Opinion: Leaf of Vaka is too overpowering

in Site Feedback & Ideas

Is leaf of vaka too over powering



1,478 posts

     

arcana • 17 April 2020 at 2:54 AM

See, I still don't quite understand how this helps, rather than hurts. I have a slew of reasons and counters that I've come up with for why this would be ineffective, or hurtful, but I still don't really understand why it helps. What would be the pros of this, compared to the cons?

Female
2,485 posts

     

yogurt • 17 April 2020 at 3:09 AM

@arcana I think the issue is just that we disagree on this statement: “Rarity rarely makes a recent creature more valuable.”

If creatures are more rare they’re going to increase in value and you might have a chance to trade for an older creature. The way I see it is that older creatures dont get more valuable as quick after a while. They tend to plateau except for a few exceptions. Most of them will be immortal and most people dont like to value them over 10k if they dont have to. But if a creature you buy for 500cc one day quickly is able to climb to around 2000cc quicker, then eventually people will be able to trade for the older more expensive creatures. How it is right now it would take a while for a new CC creature to increase in value especially with the end of the year rerelease. Everything will eventually be 500cc again.

I doubt many people would go buy an onny for pure 60k cc but in worth of creatures that have individually gained value over time it is not that impossible. This is only if new creatures are still able to gaining value.

Thats not the only reason for this proposal though. I’m also focusing on how it would Keep more players from taking indefinite hiatus. Since when they leave they most likely will have to either put their creature in Tim’s or buy a 3 month/whatever month leaf of vaka, knowing there is a limited amount of time they can disappear form the site without risk of their eggs dying. Yes its a hassle to keep coming online every couple of months to repurchase Tim’s or leaf of vaka but the more they have to return to the site the more likely they will change their mind one of those times and continue to play.

Theres more that I wrote in the first page explaining why this might help but I see there is a lot of issues with what eggcave “promised”. Theres going to be a lot of people upset (me included) but I think I’m more upset if the site is literally dead with barely any active players. It’s harder to keep being active when all your friends are gone or are going.

65 posts

     

cheetah • 17 April 2020 at 5:36 AM

@yogurt
I don't want to seem like I'm just trying to play devil's advocate, but I value the security the leaf currently gives too much to be in favor of it expiring or anything like that. ☹️ There's got to be better ways to stimulate the economy and player activity that don't involve people potentially getting a nasty surprise. I don't think the long-term potential benefit to the trading economy would be worth the short-term potential player outrage and conflict. Every site has users leave, but users leaving slowly over time will have a much less negative effect than lots of users suddenly jumping ship at once, especially in response to a site update. I don't think that's a risk the site should take anytime soon, if at all.

What if users were only allowed to have it on their main account, and any existing side accounts with them just got grandfathered in? That way people could still enjoy the security for their most valued mortals, but they'd have to immortalize anything they didn't want on their main account. This, combined with an update to the way cove expansions are handled, would be much more forgiving, I think. I still wouldn't be completely in favor, but it's a compromise.

I just truly do not think making any creatures that are essentially immortal at this moment suddenly turn mortal is a wise decision. It has too much potential to do harm. Consider that creatures can also be made legitimately immortal using CC, though through the use of stat boosters rather than the LoV. If creature immortality was suddenly removed from the game, or changed in a significant way that would end up killing a lot of currently-immortal creatures, think of how upsetting that would be. For some people, their LoV suddenly vanishing would be virtually the same experience.

The way everyone plays the game is different, and I respect that. My views are just reflective of my experiences and the way I play. I like hearing other viewpoints.

