higher, but over long periods, I cannot maintain a cpm rate of over 100, and I doubt that new players can). That is 5 hours of clicking a day in order for a solo player to simply double his or her growth.

What this does is make clicking worthwhile at the beginning of an age, but not worthwhile as the age draws on.

An interesting idea might be to make it so that each click is worth
the natural log of the number of days since the age began in soldiers, rounded up to the nearest soldier.


What is remarkable is that top RoC accounts grow less than top KoC accounts even though the RoC top unit production is exactly 48 times the top KoC unit production, and the in game click system is far better than the in-game KoC click system.

For example, in KoC, about 3 or 4 months into the age:
Baigo-SR 16,952,810 Dwarves, and he just trained down about 3 mil soldiers. On RoC: the highest tff I see is just shy of 7 million. Now, a size in number of players is partially to blame, but the lack of motivation is also a big component.

Now, since clicking is no longer tied to individual players, there is no reason for it to be such a boring task. I do like shanes idea of creating a pacman game, or similar game. The game would need to be of the following type:

1) Something that everybody can be decent at.
2) Something that gets harder as time goes on.
3) Something that, the better players do, the more points they get.


For example, the following game could replace clicking:
http://www.addictinggames.com/helicopter.html

How it would work:
1) after every fail, one must wait 10 seconds.
2) you get soldiers equal to the number of feet you traveled to the 1.2 power divided by ten.

Meaning, if you traveled a total of x feet, you would get: 0.1 * (x^1.2) soldiers (rounded down or up).


Of course, some sort of good captcha would need to be in place in order to prevent auto players.

iKon_
26th September 2009, 08:54 PM
I have to admit, if RoC didnt take a minimum of 8 hours of play time per day in order to be considered "Semi Sorta Kinda Good" and 15+ hours of play per day to be considered "I guess you're good," and 22-24 hours per day to be considered "good," I (amongst many others, I presume) would still be playing, and adding to the activity of the game as a whole. Im not saying DELETE CLICKING, Im just saying make the game less dependent on it, like Shane said. Some may say a click cap will do quite the contrary, and more reduce activity instead of increase... however, do we want 98.76% of the activity in this game to be strictly clicking? Thats not real activity, activity that draws people to the game and makes the overall experience more enjoyable. Click cap would be my best bet.

As it is now, the game is stagnant. How many new faces have you seen around here lately? 1? 2? MAYBE EVEN 3?! We need new faces... "Like Barack Obama say, its time for a change."

Disclaimer: I don't support anything Obama does

Nasser
26th September 2009, 11:03 PM
Agreed.
The unlimited clicking system we have only allows for people who have too much time on their hands to play and do good , means the hardcore players. It also kills a big aspect of the game - which is slaying - because when gold is everywhere due to huge tffs you can't call that but farming , and not slaying.
Therefor, limiting the amount someone can click per 24hrs ( alongside with reducing the max UP available - it needs hell alot of reducing but that can be discussed somewhere else ) can bring alot more excitement to the game than just click/bank , also it brings alot of players back - those who can't just sit and click for 12 hrs per day.

Vrasp
26th September 2009, 11:35 PM
I'll just take this time to point out that capping clicking means you can't really keep up unless you have a ton of officers (something new players won't have).

They'll have to go through the agony of trying to get new people to play (which is difficult). Sure that's beneficial to the game, if they actually get people to join. Otherwise, they can't keep up, even if they do reach the click cap.

I don't think that clicking is an inherent problem; maybe we just need more alternatives.

fistsofthor
27th September 2009, 01:05 AM
I'll just take this time to point out that capping clicking means you can't really keep up unless you have a ton of officers (something new players won't have).

They'll have to go through the agony of trying to get new people to play (which is difficult). Sure that's beneficial to the game, if they actually get people to join. Otherwise, they can't keep up, even if they do reach the click cap.

I don't think that clicking is an inherent problem; maybe we just need more alternatives.

Well, I would like to make clicking just plain more fun.

I suggested the helicopter game. I mean, there isnt much of a reason for clicking being a boring experience since clicking these days is:
you get clicks=soldiers and it goes to -200 or so quickly and then stops. I mean, with the current system, its practically possible for a players clicks to translate directly into their own soldiers without clicking other players' links. (i think at present the cap is your clicking may not be greater than the sum of everyone else who is clicking if you expect full return)

But, something to draw people in.

Checkman
27th September 2009, 01:24 AM
General ideas:
1. Cap clicking at x per 24 hours
2. Automatically assign x% of clicks to officers
3. Clicking helps/gives other things other than growth
4. Add something thats an alternative to clicking - Something like those gay flash games, I'm sure someone could theme a pacman / poker into the RoC theme (Security an issue), but its possible)
Shane

I am what I suppose you would call an intermediate clicker, can do 40-50k a day if I put my mind to it but at times I struggle to do any due to real life commitments.

As with many other posters here in this thread, I would happily see some kind of cap on the daily clicking, the cap would need to be low enough to make those who don't click much have some kind of target to reach, I don't know 10k, 20k or something a day. But in the same breath it needs to be high enough to at least get some gold out there on the BF.
One thing, and this might be too controversial for some people, that I think would make for an interesting age, and see how people fare, would be to remove completely the upwards trickle. You click for your account, and you grow your account, I would even go as far as removing sending credits to others. I know it is controversial. People's efforts go to building their account. This would have the impact of making big sell-offs harder to justify as clicking would mean you would not have the men to hold the weapons. Just an idea. You would see true accounts as opposed to accounts that are bolstered by others work. I know that an alliance is a combined thing, but there is so much swapping of stuff to keep up with big guys.
There are lots of comments (in many threads over many ages - both here and in previous KoC days) about what would make the game better for new starters etc, clicking can be demoralising for sure. A level playing field once - ooh, that could be interesting....

fistsofthor
27th September 2009, 01:50 AM
I am what I suppose you would call an intermediate clicker, can do 40-50k a day if I put my mind to it but at times I struggle to do any due to real life commitments.

