DarkStarr, your math seems to be off

Dear DarkStarr,

I rarely post, but in the Housing Deep Dive your “political answer” to the question if Dukes should get a “double size” city lot was: the value does not add up, a Duke pledge is not twice as much as a Baron pledge.

And I am commenting on this in the context of Early Founders:

Until May 20th, a LotM pledge was $10,000 and a Baron pledge was $3,000 (or even $3,500++, but I will focus on early cost). The size of a LotM lot is now four times the size of a Baron pledge. Four times the cost of a Baron pledge is $12,000. Therefore the increase in “lot value” you grant a LotM is exactly 20%. Is this correct?
If so, a “double size” city lot that could be granted Dukes potentially would correspond to double the cost of a Baron pledge, which is $6,000. A Duke pledge is $5000. Therefore you would grant the Dukes 20% increase in “lot value”. This would be exactly the same increase.
You opened that “can of worms” and came up with the reasoning of “value of lot size”. So... I do not see a problem here, as the increase would be identically to the LotM lot upgrade.

Am I missing something? I am aware that there is an overhead in every pledge for additional perks beyond lot cost (such as Akalabeth as the... "top example") that also "multiplies" with higher pledges... but the basic reasoning can only be based on the total amount of the minimum cost that enables you to get a tax free city lot. And to get four tax free city lots you'd had to pay $12,000 and to get two tax free city lots you'd had to pay §6,000. This is basic math, additional perks or not.

I am open to comments!

 

Don't lawyer him bro...

I agree with Darkstarr... You guys are all looking at lot size as a way to measure the pledge... That is the wrong way to measure the assets of the account... And the LOTM are paying 5000 USD to 7000 USD on top of the Dukes to get a very few items. I said on another thread that if you were to get two Duke accounts, you would get a ton of more rewards (more bang for your money) than the LOTM tier.. And still be cheaper...

If people want a bigger lot, then why not upgrade to LOTM? That is the next bigger lot.. Go get it boys!

CHEERS.

 

No lawyering intended! :-D
I am not near a Duke or LotM pledge. It just seems odd to me to put "value of lots" as an disabler for an upgrade for Dukes into the discussion. That argument has the least impact. A "deal with it" would actually make more sense ;-)

 

Agreed!

 

your argument falls apart when you use prices that no longer exist. the current cost of baron is 3600, which is only 1400 difference from duke. 5000 is not double, 7200 would be double.


changing lot size for dukes would change the perceived value of all the 3 original lot sizes. currently they still maintain their perceived value since LotM lot size is in a class all its own as the top pledge.


rather than being upset LotM get their castle lot size you should see it as incentive to become a LotM.


also, i get the feeling there are a lot of dukes, they probably lifted the limit for it.

 

and can we use the "don't lawyer me bro" correctly. He specifically stated that these deep dives were to start discussions and that's what we're doing, discussing.

 

and no it doesn't cause the argument to fall apart. I PAID $3000 for baron and then PAID $5000 for duke. The fact that duke did not sell out is irrelevant. In fact the fact that duke didn't sell out and baron has twice is a major tell that there is a problem.

And no, they did not lift the limit for dukes. Why would they lift it for dukes and leave it for barons and LOTM? makes no sense

 

looks to me like baron3, duke, and LotM2 have no limits

 

If Early Founder pledges are compared (which I did), the argument is perfectly valid. 2*$3000 (20% over Duke) and 4*$3000 (20% over LotM).

Regarding total cost of pledge to lot size, there is just a linear progression to be perceived. Isn't it? I know that I am arguing for the "gimme more because they got more side".... but objectively (and thereby I do not mean the "perceived value") there is an effective cost to acquire tax free lot sizes (because there is simply no other way to get them). And doubling the size of the duke lot would be in line with the example the LotM upgrade set.

Again, I am aware that the cost progression of additional perks might be "perceived" otherwise. But seriously, most folk care about real estate. That's where the main part of the cost progression comes from, especially now that the LotM were upgraded. That is why the Dukes feel really stumped at the moment. And that is what Portalarium surely saw coming.