Gender Fluid
1,346 posts

     

kayuubii • 17 April 2020 at 5:47 AM

@yogurt
I don’t really agree, my side @dreamkeeper is too much for me to feed daily and I can’t afford to put them in Tim’s. It’d cost too much if there was an expiry date, I think 500 CC is a good amount

Male
2,235 posts

     

beta • 17 April 2020 at 7:26 AM

@yogurt while I see what you mean, I really don’t think having expirations on the Leaf of Vaka is a good idea. Back a while ago, I was saving cc to try to buy one. Day after day I fed tirelessly to get ec to purchase cc. When I finally got one I was overjoyed, and then fed some more to work towards the SARC. Now imagine a different scenario where it was only for a few months. Would I even bother buying it? All items in the cash shop has unlimited uses, or one use, why change that now? Keep in mind 500cc is $5, and not everyone can afford that every few months. Say you wanted the LoV year round, and it had a 3 month time. That’s $20 out of you pocket, or 2,000 cc you have to give up. While I agree that creatures dying increases rarity, so does people leaving. When new people join, they might want the newer creatures, and after a while, they will have depleted the number of the creatures. This is just my opinion

Demiboy
2,368 posts

     

ethereality • 17 April 2020 at 9:49 AM

@yogurt To respond to your point on values climbing, I've also seen that recent CSPs have not been climbing value as fast as in 2010, 2012 or even 2015. I think there's a slew of reasons behind this, and not just that they aren't rare.

1. There's just so many of them now!: the amount of CSP species exceeds 250 at this point. In olden Eggcave days, any CSP creature had this special sheen about it because you could only get it from the Cash Shop Park, and everybody knew which creatures those were. This also somewhat limits the creativity of the creature concepts as well leading to the next point--

2. Art decline: I'll admit that some months we still get stunning CSP creatures but I don't think we've really had some popular creature designs in a while. I still appreciate and love the CSPs now, and I'm 100% not complaining about the art, but just to compare, let's look at August 2011 CSPs: Raskoon, Corsal, and Nym. Those three all came out in the SAME MONTH. Three gorgeous, amazingly colorful, and creative concepts, came out in the SAME MONTH. And every month WAS like that back then, although that's just my favorite example.

3. Yearly rereleases: More than the leaf of vaka, I think yearly rereleases are draining the value/rarity out of the recent CSPs. At the end of every year since 2017(?) I believe there has been rerelease of ALL CSP creatures from that year for half of December. This essentially disincentives people from buying CSP's throughout the year, first of all, because everybody knows that if I miss it now, I'll just be able to buy it in December. No one is going to trade for that January 2020 CSP you bought for more than 500 CC until MAYBE June 2021. Let's look at the Volpe for example. Classic popular fox creature type thing. It was released SIXTEEN months ago and it is worth only 600 CC according to Budgie's. Only because it was released in January 2019 and it was rereleased in December 2019. This value curve is really punishing on new players because recent CSP value spikes are an amazing way to grow your cove value, and adding 18 months to the wait may frustrate newer players. I know I didn't have to deal with 18 month keep-and-sell times as a newbie. This is much much more of a problem affecting natural CSP value than Leaf of Vaka killing of a few CSP's from users that forgot to buy Tim's or something.

1,478 posts

     

arcana • 17 April 2020 at 1:11 PM

@yogurt

Okay, I think I understand this point a little better. But let me ask, if you bought a creature/got a creature, and were being active, would you suddenly switch to inactivity without a care for them? You've also stated that this would give users a cause to care more their creatures(I disagree, because working for a Leaf currently is caring for your creatures), which would likely happen. I doubt they'd just flounce off and leave their creatures to die, especially if they bought it with money. Essentially, not enough creatures would die to make it more rare. Not enough creatures would die to make a difference, because this is penalizing very specific players, and making things more difficult for others.

I doubt many people would go buy an onny in general! It's an impossible goal! But consider this, making creature prices go up quicker might help, but our economy is already so ruined. I am not someone who dabbles in economics, and I don't claim to. However, beyond the short term effect of "prices go up," have you looked into how it would affect the economy long term?

You bring up the word hassle. If someone is unwilling to sacrifice time on EggCave in favor of real life, I think we all agree that its a good choice. But see, when you view things negatively, as a hassle, at what point do you start hating it? At what point do you start thinking "I don't care anymore. Its too much trouble. I hate this game." It would be amazing to keep, attract and bring back users. But I don't think you should do it with such a negative and stressful way. Besides, they would just immortalize and leave. No big difference.