As with many other posters here in this thread, I would happily see some kind of cap on the daily clicking, the cap would need to be low enough to make those who don't click much have some kind of target to reach, I don't know 10k, 20k or something a day. But in the same breath it needs to be high enough to at least get some gold out there on the BF.
One thing, and this might be too controversial for some people, that I think would make for an interesting age, and see how people fare, would be to remove completely the upwards trickle. You click for your account, and you grow your account, I would even go as far as removing sending credits to others. I know it is controversial. People's efforts go to building their account. This would have the impact of making big sell-offs harder to justify as clicking would mean you would not have the men to hold the weapons. Just an idea. You would see true accounts as opposed to accounts that are bolstered by others work. I know that an alliance is a combined thing, but there is so much swapping of stuff to keep up with big guys.
There are lots of comments (in many threads over many ages - both here and in previous KoC days) about what would make the game better for new starters etc, clicking can be demoralising for sure. A level playing field once - ooh, that could be interesting....

you realize that by removing upward trickle you would remove the one incentive players have to recruit other players and teach and train officers. So, I would say no, as it does something we do not want it to do:
remove one of the incentives players have to recruit other players.

biglou250
27th September 2009, 02:12 AM
A clicking cap would be great. Who in the hell wants to click 50k+ daily? Seriously. :wacko:

People only do it to stay competitive and would most likely rather be doing something else. Like watching paint dry or clubbing baby seals.

Some kind of alternative to clicking, like a flash game, could be fun. But I'm sure with time that would get boring too.

Shane-
27th September 2009, 02:22 AM
Checkman:

I think your idea would be nice for a more so (ermm), second type of round, A bit like how old RoT would have two/three rounds running at once, heck having separate 'mini-rounds' itself isn't too bad of an idea, if clicking isn't involved, I'd imagine the server would be able to handle it perfectly fine.

The direction of my post was to get more people working closely together, rather than a limited amount of people spending all day clicking. Total removal of any type of trickle, would have a reverse effect to that, and make recruiting useless as they is no gain in it for the commander(other than friendship).

Unless having officers had another type of purpose which would be some type of gain for the commander, (x% of tbg? or something, I don't know), then your idea in a main age could have a pretty bad impact on the player base, well at least to the active active players who login 4-5 times per day.



Shane

joly
27th September 2009, 04:27 AM
So, why not have an alliance unit production?

1,000 extra soldiers : Costs: 500M Gold
2,000 extra soldiers : Costs: 1 Billion Gold
3,000 extra soldiers : Costs: 1,5 Billion Gold
4,000 extra soldiers : Costs: 2 Billion Gold
5,000 extra soldiers : Costs: 2,5 Billion Gold
and so on, that way people will try to get more members, and every member pays taxes, eg. 1 procent of income, that goes directly into the alliance bank, and Admins can upgrade UP when enough taxes have been collected. Or members can donate the gold so upgrades can be bought faster.

Marketplace

You can trade inside the alliance and set prices.

eg. Daggers: 1,000,000 sellprice: 1,000 - 10% taxes (goes in alliance vault)
and trade them for:
eg. Mithrils: buyprice: 200,000 + 10% taxes (go into the vault)

So 20% of every transaction goes into an alliance vault.

the_nba_player
27th September 2009, 08:53 AM
Biggest problem with a clicking cap:
This will encourage people to make multiple accounts in order to be able to click more.

Until someone proposes a method to eliminate this problem, I will withhold my vote.

This is not to say that I dislike the idea in its entirety, just the issue I have addressed here.

ThOrN-
27th September 2009, 09:17 AM
I hate looking at the top players thing on clicking...

Soul crushing to see this everyday... D:

Top Clickers Today
Henry Clicks Rank
iFuryMyself [TLM] 162,853 1
NamyarIsRelentless [~RF~] 108,298 2

I don't have the time to click that much and I'm sure others have jobs/school/college as well..

A cap on the amount would be great but like 50k..

Another thing that annoyed me was "100 external clicks in a 24 hour period... a whopping 189,000 credits won!" That isn't a bit over the top as a prize?.....Imagine being a new player as you said clicking 2k being all proud of yourself then seeing someone has just won 189,000.. O.O'

I do think it would be fun to see if you took the trickle out..to see if people would stay in alliances or not.. >.> But i guess somehow you could change the trickle so its not as much of a gain to a commander? :S

Maybe a sacrifice to a commander if an officer joins? :P Like they lose % of their tbg or weps (a VERY small % of course..) and it goes to the officer.

The only other thing i can think of is if you have to buy clicking time like... trade creds or gold in for an hour of clicking...O.O Difficult lol

Tapchou
27th September 2009, 09:25 AM
Biggest problem with a clicking cap:
This will encourage people to make multiple accounts in order to be able to click more.

Until someone proposes a method to eliminate this problem, I will withhold my vote.

This is not to say that I dislike the idea in its entirety, just the issue I have addressed here.

Problem eliminated :<3:!
Nah - we have some pretty decent tools, right now and some more in the making, another reason for Age 4 Beta being rewritten, is to include things we need to make new tools for us to monitor activity, but cannot be put in the current code.
But, cheating will always happen, and we know that - it's impossible to completely stop cheating.

skynet
27th September 2009, 09:32 AM
I think would make for an interesting age, and see how people fare, would be to remove completely the upwards trickle. You click for your account, and you grow your account,

great suggestion.. clicking is boring, monotonous and a complete waste of your life.. as well as implementing your idea, i'd also have a cap on the amount that can be clicked per day..

i've sold off and reset this age..

i like to log in now and again, make a few attacks, sab relentless and a few other clowns; however, with the new changes made to sab and recon etc this age it is becoming impossible to keep up unless you click a lot, have a large fighting force and tbg.. i cant devote that much of my life to that so i've decided to quit...

and the prize thing for the external clicks was a complete joke.. did anyone actually look at the "officers" that the winners recruited.... i see some of them have disappeared now anyway..

fury
27th September 2009, 01:01 PM
A game like Ruins Of Chaos is suppose to be build around alliances, attracting new players (Outside and inside) to play with you and your chain, and that doesn't really happen too much, as if the player wants to do much, he/she has to have no life

This game is way too focused on clicking, clicking is almost the only aspect of the game, and really?... how many people want to spend hours and hours clicking? - Sure clicking is a relevantly easy task, but its also a boring one that takes up a lot of time.

