The fundamental flaw in assuming that everyone gains if you steal from your friends.

[Shadowscarred]

I don't mind people taking my crops. I feel it works for the community. I ask them to tend my fields, and if they are ready to be sowed, then have at it.
The game allows a percentage to be lost to "theft" but that percentage is less than what I will get because the crop is mine. I will always get the greatest amount of product from my farm.

According to other posters, there is a cap to how much you may acquire from other farms and it is less than the amount you can acquire from your own farms, so I choose to not let it bother me. I will get something from the crop. The how much is irrelevant because I will get something. When I log in in the morning, I get the message my crops are ready to harvest. I get excited because they are ready and I am going to get something. I don't know how much others got, nor do I care. I am about to get something for planting them.

Games will always reward activity over inactivity. Games will always reward paying over non-paying. Knowing these things from the start allows me to not get upset over others progressing faster than I. This is a game, a computer generated virtual environment designed to entertain. If I need an explanation as to why I did not get a full yield, then perhaps it was weather, or a drought, or animals. Again, irrelevant because I will get something for planting.

I loved your two posts, I feel they expressed the issue well, and in words I wouldn't have managed.
The idea that a person "greedily steals" the crops is two-sided. For example, hoarding the wealth of your crop yield could be considered greedy, couldn't it? Communal farmers will often share a small portion of their harvest with one another, and the one that keeps it all to himself is looked at with disdain.

[Greyankh]

I don't mind people taking my crops. I feel it works for the community. I ask them to tend my fields, and if they are ready to be sowed, then have at it.
The game allows a percentage to be lost to "theft" but that percentage is less than what I will get because the crop is mine. I will always get the greatest amount of product from my farm.

According to other posters, there is a cap to how much you may acquire from other farms and it is less than the amount you can acquire from your own farms, so I choose to not let it bother me. I will get something from the crop. The how much is irrelevant because I will get something. When I log in in the morning, I get the message my crops are ready to harvest. I get excited because they are ready and I am going to get something. I don't know how much others got, nor do I care. I am about to get something for planting them.

Games will always reward activity over inactivity. Games will always reward paying over non-paying. Knowing these things from the start allows me to not get upset over others progressing faster than I. This is a game, a computer generated virtual environment designed to entertain. If I need an explanation as to why I did not get a full yield, then perhaps it was weather, or a drought, or animals. Again, irrelevant because I will get something for planting.

[R24907107]

I have seen quite a few posts on this type of subject. Stealing = bad. Stealing = good, Stealing is selfish, and so forth.

There is a loss associated to someone taking your crops. They cannot take all of your crops. They get a portion and your portion from the original is reduced. The math by the OP seems sound. There is another aspect that is missing from the intent. Farms grow because others tend them. Your crops grow because freinds weed, de-worm, and revive. Your tree gains power because your friends energize them.

If you don't allow me a portion of your crops, I will not tend your farm. You are asking for a something for nothing partnership, where you reap the rewards of my tending, yet sharing of the resources is not given. To me, that seems more hypocritical than worrying about how much I am going to lose from a seed.

If I plant a crop, and it is tended, I will get something. There will never be a zero return if someone helps me tend my farm. If I plant a crop and I have no one to tend it, then I will get zero return, because I will need a friend to revive my crop at some point. No one revives, no new crops, no new returns.

My vote will always be a diminished return over no return.

True, people ARE tending your farm, but you're tending their farm as well. To me the payment is me taking care of their farm while they take care of mine. In other words - you weed, I weed!

[R24907107]

Hmm, maybe you don't understand, if every player steals from someone else, 200 times, not just 5 people sharing... Then they will reach a lot more TOGETHER, than they would of reached individually?

What about the people you stole from??? I'm pretty certain they were planning on getting that crop you so greedily stole!

[Shadowscarred]

I have seen quite a few posts on this type of subject. Stealing = bad. Stealing = good, Stealing is selfish, and so forth.

There is a loss associated to someone taking your crops. They cannot take all of your crops. They get a portion and your portion from the original is reduced. The math by the OP seems sound. There is another aspect that is missing from the intent. Farms grow because others tend them. Your crops grow because freinds weed, de-worm, and revive. Your tree gains power because your friends energize them.

If you don't allow me a portion of your crops, I will not tend your farm. You are asking for a something for nothing partnership, where you reap the rewards of my tending, yet sharing of the resources is not given. To me, that seems more hypocritical than worrying about how much I am going to lose from a seed.

If I plant a crop, and it is tended, I will get something. There will never be a zero return if someone helps me tend my farm. If I plant a crop and I have no one to tend it, then I will get zero return, because I will need a friend to revive my crop at some point. No one revives, no new crops, no new returns.

My vote will always be a diminished return over no return.

Please post this on every crop related discussion you find!

[Greyankh]

I have seen quite a few posts on this type of subject. Stealing = bad. Stealing = good, Stealing is selfish, and so forth.

There is a loss associated to someone taking your crops. They cannot take all of your crops. They get a portion and your portion from the original is reduced. The math by the OP seems sound. There is another aspect that is missing from the intent. Farms grow because others tend them. Your crops grow because freinds weed, de-worm, and revive. Your tree gains power because your friends energize them.

If you don't allow me a portion of your crops, I will not tend your farm. You are asking for a something for nothing partnership, where you reap the rewards of my tending, yet sharing of the resources is not given. To me, that seems more hypocritical than worrying about how much I am going to lose from a seed.

If I plant a crop, and it is tended, I will get something. There will never be a zero return if someone helps me tend my farm. If I plant a crop and I have no one to tend it, then I will get zero return, because I will need a friend to revive my crop at some point. No one revives, no new crops, no new returns.