"But I think I’m more upset if the site is literally dead with barely any active players. It’s harder to keep being active when all your friends are gone or going." See, I don't think this will fix that. When I see people leave, its mainly because either life got in their way, or they're just bored. Would you really make it more stressful for those with lives? And fixing boredom with a "hassle" doesn't really help things either. If the site wants more players, they would have to fix and add so many different things, but I would doubt that this would be one of them. Again, what would this fix?

171 posts

     

mirime • 17 April 2020 at 5:31 PM

@yogurt
So, I'm here a bit late and I think I've read every post; hoping I haven't missed anything, I can certainly say that I particularly agree with @arcana, whose speech has also expanded the topic and the various points of view, more fully understood, and I fully support it, as well as @stevepat2002 post.
Having said that, I find myself slightly surprised to learn that the "economic" part of this Site has been and still is, often, the reason for various conflicts; moreover, from what I've read around, it was also the reason why most of the older users decided to quit.

The economic part of this Site is useful to understand the related basic dynamics, increase awareness and also management skills in various areas. I don't think it deserves such a full focus; personally, it wasn't this that attracted me to the Site. After all, it is an adoption site, and the various "slices of the cake" are the most varied: there is the social and relational part; the one that gives space to Art and creativity, but above all the personal one, which allows (fortunately!) various possibilities for all users, who can thus modulate the flexibility degree between real and online life, and therefore also the activity degree specific to this Site. Attempting to build a sort of "bond" of this kind (almost as if it were a sort of economic blackmail), regarding the proposals concerning the LoV, I don't think it's a good way to improve the "deficient" (also, for sure, economic) points of the Site, nor to increase the activity or the approval rating of the Site and the respective activities of its users. I don't want to dwell on this point because I fully agree with the points earlier exposed by @arcana; the economic side and the exchanges in this Site, in my opinion, should find a meeting point between subjective values and a certain objective degree (which must be ruled by discussing and arguing multiple opinions); I say that because it seems to me that there are too many problems inherent this point. What factors are affecting the value of the creatures right now? Their longevity? The concept? The design? The colors? The (species) names?! It would certainly be necessary to clarify; if there was already someone who's taking care of these things in detail (I know that there are several "price guides" or something similar), in any case he/she shouldn't do it alone.

What's more, the value of the LoV is difficult to achieve for users who do not buy CC directly, but exchange them. What I think is that it's a privilege for many to be able to get this item: wanting to get it shows that one gives a certain importance to the Cove and has already developed a good sense of attachment to creatures that, although virtual, are the object of affection of the users, and I find nothing wrong with the fact that one can soon reach a good balance to exchange his/her ECs and afford it. On the contrary...! After all, I think it's one of the first objectives that an Adoption Site aims to achieve c:

I also think that priority should be given to the relational and gaming sectors (which could certainly be expanded and made more stimulating as well as often updated), but above all the maintenance of a good mood and of serenity.
I think that the age of many users can be under 20 (we can also easily calculate an average) which is also a relevant factor. We must give space to everyone but also remember that certain age groups can generally correspond to certain ways of conceiving things. Any comparison should be a reason for personal growth and also for the Site, so we can certainly find a meeting point to improve various things here, but I absolutely do not think that fixating on the economic side, and in particular on the functioning and value of the LoV, is useful for the purpose.
Because, regarding the "problem" of abandonment by users, as long as it's what has been truly put in the foreground, there can be many initiatives and updates, we just should discuss about and find something that can turn beneficial for everyone and doesn't bring unnecessary stress.
We also come here to relax; it wouldn't be right to force people to a certain degree of activity that would end up being tied only to the accumulation of virtual money.
I read, on the profiles of many now inactive users, that the reason they were quitting was precisely the system inherent the priority and privileges that are given to those who can afford CCs. Thinking about that... If there were no users who buy them, and therefore also support the Site, they could not even be exchanged for ECs, and no user could afford any privileges from the CSP, from time to time.
To be fair, I find that at the moment there's a certain balance and a good basis of solidarity. It never seemed to me that there were few users online, even less little activity here.