An alliance is suppose to be many people working together, and when the days come that you've got 3-4 people clicking 150k a day, then the aspect of an alliance is almost altogether gone, those 3-4 people are pretty much doing everything, that doesn't promote an alliance other than petty click deals where x and y work together for a small period of time, and then go their separate ways.

I can't really see the need for allowing someone to click so much, In general it has a negative impact on the game, Imagine you're a new player, and you've just clicked 2k, you're thinking 'meh, this clicking thing sucks, but /win, I've got 2,000 new soilders!, I'm doing good' - then you go and see people clicking 150,000 - You just know that what you've done in pretty poor... your motivation drops to click drops, causing your motivation to grow drops, which indirectly effects your game play as a whole, as less growing = less stats, etc etc etc, and over time, you end up losing interest in the game.


So, make the game as a whole less depending on clicking, maybe cap clicking at x per 24 hours, or after x has been clicked, make "clicking" give something else in the game (For example x gold, or every y clicks promotes z% towards an upgrade). I'm not really sure what, but do something that prevents people spending hours and hours and hours clicking....

The game needs to be more focused on alliances and other aspects of the game, you need to attract new players to the game, and a new player who hasn't played RoC/KoC before isn't going to be a huge fan on clicking, so their not going to stay around for too long, As it stands now, the game doesn't get too many new players due to its nature, and the new players that it does get don't tend to be too hardcore.

This game starting of pretty well as it used the KoC userbase, players who already understood clicking, players who already clicked, so clicking in a game didn't come as anything new, But now the game has the same problem as KoC, user base is dropping, any new players that do join don't find anything too attractive, thats worth staying for.

I'd imagine, If the game wasn't centralized around clicking, and more focused on alliances, then people would be recruiting more, which brings people into alliances, and that helps the community, once you're in an alliance, you use their forums, irc channels, and just get involved more....

You'd also have more motivation to recruit people outside the game (Old koc players, players from other games, friends, family).


Anyways, What to change, implement, add/remove - I guess is for you players to suggest, something that doesn't screw clickers, but something that doesn't make clicking the one and only aspect of the game (Ruins of Chaos - Huge lot of chaos in clicking numbers eh?)


General ideas:
1. Cap clicking at x per 24 hours
2. Automatically assign x% of clicks to officers
3. Clicking helps/gives other things other than growth
4. Add something thats an alternative to clicking - Something like those gay flash games, I'm sure someone could theme a pacman / poker into the RoC theme (Security an issue), but its possible)

I'm sure that you (The players) will be able to make better suggestions on how to make the game better, and less focused on clicking, As it is you guys who sit back and watch people click 10-20 times more than you (Lol)


Shane

The game centers around community effort... people clicking as much as they do is part of that community. If it weren't people clicking 50k, 100k, 150k a day, then it would simply be [insert another item here that somebody is better at] - if the game was simply how many officers/recruit clicks you had like in KoC age 1 then it would be all about the folks with the big websites. If the game was simply about how much gold you steal, then it'd be all about the people who spend the most time vacuuming up the battlefield or getting selloffs. If the game was simply about how much you can click then the top clicker of the age would always win it hands down. But it's not just about any single one of those things. There's a variety of strategies that people can use, and most of them have stood the test of time for years, none of them being too powerful that they can't be challenged.

Unlimited clicking, which this game started from, has been proven time and time again to have not nearly as much influence in the game as the alliances and selloffs. The proof is in age 1 already that it didn't matter how much I or d3vm0n clicked, it was about the size of the biggest alliances and the skill of their main accounts and their general strategies. Clicking is unlimited mainly so that people can compete against those huge alliances with a lot of raw effort if they wanted to and had the time and played their cards right. If there were any sort of limit on it (even a high one), not only would it ruin that competition, but then it would give the less honest people another reason to load up the proxies and start playing 2 or 3 accounts.

I've played enough games with limits to know that limiting it doesn't fix gameplay imbalances, it only frustrates the user who finds something they like to do in the game and then hits that limit and can't do it anymore. It's like getting to level 11 in an online RPG and then being told "sorry, you can't gain any more experience anymore today because you can only level up 10 levels in a day" just because most people can't raise 10 levels in a day.

----------------------------------------


An interesting idea might be to make it so that each click is worth
the natural log of the number of days since the age began in soldiers, rounded up to the nearest soldier.

Work up some math on this one... might be intriguing. If there's anything that could even out the relative effort people are expending, that might make it not suck so hard to start playing in the middle of an age. I don't want to make it possible to just up and win an age after playing only the last month just because the credits were worth more soldiers, though. Lots of people play their hearts out for 3-4 months to have a shot at winning an age or getting their alliance to win an age. That shouldn't be possible to overthrow just by playing it later without some serious skill and effort.


What is remarkable is that top RoC accounts grow less than top KoC accounts even though the RoC top unit production is exactly 48 times the top KoC unit production, and the in game click system is far better than the in-game KoC click system.

For example, in KoC, about 3 or 4 months into the age:
Baigo-SR 16,952,810 Dwarves, and he just trained down about 3 mil soldiers. On RoC: the highest tff I see is just shy of 7 million. Now, a size in number of players is partially to blame, but the lack of motivation is also a big component.