My vote will always be a diminished return over no return.

[CondorHero]

Ah ok, I see now.

In which case, I still say stealing is the right thing to do. Split the rewards around, and try and steal a majority from non guildies I guess.
A non casher needs more than 2k, so they can get the clothing too, where a casher has little need for the clothing.

Yes, so long as you understand that the total number of seeds available cannot be increased. That is a fallacy which I'm trying to correct.

Now, if your strategy is to maximize your own gain while minimizing your "enemy"'s, then by all means, steal.

[Shadowscarred]

Ah ok, I see now.

In which case, I still say stealing is the right thing to do. Split the rewards around, and try and steal a majority from non guildies I guess.
A non casher needs more than 2k, so they can get the clothing too, where a casher has little need for the clothing.

I agree in part with this - I prefer guild members have my spirits than non guild members, and I prioritize non-guild members for stealing.
Still, not stealing from guild members is somewhat dubious, in my opinion.

[ElusionM]

Ah ok, I see now.

In which case, I still say stealing is the right thing to do. Split the rewards around, and try and steal a majority from non guildies I guess.
A non casher needs more than 2k, so they can get the clothing too, where a casher has little need for the clothing.

[Shadowscarred]

Theoretically, that 'could' be true, but how do you do it in the game? You have to check every farm, and write down the time their crops will mature.... Now you would have to stay awake all the time, cause people have different time...

Irrelevant, it still wouldn't increase the total number of ancient seeds available to everyone. Again, someone will have to lose, or no one gains.
Unless you were alluding to just one person doing so, of course, but that's not the issue at debate as I understand it.

[BlueEarth]

If everyone steals, they'll hit that 2k very, very easily. So why would you NOT steal?

Theoretically, that 'could' be true, but how do you do it in the game? You have to check every farm, and write down the time their crops will mature.... Now you would have to stay awake all the time, cause people have different time... Now that would be stressful, plus, at the end of the month, you get the mount, but you had sacrificed your time and health... It would be better to buy ancient spirits, than to steal from others...

That is why the best thing you can do is to minimize the chance of getting your crops stolen to get the maximum seeds possible...

[CondorHero]

Hmm, maybe you don't understand, if every player steals from someone else, 200 times, not just 5 people sharing... Then they will reach a lot more TOGETHER, than they would of reached individually?

I provided a simple example. You can easily extend it to a (N,M) player game, with N being the number of players and M being the number of crops per player. The outcome is the same.

The total yield of the crops remains unchanged. It depends on how you split it.

[Shadowscarred]

Taking ancient seeds from a player reduces the number they can receive by 10%.
If they then took ancient seeds from other players, that would reduce the number those players receive by 10%.
Continue the cycle - someone has to lose if you're gaining.
There is no "winning" in this game unless someone loses, and that person will be very, very unhappy.
Regardless, this isn't necessarily a determent to stealing, rather a complication, since the person being stolen from can themselves steal from others.
In theory, it could go full circle, and everybody ends up where they started, or otherwise at the very least somebody you don't care about suffers.
If you don't care about them, why should you care that they suffered?
This is one rationality for stealing, though don't dare apply it to the real world.

If you still don't understand, find an abacus, and try to increase the number of balls on both sides.
It's actually impossible - increasing one side reduces the other.

[WickedSilk]

Condor is, of course, right. I didn't know so many people need explaining.

I think that the idea behind this event was to reward the most active players out there. It became an interesting social experiment where subjects have to choose between friends and power. A lot of people blacklist you for stealing these crops, some even though you had friendship x4 or more. I think that this is ridiculous - people are worth more than that to me (I need them for extra gold during other months of the year :P), and if I'm there when crops finish growing I lose 4-5 spirits at most from 9 crops which is negligible. True, the morality of introducing such an event is problematic. If you can't reach the goal without trampling over others in the process, will you still do it? (It could also be an evil plan to make players hate other players instead of R2 which seems to be the case often enough )

This is by far not the first game (or browser game) that I played and even though this event is problematic, it is far less cruel than most of the games out there. Don't wanna advertise anything (as I don't really like that game anyway), but take Travian for example. In that game you build a city instead of a character, and the buildings are built at the end of the building cooldown (not at the beginning as in WT). The game is relatively slow but it has an ending (it is possible to actually win) and you can't pay to win (you can get some nice features by paying, but you can do the same thing by playing or through referrals). Servers last for about a year before someone wins. So what's my point? Every week a few people leave because they were destroyed. Yes, it is possible to completely destroy someone, take all of his cities (except for one) and completely take everything he worked for (for those who know the game, I know that there are other elements of the game you cannot steal/destroy, but you can't continue playing with just those). Imagine what wartune would be like if people could raze your cities, even though this game isn't even focused on them. I hope that you can see my point here.

Well, you'll say, that's why I don't play games like that. This isn't what I signed up for. Stealers will become stronger and after the event ends nobody will even remember they stole. Well, I don't have a really good answer for that. But it does resemble life in a way that history is written by the winners.

Hope this event doesn't crush you people. Have fun.

[KnowingEyes7]

Hmm, maybe you don't understand, if every player steals from someone else, 200 times, not just 5 people sharing... Then they will reach a lot more TOGETHER, than they would of reached individually?

He simplified the current scenario though.

You also don't understand that the number of seeds/spirits is limited. You're stating "they will reach a lot more together". You're insinuating a group of players will come out ahead by a large amount. Where did those seeds/spirits come from? That's right, a large group of players outside your original group. In fact, using Condor's excellent example, your group of players affected *more* players negatively than in your original group.