I hope I've explained myself and my thoughts well enough; I'm pleased to discuss this and that reasonable doubts have been raised about a certain number of things.

I would love to help and find great ideas on how to make this Site more exciting and make people want to come back more often, but you also have to understand that it is something you can only control up to a certain point. Real life doesn't allow all the organization that you can have virtually ^^ I will always be for the preservation of flexibility and of breaks, sacrosanct hiatus from technology.
And I love the fact that there are objects like the LoV; I almost lost all my creatures in the past, I was aware that it could happen from the beginning, and I was really sorry about that, but real life problems and commitments don't wait (*). And since I've been there, I wouldn't want other users to experience worries like these (it can easily be lived badly, especially by kids) and that they can't afford to be too far away from here: distance is not equivalent to disinterest or a lack of interest! We all have to give importance to the right things.

(*) I'm glad I found kind and lovely people who took care of my Cove in my absence. I'm glad I can now return the favour.. It's the circle of life...

Female
2,485 posts

     

yogurt • 17 April 2020 at 8:25 PM

To everyone: I want to acknowledge that we all have different perspectives, reasons for joining, reasons for staying, attitudes, and values. I feel like a lot of the disagreements come from some of us valuing one aspect of eggcave over another. So with that I dont think anyone of us could say what is right or wrong in any case, all points and opinions are valid. We can just give our opinion and how we would feel personally if something like this were to be implemented. I’m going to leave this thread with this since there’s just so much going on and I’m just a player with school and so much other stuff to focus on than fixing a website I just returned to. XD I’m not qualified for this at all. Feel free to keep sharing your thought but no need to ping me since I probably wont respond. Most of my thoughts are already somewhere in this thread.

———-

I also just want to acknowledge that I know its difficult when you don’t buy CC. (Not once have I spent a penny on this website) but I know it was not this difficult to obtain CC from trade or getting valuable creatures when I was active in the past. (newbies less than months old used to be able to trade for CC or be gifted LEs and somehow trade upward) This is nearly impossible now or takes forever as many people have complained about. If this site was more populated with more players willing to buy CC and invest maybe it would not be so difficult to obtain CC since there just more in circulation.

I expected a lot of opposition just because basically what I’m suggesting is like this scenario: I’m asking for a price increase or removal of nice services. As consumers (the buyers) of course we would hate that. But there could be longterm indirect benefits in the future we have to consider as well not just for us personally but for the site itself. (I’m not even Staff, not like I’m trying to raise the price of my own service and make profit lol)
———-
Example that kinda fits. (Idk how to explain it another way)
People used to just watch whatever was on television at the time
The Netflix feels like helping the people be able to choose their movies/shows whenever they want so they sell their service for $1. If you pay $1 you get to watch whatever you want whenever you want for the rest of your life. Everyone loves it and buys it its such a good deal. There is more freedom and Netflix makes a ton of money from initial sales. Now after a year barely anyone is buying it anymore since it last a lifetime and never expires. Netflix is no longer making much money from this service.

Now I’m asking for the price to be increased to $2 or to end it.
Comparing it to the $1 price everyone is outraged. But compared to the lack of freedom of choosing your own shows and just watching the TV, $2 is still a steal for the service. And the store would gain regain this as a source of income to improve other areas of function of the community.

———-

One last thing. I think we have to trust the staff in whatever action they take even if its drastic and damaging to you personally. (As someone who collected rare eggs, I hated the stage changes they allowed, I also spent over 70kcc worth of creature for a tine EGG not that long before they got rereleased but oh well trust the process.) I think we need to be prepared for whatever eggcave decides to do because the staff know what needs to be done to improve the site. We should appreciate that they are even trying to fix things.

65 posts

     

cheetah • 18 April 2020 at 3:24 AM

"But compared to the lack of freedom of choosing your own shows and just watching the TV, $2 is still a steal for the service."