There are other reasons for this difference, as well. Namely, KoC's current age has been going on 3 months now, and the click system there makes growth largely dependent on your officer list, since the slow clickback speed makes it hard for a single person to get their clicks back to them in soldiers unless they buy or click a ton and get the .25% clickback.

You'll notice the top TFF in KoC has 17 million, the next two have 10-11m, and then there are two after that with 8m. The next one as far as I can tell has 4.7m. That's a pretty big gap in the TFF tiers.

RoC's TFF tiers are pretty close together. There's 1 with 7.1m, next has 6.7, another with 6.2, a few with 4.5-5.5, and several with 3-3.7. It's a pretty close competition.


Now, since clicking is no longer tied to individual players, there is no reason for it to be such a boring task. I do like shanes idea of creating a pacman game, or similar game. The game would need to be of the following type:

1) Something that everybody can be decent at.
2) Something that gets harder as time goes on.
3) Something that, the better players do, the more points they get.


It's hard to get all three of those in this kind of game. For a lot of aspects of this game (i.e. slaying, sabbing, clicking, growing) "better" is a very subjective term. Somebody who hits for a billion gold on somebody who makes 500 million a turn and is all proud of it could very well be called a n00b by somebody who hits for 300 million gold on targets that only make 50 million a turn. And somebody who clicks nothing but still grows 100k can be shown up by somebody who clicks 150k and grows 300k. It all depends on what each person thinks is good. So, it'd have to be something never before seen, and manufactured in such a way that there is only one way to be "good" at, so that more points are earned by the people who do get good at it.

-----------------------------


I hate looking at the top players thing on clicking...

Soul crushing to see this everyday... D:

Top Clickers Today
Henry Clicks Rank
iFuryMyself [TLM] 162,853 1
NamyarIsRelentless [~RF~] 108,298 2

I don't have the time to click that much and I'm sure others have jobs/school/college as well..

A cap on the amount would be great but like 50k..

Clicking cap doesn't mean this kind of thing won't happen. It just means your soul would instead be crushed by seeing the top growers list all have the top alliance accounts and nobody else...and then you and everybody else that didn't have such a luxury as an established alliance wouldn't be able to do anything about that like you could now.


I do think it would be fun to see if you took the trickle out..to see if people would stay in alliances or not.. >.> But i guess somehow you could change the trickle so its not as much of a gain to a commander? :S

Changing or removing this trickle really changes the style of the game entirely. A lot of the interaction that goes on is in people arranging their alliances or deals for growth purposes. If that's taken out, it's a very different game. I'm not sure if it'd be a better or worse game, but it'd be a smaller game for sure, and that's already not saying much.


Maybe a sacrifice to a commander if an officer joins? :P Like they lose % of their tbg or weps (a VERY small % of course..) and it goes to the officer.

You know what would happen...everybody would join the biggest player, and then the biggest player would get even bigger so that they'd be even more enticing to join & stay under.

--------------------------------


Another thing that annoyed me was "100 external clicks in a 24 hour period... a whopping 189,000 credits won!" That isn't a bit over the top as a prize?.....Imagine being a new player as you said clicking 2k being all proud of yourself then seeing someone has just won 189,000.. O.O'


and the prize thing for the external clicks was a complete joke.. did anyone actually look at the "officers" that the winners recruited.... i see some of them have disappeared now anyway..

I agree, that wasn't such a great idea after all was said and done. My bad.

---------------------------------

Instead of talking about limiting things, let's talk about what we can add to it that would move toward this goal of making the game more fun and inviting for new people and more enjoyable for the people who are still here.

I'd like to hear more about mini-games or alternatives to clicking to get credits. One of the ideas I've been cooking up for a while is a market where things can be traded, so that if you wanted more soldiers, then unit production and clicking and officers aren't the only way you could get it; you could buy credits from somebody who wants more gold.

Another good one is something like a mini-game attached to (or in place of) clicking captchas for credits. Something would have to be directly integrated in the game; I don't think I would do flash games, as those can be spoofed pretty easily.

Perhaps integrated mini-games that you play by clicking, little quests you can work on, or an easy competition/click race system so that it's not just a bunch of numbers you're clicking, but actually competing with somebody directly or seeing something in the game progress besides your number of credits for hours at a time.

Hurt/heal would probably work -- something like that downtime page that we used a long time ago when the server was down for a datacenter move. The concept is simple: somebody would pick a race to heal and a race to hurt, the last one standing would be the winning race.

Once upon a time, I had a random, artificially stupid AI attached to the races in a separate hurt/heal game I made, so that the races would randomly "buy" stats with their gold, randomly attack one of the other races, and buy another stat with the gold if they won. I could probably make another mini-game out of that idea. people could click toward contributing to their favorite race's stats, and then they could watch as computerized battles take place between the four races. Kind of like a football game, except not with football, and not a real game, and it's not as fun to watch.

As for a quest idea, maybe something could be attached to your clicking so that you could "explore" a vast land while you're doing it, and maybe a few times per day you could find a random item on one of the spots, like some credits, or special weapons, or collectible items (hot potato!).

None of these mini-game ideas would be taking away people's credits for clicking, they'd only be like different interfaces to getting your credits, and something else a little more interesting to watch than "oh yes, i've got 400,000 credits... oh, yes, i've got 400,001 credits! oh yeah bitches, i've got 400,002!!!!"

Shane-
28th September 2009, 08:23 AM
Well - One question fury, This thread was/is more so focused on "To change, or not to change clicking", Does/Will the outcome of the general feeling of the members have any impact of whether to change clicking or not?... And are you viewing this in a non' bias way (Since you're an epically large clicker, You'd naturally want clicking to be unlimited)



Shane

ThOrN-
28th September 2009, 09:20 AM
Hmmm I'm one that believe yes..everyone can click that much if they wanted and its a public good available to everyone, so i shouldn't moan about it right?