What would leave... an additional bad aftertaste is that Portalarium might have no interest in upping Duke now because it is so close to April 7th now (and therefore it might be a smaller pledge incentive overall, then the LotM upgrade), although there are valid arguments for doubling a Duke's lot size. I really like the crew and I try to support and think positive about their decisions. But I also think it does not hurt to give the Dukes - that kinda feel left out right now - a little love

 

I'm not a Duke, but it would be nice to be one. Since the lot size is the biggest part of the Citizen+ pledges, comparing lot sizes between pledges is perfectly reasonable and valid. It would be a good faith gesture on Portalarium's part to upgrade the Dukes to a double-sized city lot - whom after all are among their biggest backers.

 

The thing I don't like about these types of requests/suggestions/demands is that at the end of the day, you are complaining about the staff rewarding their biggest backers. Sure you can do the hard math and "accountant" DarkStarr to death, but doesn't that take the fun out of all of this?

Here are a few potential pitfalls of what's being posted:

1. If they bend to your will of changing the Duke's size they will be open to demands from other pledges. I mean where does this end? Maybe Lord's town lot is also too small? Or perhaps Knights should get a bigger village lot than Citizens? See what I mean?

2. The staff should not have to pay a penalty (by doing more work and deal with complaints) when they decide to do something for their highest pledges, as they have made a significant impact to support the game. $10-12k is no joke, that's a down payment on a decent car.

3. Gham is right in using the "don't lawyer me bro" in the context of "Hey let's not hold DarkStarr hostage on what he verbally said on the deep dive videos". The staff would like productive/innovative discussions on game design, not to gripe about what each pledge level should get.

Remember the point of all this. We want to back the game so it'll be successfully launched and then we can all have fun.

 

Well... until the deep dive I wasn't actually interested in the situation. But I think, DarkStarr brought this... surge of demand onto himself by introducing the argument of "value of lots" into the discussion. This is actually a counter-argument for not upgrading Dukes. Cost can only be measured by effective cost to acquire. [insert argument repeated already above here]. Just say'n
Pointing out that his own argument actually is leaning to the solution of upgrading Dukes is not lawyering - at least in my opinion. It just is kinda... obvious. I can understand the strong feelings of Duke pledgers, especially after the deep dive. Hence, my second post in this tread

 

Portalarium have created the castle lots based on user feedback. There's absolutely nothing wrong with user's suggesting larger lot sizes for Dukes. Portalarium already have shown it was relatively easy to add in these rather large castle plots. It is even easier to add in the double-sized Duke lots, being smaller than castle lots and less of them (compared to LOTM pledges) . I had suggested the new Dukes lots be placed on nearby hills, so that more choice locations of the normal sized City lots available to the Barons. This creates a win-win situation.

 

Honestly I think the main point, and this is really what they should have leaned on more, is that there are, what, less than 20 LotM lots? And there will most likely only be one per town. Giving the Dukes a different lot size than city, while nice for their yard, would actually end up severely restricting where they can live. I am not a Duke (I wish!) but if I were, I would rather have the more populous lot size, than a larger but more restrictive one.

 

I don't get why anything was increased; the original pledge reward said City Lot. Period. End of discussion.

*shrugs*

Yes it is a can of worms and seemed to come out of thin air. So, who knows, maybe there is a good reason but I sure as heck don't know what that reason is

 

I do not imagine castle lots in the hot spots of a city either. The point that remains is the option to choose.

 

True, if one indeed wanted the extra size. Based on current thinking regarding lot selection though, a Duke would still have the option to use their "Duke Lot Deed" to acquire a City Lot property (or smaller if they so chose).

Of course, we would end up with a number of empty Duke lots in that case, which would be sort of a waste of effort.

 

Don't forget Duke can still select city-sized lots, if they so choose. Just like the LotM can choose to not go with a castle lot and choose a city lost instead.

By the way, based on the Kickstarter numbers, they are less Duke pledges than they are LotM pledges.

 

The lack of a resolute "deal with it" comment now transfers the duty to "deal with it" back to Portalarium. I cannot understand this sudden and massive intervention either. But the... curve of progression is now very spiky at the end. To smooth that spike out is Portalarium's responsibility. Isn't it? They introduced it

 

Yes, I think there is a good chance that this situation might take the fun out of all of this for some Dukes
(I do not want to troll my own thread - do not take this comment too seriously, please)