True, but the LoV is just one feature of a large game. Netflix is a pretty straightforward service, and the reasons people choose one streaming service over the other are pretty simple (availability of a show/movie, price, video quality, ease of use, maybe accessibility), so they have much more limited options when it comes to attracting customers and getting them to stay watching (and stay paying).
Games like Eggcave are much more complex systems, which means there will nearly always be multiple approaches and solutions to every problem. Just because one feature (LoV) isn't conducive to a certain outcome (creature rarity increasing) doesn't mean the feature has to be scrapped or changed drastically. There are other approaches, some of which may have less downsides, some of which may take longer to have an affect, but there are always options. In this case, the LoV getting nerfed could potentially have a lot of negative side effects, and we have to take into consideration the possibility that those side effects could be more harmful than the alternative, which in this case is business as usual. "Business as usual" might mean gradual declines in some areas, but like I said, there are many ways to combat those declines (participation - more events, new players - referral program, impossibility of obtaining old creatures - re-releases, etc.) that don't involve as much risk and have much higher potential benefits. I'm not saying "all other ideas are perfect except this one," I'm just saying that as far as changes to the site go, I'm not convinced the risk is worth the potential reward here, whether we're talking long-term or short-term, player subjectivity or numbers. This is partially because I am not convinced the proposed root of the problems and the thing that needs changing, the LoV, is all that much responsible for those problems, not when creature immortality is already a thing (and a thing that can be obtained with CC, no less).

Whew. Okay, wall of words over.

TL;DR: There's probably a better way.

Male
1,987 posts

     

Ian • 20 April 2020 at 7:01 PM

Hi everybody! Thanks for weighing in on this.

At this time, we do not intend to change the functionality of the Leaf of Vaka item as we feel that it would be unfair to all of the current users who purchased it under the assumption that it'd essentially immortalize their Coves for forever. If the consensus is that it's OP, perhaps its price should be increased to reflect its high value.

While game mechanics do intermingle and play on each other, we see the Leaf of Vaka as entirely separate from the issues of creature rarities, their value, and their trade volumes (i.e. how frequently rare creatures change hands). While there are "immortal LoV accounts" that are home the rarest of the rare creatures, they are not to blame for others' inability to obtain these creatures. Immortal LoV accounts were simply playing at the right time when those creatures were available and then the accounts aged. Instead, the key upstream issue in an economic sense always has been and will be the restricted supply of these now-retired, much older creatures.

Questing directly addresses this upstream issue of supply. There will always be two camps of people: people who are hanging on to their rarest creatures for forever because they cherish them (not-for-traders) and people who are looking to realize gains on the rare value of these creatures (traders). Here's our approach: we are not seeking to penalize the first group or force them to trade; we are merely trying to expand the second group of willing traders. And yes, creature values will always fluctuate upon re-release as this is the basic nature of economics (more supply = price goes down, this happens in any and all games with virtual currencies).

It's simple: to expand the group of willing traders, we must expand supply. On a small scale, we've noticed that questing has largely worked when these rare creatures are re-released. We are hoping to continue releasing new quest prize pools to cover more ground with former Cave monthlies.

At this time, we are hesitant to re-release CS creatures, as the community has always been extremely hostile toward the idea. However, we are open to hearing community suggestions on how to solve that particular issue into the future.

Deleted • 22 April 2020 at 4:06 PM

@yogurt

I disagree with this. I rather pay 500cc for my leaf of vaka and have it last forever.

My babies will be happy and will not die.

I can not afford to renew it each month.

I am not always here,

there are times where I can not get online and knowing my babies are alive and happy make me happy!

like my best friend she works all the time. she can't be on all the time!

Female
408 posts

     

izziedragon • 16 September 2020 at 7:12 PM

As someone who has vowed to come back because of the Leaf of Vaka and promise of my creatures not dying... I DO have to agree it is underpriced. It seemed too good to be true. Definitely thought it would come with a catch of like expiration or only applying to certain pets or something.

Reply