But Still with a clicking cap you could still out click a large majority of players...Also think of your health?... Whats the average players mins per 1k clicks like 5mins-8mins? 163k clicks in a day must take idk like 15-20 hours or more? idk if calculations are right..but yea.

You can still take pride clicking the full cap then having some time to relax or do things you enjoy and as i said still you could out click so many players.

Just check the TFF of previous ages..and look in the rankings now.

7,262,096 Humans

In almost 2 months?..

I'm just saying there has to be another tactic than clicking to win. Hmm having that big of a TFF can't be fun? no targets just 5 x 1's lol. :)

andyt683
28th September 2009, 10:32 AM
Well - One question fury, This thread was/is more so focused on "To change, or not to change clicking", Does/Will the outcome of the general feeling of the members have any impact of whether to change clicking or not?... And are you viewing this in a non' bias way (Since you're an epically large clicker, You'd naturally want clicking to be unlimited)



Shane

His views as a developer are balanced by my views as a developer. It works rather well, because we're generally on opposite sides of things. I made a game with no clicking at all, just for reference, because I dislike clicking that much. In this case, though, I'm on his side. Limits, from a game design perspective, are an awful idea, and most users don't realize how awful it is until they experience it.

purp1ekush
28th September 2009, 11:44 AM
Shane, Fury being unbiased, rofl will never happen, he's too self centered and opinionated.

I hope your game fails, regards.

fistsofthor
28th September 2009, 12:32 PM
Well, my response:
you asked about the clicking becoming slightly more effective as the age goes on in order for it to compensate for the Unit Production being so much higher.

The function could be that each number is worth the square root of the number of days. Meaing, if the age has been going for t days, then each number is worth √(t ) clicks or soldiers.


Meaning:
from day 0 to the end of day 3, clicks would be normal.
from day 4 to the end of day 8, each number clicked would give 2 soldiers and would be worth 2 credits
from day 9 to the end of day 15, each number clicked would give 3 soldiers and be worth 3 cc.
from day 16 to day 25, each number clicked would give 4 soldiers and be worth 4 credits
from day 25 to day 36, its 5x
from day 36 to 49, its 6x
from day 49 to day 64, its 7x
from day 64 to day 81, its 8x
from day 81 to day 100, its 9x
from day 100 to day 121, its 10x
from day 121 to day 144, its 11x
from day 144 to day 169, its 12x, and i dont think the age should go longer than that.

The purpose of this would be simple: to make clicking worthwhile throughout the age. After 3 and a half months, it would take 3k clicks to equal your unit production. Isn't that about how it is after about a week at present?

I mean, 5 hours of clicking should earn a player more than just 1 days worth of UP. Wouldn't you agree?

Now, an alternative is that we could use the cube root, or a log function for these purposes, but I think the square root seems pretty dandy. It enables players who arrive late to have a fighting chance, and makes it so that clicking is important throughout the age.

As for a game that players are good at in only one way, please check out the helicopter game. Its one of those: you have a winding path that is constantly getting smaller, stay on the path or die, and see how far you can get type of games.
It can be found here:
http://www.addictinggames.com/helicopter.html

Or you can just google up helicopter game.

Vrasp
28th September 2009, 12:39 PM
Well, my response:
you asked about the clicking becoming slightly more effective as the age goes on in order for it to compensate for the Unit Production being so much higher.

The function could be that each number is worth the square root of the number of days. Meaing, if the age has been going for t days, then each number is worth √(t ) clicks or soldiers.


Meaning:
from day 0 to the end of day 3, clicks would be normal.
from day 4 to the end of day 8, each number clicked would give 2 soldiers and would be worth 2 credits
from day 9 to the end of day 15, each number clicked would give 3 soldiers and be worth 3 cc.
from day 16 to day 25, each number clicked would give 4 soldiers and be worth 4 credits
from day 25 to day 36, its 5x
from day 36 to 49, its 6x
from day 49 to day 64, its 7x
from day 64 to day 81, its 8x
from day 81 to day 100, its 9x
from day 100 to day 121, its 10x
from day 121 to day 144, its 11x
from day 144 to day 169, its 12x, and i dont think the age should go longer than that.

The purpose of this would be simple: to make clicking worthwhile throughout the age. After 3 and a half months, it would take 3k clicks to equal your unit production. Isn't that about how it is after about a week at present?

I mean, 5 hours of clicking should earn a player more than just 1 days worth of UP. Wouldn't you agree?

Now, an alternative is that we could use the cube root, or a log function for these purposes, but I think the square root seems pretty dandy. It enables players who arrive late to have a fighting chance, and makes it so that clicking is important throughout the age.

As for a game that players are good at in only one way, please check out the helicopter game. Its one of those: you have a winding path that is constantly getting smaller, stay on the path or die, and see how far you can get type of games.
It can be found here:
http://www.addictinggames.com/helicopter.html

Or you can just google up helicopter game.

This actually does nothing to benefit those who start playing later in the age. If anything, it hurts them even more.

Consider it; you start on day 25. You're getting 5 credits per click, but so is everyone else, AND they've been getting 4/3/2 for the other days they were clicking.

So, what this really does is benefit those who click extraordinary amounts and do so throughout the age.

Sure, it'll help people starting mid-age catch up, but only to the people who stopped clicking after a week.

I think realistically it just creates more farms for those who start late, creates bigger selloffs, creates larger TFF gaps between the top accounts and mid accounts, and rocks for those who click all age. If this is what we want, let's just go back to 120,000 UP. ;-)

So if the goal is to make clicking awesome all age, then sure this is great. However, if the goal is to give "late bloomers" a fighting chance, then this isn't the way to go.

---------------------------------------

Now to get back to the ideas for changing clicking, but away from limiting, what if there were certain points where you'd stop getting full credits for each click?

For example:

Clicks 1-50,000: 1 credit each.
Clicks 50,001-100,000: 1/2 credit each.
Clicks 100,001+: 1/4 credit each.

These values are for in a single day, not for the whole age.

It'd make clicking a certain amount good, but with diminishing returns so you can't just get extremely big by being alone in the game.

Now, being a clicker, I obviously am not a fan of such a system, but...it's an idea that some people will like so I'll throw it out there.

fistsofthor
28th September 2009, 01:13 PM
This actually does nothing to benefit those who start playing later in the age. If anything, it hurts them even more.

Consider it; you start on day 25. You're getting 5 credits per click, but so is everyone else, AND they've been getting 4/3/2 for the other days they were clicking.

So, what this really does is benefit those who click extraordinary amounts and do so throughout the age.

Sure, it'll help people starting mid-age catch up, but only to the people who stopped clicking after a week.

I think realistically it just creates more farms for those who start late, creates bigger selloffs, creates larger TFF gaps between the top accounts and mid accounts, and rocks for those who click all age. If this is what we want, let's just go back to 120,000 UP. ;-)

So if the goal is to make clicking awesome all age, then sure this is great. However, if the goal is to give "late bloomers" a fighting chance, then this isn't the way to go.

---------------------------------------

Now to get back to the ideas for changing clicking, but away from limiting, what if there were certain points where you'd stop getting full credits for each click?

For example:

Clicks 1-50,000: 1 credit each.
Clicks 50,001-100,000: 1/2 credit each.
Clicks 100,001+: 1/4 credit each.

These values are for in a single day, not for the whole age.

It'd make clicking a certain amount good, but with diminishing returns so you can't just get extremely big by being alone in the game.

Now, being a clicker, I obviously am not a fan of such a system, but...it's an idea that some people will like so I'll throw it out there.

Um, making things worth more later on makes it so that the earlier days are less relatively important. So, my way certainly does help the player who joins mid age who really wants to hit up the clicking. It means that if newbie is clicking twice what another player clicks starting a month in, then he has a much better chance then previously of catching up.

On the other side, the diminishing margin of returns exclusively rewards multi accounts as well as creates an artificial limit. If one player is willing to put in 10 times the effort of each of 10 players, he should be able to grow just as much as they do. I see nothing wrong with that.

If you and your 3 buddies can lift 100 pounds, and I can lift 400, its kind of dumb if the weight lifting machine only goes up to 200 pounds. I mean, the 4 of you together can go lift a 400 pound box outside, and i can go lift a 400 pound box outside, but in the gym, you just put a dumb strength cap (effectively) on. I do not like the idea.

Vrasp
28th September 2009, 02:04 PM
Um, making things worth more later on makes it so that the earlier days are less relatively important. So, my way certainly does help the player who joins mid age who really wants to hit up the clicking. It means that if newbie is clicking twice what another player clicks starting a month in, then he has a much better chance then previously of catching up.


Yes, but it only lets him catch up to the people who have stopped clicking; otherwise he's still just as far behind as he would normally be, and with more reason to click...people are less likely to just stop doing it.

Additionally, some people just _don't want to click_ so this hurts those people even more. Do we want to force people into clicking? Will UP be modified based on the days passed too?



On the other side, the diminishing margin of returns exclusively rewards multi accounts as well as creates an artificial limit. If one player is willing to put in 10 times the effort of each of 10 players, he should be able to grow just as much as they do. I see nothing wrong with that.


Yeah, it might reward multi-accounting, but it'd be quite easy to catch (also, as long as you don't go above 100k you're still getting the same as doing it on an officer, unless you're transferring [even easier to catch]).

Diminishing returns aren't really an artificial limit...just makes clicking less valuable over time in a given day. I'm not exactly a proponent of this either, but the idea has its merits: it allows a single player to click more and make more, but makes having a lot officers who click 10 or 20k a day better than having two or three players who click 120k a day.

unlimited
28th September 2009, 02:06 PM
How about diminishing returns to clicking?

Vrasp
28th September 2009, 02:10 PM
How about diminishing returns to clicking?

Uh, that's what I posted about. Go read it. :-P

unlimited
28th September 2009, 03:05 PM
Well, I meant this:

The first 20k clicks are "free" - you get full returns.
The next 40k (up to 60k) clicks you only get 3/4 return.
The next 80k clicks (up to 140k) you get 9/16 return.
The next 160k clicks (up to 300k) you get 27/64 return.

So clicking 60k = 50k soldiers. Clicking 140k = 95k soldiers. Clicking 300k = 162,500 soldiers.

Above 300k... well, if you can click that much, take full clicks on the rest!

Vrasp
28th September 2009, 03:12 PM
Well, I meant this:

The first 20k clicks are "free" - you get full returns.
The next 40k (up to 60k) clicks you only get 3/4 return.
The next 80k clicks (up to 140k) you get 9/16 return.
The next 160k clicks (up to 300k) you get 27/64 return.

So clicking 60k = 50k soldiers. Clicking 140k = 95k soldiers. Clicking 300k = 162,500 soldiers.

Above 300k... well, if you can click that much, take full clicks on the rest!

Yes, if you read my post, that's similar to what I said. Just different values. ;-)

JunkMail
28th September 2009, 05:43 PM
how about a simple way of limiting the growth of the 00ber clickers like......

if you click over X amount in a day then you do not get your UP for the next 24hrs?? that way the big clickers only grow from their clicks and not both ways. and the average clickers can make up some of the difference with UP and Clicks. this way the 00ber clickers will still grow bigger and faster but not at much or as fast as now. it will slow them down.

the UP max of 30k is a little small for this option and the X value will have to be figured out by a fair means.

fury
28th September 2009, 07:23 PM
Well - One question fury, This thread was/is more so focused on "To change, or not to change clicking", Does/Will the outcome of the general feeling of the members have any impact of whether to change clicking or not?... And are you viewing this in a non' bias way (Since you're an epically large clicker, You'd naturally want clicking to be unlimited)



Shane

I've made a game without clicking before. You might call it "bias" when you think I am opposed to limiting clicking simply because I am a clicker, but that's not it. I am looking at this from the perspective of how to move forward rather than backward. People have historically disliked the devolving of any of the hallmark features of their favorite game, and to limit clicking would definitely devolve it in this case. It's not going to suddenly make everybody click who already won't, and that means only the people who were clicking can no longer do it that much...means less activity and less game. But I'm not against the idea of changing it or extending it in some way so that it is not just the same old boring stuff and more people might actually enjoy the game.

The mini-game ideas have definitely struck a chord with me, so I'm going to be coming up with a few possibilities on that front. Not sure that it would be feasible to integrate flash games like helicopter, but I get the point...some kind of other activity can be done in place without taking away what is already there.

rabbitohs
28th September 2009, 08:29 PM
Would these games replace clicking all together? Or just provide another way to get your credits?

Shane-
28th September 2009, 11:33 PM
rabbitohs - By furys posts, It would be an alternative, not a replacement.

fury - Someone suggested a cap that wasn't _low_, How many people click more than (Checkmans example) 50k? - My post wasn't based on screwing the current system, or forcing dramatic change that changes the whole aspect of the game. Just taking away the main/only focus point of the game down a keg or two, as I said, imagine you're a new player, playing for first time, Mass clicking is pretty much old now, years ago it was more/so accepted, and new players would do it a bit, I guess its like giving a child an Atari and a PS3 - I know throwout my life I've played on the old atari's a lot more than any other game console, and still play from time to time (Lol...), but sit a child down now, and fat chance you'll see the same impact on them


Shane

fistsofthor
29th September 2009, 12:19 AM
I think that artificial caps are pretty bad. KoC would be a bit more interesting if players were able to click for as much as they wanted each day. Would mean that those meating the cap (which is enough to frighten new clickers) are all in the same boat. So you know who wins? Those who can get the most growth from officers and strike the most deals.

Now, i think the no cap is good here. It doesnt hurt anybody. Now, if you are arguing about it hurting new players, how about the top clicks are only available to players within 300 ranks of the clicker. Then, pretty much anyone who wanted to see it could, but it wouldnt hurt new players if thats what your issue is.

Checkman
29th September 2009, 10:48 AM
Here's a suggestion.

What about a small bonus for certain achievements:-
10% extra credits if you beat your best number clicked in 5 mins.
5% extra credits if you beat your best number clicked in 24 hours.
Variable % bonus based on how fast you click.
100 CPM - 5%
125 CPM - 6%
150 CPM - 7%
etc

Pr0nStar
1st October 2009, 06:27 AM
that sounds like a horrible idea as it would only benefit those top clickers more, not make people want to try to click more. there are a lot of people who click that fast almost effortlessly, so it's not an incentive for new players or even for players who don't like to click

rabbitohs
1st October 2009, 07:16 AM
So you want to give incentives for new players to click, but also decrease the ammount heavy clickers click...
Cant have your cake AND eat it.

Only way to do that would be to base incentives on total ammount clicked in the age. For example, the 1st 10k clicks of an age would be worth double. However, that brings about multies.

Therefore, the cake is a lie...:sneakout:

unlimited
1st October 2009, 09:12 PM
I still say the diminishing returns is the best idea. It gives new players incentive to click and reduces the chance of top clickers "running away," although it still benefits high clickers to click more.

In addition this gives alliances incentives to recruit many small-medium clickers instead of focusing on a few big powerhouses.

fistsofthor
1st October 2009, 09:26 PM
I dont like the diminishing margin of returns as that hurts the really active players. And, games tend to thrive for rewarding the really active players while also letting new players get off the starting block.

What i would propose is this:

the first 1000 times a player's link gets clicked, that player gets 2 soldiers per click instead of one. That way, they do not have extra cc s to transfer. This would provide a nice bump into clicking.

Additionally, we could add something about the commander getting only the normal amount of growth they would from 1000 clicks being turned over, but its not a must. It certainly would reward a commander teaching a noob how to click (that, or sending the noob 1k morale)

joly
2nd October 2009, 07:43 AM
I think clicking should be fun. This is so boring, so maybe make a shooter, slidepuzzles, sudoka stuff,... but that will be so much work, i dont think any of it will happen.

So maybe we should have a bankmanager who converts gold/clicks in soldiers, and once you reach certain amounts of sov/tbg prices will go up. These soldiers should be restricted from sending to others.

Amak1131
2nd October 2009, 06:28 PM
I think clicking should be fun. This is so boring, so maybe make a shooter, slidepuzzles, sudoka stuff,... but that will be so much work, i dont think any of it will happen.

That is along the lines of the mini-game idea.

unlimited
3rd October 2009, 02:13 PM
I dont like the diminishing margin of returns as that hurts the really active players. And, games tend to thrive for rewarding the really active players while also letting new players get off the starting block.

How does it hurt the active players? It is STILL more clicking = better. 160,000 clicks per day will STILL get you top TFF easily. And it exactly fits the balance of rewarding active players while letting new players get off the block.

fistsofthor
3rd October 2009, 02:48 PM
How does it hurt the active players? It is STILL more clicking = better. 160,000 clicks per day will STILL get you top TFF easily. And it exactly fits the balance of rewarding active players while letting new players get off the block.

it hurts the super clickers because it denies them size growth. Additionally, one player who is putting in 10x the clicking of other players should have the same tff as a commander who doesnt click with the 20 officers who click.

So, playerA clicks 200000 a day.
playerB has 20 officers each who click 20000 a day.

Those 2 should be the same size.

unlimited
4th October 2009, 02:03 PM
I disagree. This rewards finding officers as well as finding MANY small-clicking officers, instead of like 3 super-clickers. You'll see then alliances like RF, TLL, PHNX, TLM, etc. will be trying to trade more active and small-clicking players instead of trading a few super-active (Fury yes, but he's not the only super-active clicker there is) clickers.

Vrasp
4th October 2009, 02:26 PM
Since some people have brought up the point that 'someone who clicks 10x as much as another person should have 10x as many soldiers,' I've come up with a different view on the diminishing returns.

What if, instead of getting less credits per click after 100,000 in a day, a person started getting less soldiers per click on them, after their link has been clicked x times that day.

This way, you can click a ton and store up for later days, or you can click a ton and send them to officers or what have you.

I specifically put it on clicking on your link because main accounts shouldn't stop getting growth, or start getting diminishing returns, from officers' clicks.

It does mean that those solo accounts out there will have to either store their credits and not get all their soldiers in one day, or they'll have to stop playing solo...but whether or not that's a bad thing depends on how the admins think the game should run.

If you think this still promotes multiple accounts, let me know how. If you have any other issues with it, point those out too!

saulot
9th October 2009, 04:25 PM
the think i dont like with koc and roc is that you have to have lots of clicking officers to have a chance
i dont have any officers and i dont click that much so i know i dont have a chance and dont even try to get the #1 spot
and started this age way to late for that anyway

fistsofthor
9th October 2009, 04:47 PM
i say leave the clicking cap out. That is my opinion.

pastol
11th October 2009, 11:55 AM
There are several great ideas in this thread. Some that I really hope become part of the production model. It would be great to get more people's ideas and creative thoughts. I hope people are encouraging fellow alliance members to look at this post. And sorry Shane, I'm going way off topic here.

My post is not meant to negate any of the ideas presented so far. But I'll point out that there are two aspects of RoC that keeps me from recruiting (outside of RoC) players. The first has been discussed; the fact that it is a clicking game. It would be embarrassing for me to be completely honest with a potential player in terms of how to excel in the game. I can see the response: "Oh yeah, that sounds like a lot of fun. No thanks." So clicking is obviously a problem. The other problem that I see is one that affects current players and that is predictability. Currently, at a high level, I can predict how any given age is going to turn out about 3 weeks in. We all can. Not necessarily who will be in the number one spot, but we all know it will be a member of a large and established alliance. We all know which alliances will be sabbers, which will be rankers, so we know who is and is not a target for gold, yadda yadda yadda. We even know the personalities of individual players The point is, there are very few, if any surprises. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, AAs give support to most of this predicament. And the bottom line on that situation is that no game can retain any amount of excitement if each player is allowed to make his/her own rules and then publish those rules. It just will not work. RoC is a perfect case in point. Every player, and his/her M.O. needs some amount of anonymity outside of one's own alliance regardless of his/her status (alliance v. solo, sabber v. ranker, experienced v. noob, etc.). There is no way to do this perfectly, but there are various functions of RoC that serve to negate that. AAs and alliance tags are the two biggest. Alliance tags should only be seen by alliance members to designate their own alliance. In other words, I would only see tags for my own alliance. AAs should also be viable only to fellow alliance members.

I first joined KoC because it was a strategy game that took some thought as opposed to a "shoot'em up" game that only required digital dexterity. But the strategy has been drained out of both KoC and RoC. I know everyday what my own game play will be. Log on, catch a few gold hits, click a few clicks, answer a few PMs, then, if I have nothing else to do, click some more. Fun party.

I would really like to see strategic strength become the number one aspect of the game again. Some dangerous possibilities from making the wrong decision(s). Some unknowns that result in risk. Risk that pays off or gets you sabbed. Some excitement! Allowing players to make their own rules negates all of that.

One more point. If in fact sabbing totals (amounts) is going to be a celebrated accomplishment, that needs more accolades in a public sort of way. At the end of the age, the number one spot is given praise, but nothing is said about who sabbed the most. Nor is that stat ranked during the age.

Teh JoKer
13th October 2009, 09:20 AM
I'm a new face to this game, but a veteran KoC player. Altho its similar, id rather click for RoC, becuz the stupid gaptcha thingy doesnt stop u wen u get 1 wrong :P <nvr take that out or il go crazy

sum great ideas have bin posted tho :)

/me thinks less trickle. Atm its every 2 from ur officer gets u 1. change to maybe 3/4 to 1. and limit officers to say 10? This in turn forces people to make a chain, and nt jst sum arse with aloada officers boostin one player :laughing:

and i read in another thread pigsfoot sayin tht the best new game he played was Solar Combat.. im the same, that wasnt click based but most players had a fair grack at top #50 rank. cant remember hw the game worked tho :P haha

also if u dnt want the higher TFF's runnin away with it, boost ur spy and sab the sh1t outta them for the fun of it... it is a game of chaos after all :P

xforsakenx1x
28th October 2009, 09:02 PM
As for a quest idea, maybe something could be attached to your clicking so that you could "explore" a vast land while you're doing it, and maybe a few times per day you could find a random item on one of the spots, like some credits, or special weapons, or collectible items (hot potato!).



Sounds similar to RoT:<3:, which i miss a lot btw, so that might not be a bad idea. I am also a fairly avid clicker but im no where near 100k. I don't have time for that but I also disagree with a cap. Its a tough call...the mini games sound like a good idea...or Fury could just bring back RoT:<3: :p

fistsofthor
28th October 2009, 09:27 PM
One of the things that I like about RoC is that its very possible for one to do fairly well (I mean, whoever is the best at anything probably devotes an unhealthy amount of time to it) with little to no clicking do to the fairly high unit production.

This makes the game nice. With clicking relatively ineffective compared to unit production, it makes it easier for players to play this like the KoC of old where clicking really was optional for 90% of players.


I really do like the mini-game idea as a substitute for clicking. It would make explaining this game to new players a lot more fun. I mean, ranking shouldn't be the only aspect of this game. Displaying the top 10 sabbers would be a good thing (and have their totals only revealed at the end). It would reward other aspects of the game. Same thing if we did that for the top 10 slayers. Although, I feel like whoever was thrown a big sell near the end would win that.