Forum: bigfarm-en

Board: [1260] Suggestions

Topic: [31343] Sharing/Trading With Coop Members (incl Collectibles)

[792155] farmerjohn 22 (US1) [US1] :: June 12, 2014, 5:03 p.m.

Alpha-Avis wrote: »

What do you mean it would give them an edge if they can give to help their friends?

Let me put on my evil face.:evil: There! O.K. now, what if a coop leader were to tell a member that they must give him or her an amount of cash, crops, etc. in order to remain in the coop? That would give that leader something unearned, and if done to many players, an edge. That's only one way I can think of. There are probably many ways others can think of to abuse what you suggest. I commend you on wanting to help your friends, but there are those who would misuse it. Sorry!

[792165] Aphasia [None] :: June 12, 2014, 6:04 p.m.

Simple way to eliminate any abuse aspect would be to make it so the co-op itself is used as the trading hub. Members could only contribute goods to and take goods from the co-op stores, and could only take out equal to the cash value of what they'd put in. Say I need peaches to whip up some fruit cakes, and there happen to be peaches in the co-op stores. I've already contributed fifteen thousand dollars worth of various and sundry goods, which gives me a co-op store credit of same. Thus I could withdraw up to fifteen thousand dollars worth of peaches. So GGS would bite on the idea, there could be a daily transaction limit for members that could be golded away.

[792167] farmerjohn 22 (US1) [US1] :: June 12, 2014, 6:38 p.m.

Aphasia wrote: »

Simple way to eliminate any abuse aspect would be to make it so the co-op itself is used as the trading hub. Members could only contribute goods to and take goods from the co-op stores, and could only take out equal to the cash value of what they'd put in. Say I need peaches to whip up some fruit cakes, and there happen to be peaches in the co-op stores. I've already contributed fifteen thousand dollars worth of various and sundry goods, which gives me a co-op store credit of same. Thus I could withdraw up to fifteen thousand dollars worth of peaches. So GGS would bite on the idea, there could be a daily transaction limit for members that could be golded away.

This is completely different from what was first suggested, that members of a coop could trade and give resources to each other. What you are asking for is a place where a cooperative could pool it's resources, then members could draw from them as needed. And given cash credit for what they've put in. Sounds like it would require a great deal of time and money for the company to develop something that complex. I don't see them doing that unless there was more of a source of revenue to be had.

[792240] Aphasia [None] :: June 13, 2014, 3:54 a.m.

farmerjohn 22 wrote: »

I don't see them doing that unless there was more of a source of revenue to be had.

I provided the source of revenue in an individual daily transaction limit that could be mitigated with gold.

[792296] Alpha-Avis [None] :: June 13, 2014, 1:50 p.m.

Yes, but then you are just paying for what you get, it is the same as buying it your self. I see what you mean by how it could give an edge, but if some one did that then we could just tell support about it. If we can give and not have to sell, like I need some cherries and my friend has some but needs wheat, I can give them the wheat they need and they give the cherries (and we don't have to have the prices match). That is the trading I had in mind. The other way is just doing what you can already do by yourself.

[792298] Tootie (US1) [None] :: June 13, 2014, 2:05 p.m.

This sounds good

[792299] FarmerVinu [None] :: June 13, 2014, 2:24 p.m.

This sounds better ^^..................................

[792307] Wulwina [None] :: June 13, 2014, 3:14 p.m.

I would like the idea of being able to help each other with decorations. At this point getting crops from others doesn't sound appealing since human nature has a tendency to lay back and relax. "Why should I bother when I can get the cherries free from joe"? and poor Joe is working his fingers to the bone to plant cherries.

But decorations is a good idea, I know for a fact that we all have hundreds of decorations we do not use, why not share them with the players in the cooperative.

Besides, why can't we share decorations with the other farms we own. We share money, we share the building gadget, why not decorations.?

We all know what cooperative means: Group of people working and sharing together toward a common goal.

[792406] Aphasia [None] :: June 14, 2014, 5:08 a.m.

Alpha-Avis wrote: »

Yes, but then you are just paying for what you get, it is the same as buying it your self. I see what you mean by how it could give an edge, but if some one did that then we could just tell support about it. If we can give and not have to sell, like I need some cherries and my friend has some but needs wheat, I can give them the wheat they need and they give the cherries (and we don't have to have the prices match). That is the trading I had in mind. The other way is just doing what you can already do by yourself.

So change the value of goods traded in to the co-op store to give a better deal in trade credit than buying the goods.

Wulwina wrote: »

We all know what cooperative means: Group of people working and sharing together toward a common goal.

For GGS purposes, cooperative means a way to get players to buy and spend more gold.

Edit by PINJO: merged post, please use edit button

(as the individual posts had nothing to do with each other, please CM - use the edit button to revert two two posts)

[792575] Alpha-Avis [None] :: June 15, 2014, 6:38 a.m.

Aphasia wrote: »

So change the value of goods traded in to the co-op store to give a better deal in trade credit than buying the goods.

Yes, this is a possibility but still not quite what I was hoping for. But you can't always get what you want.:S

[792791] Concinus (SKN1) [None] :: June 16, 2014, 2:20 p.m.

Alpha-Avis wrote: »

I think that to make the game more realistic we should be able to trade and give resources and other things at least to Cooperative members. That would make the game not only more realistic but also give a happier atmosphere to the game because players would be able to help each other!

I agree, this would make the cooperative work more fun. To avoid abuse they could implement a cap which only enables you to do restricted trading during co-op missions e.g. allowing a member to donate x amount of manure or seeds to another member per mission or day.

[792794] elunia13 (GB1) [None] :: June 16, 2014, 2:54 p.m.

Ah, how I longed for such option yesterday, when my coop was doing the native wildlife project! I have hips and hips of dung (over 70,000 units) and two silos fully upgraded, but it still takes time to make fertiliser and yet some of the people in the coop didn't have enough dung! If I could have been able to pass it to any of them! We would have finished the project much earlier, without me having to resolve to skipping...

[792841] amaprincess1 (US1) [None] :: June 16, 2014, 7:31 p.m.

elunia13 wrote: »

....without me having to resolve to skipping...

Ahhhh. The operative words... ;-) That's just one of the reasons you won't see such a feature added to the game, but I bet it's a BIG reason.

[793300] Farmer J.M. [None] :: June 19, 2014, 3:09 p.m.

I see how this could be helpful and how it could be used for the wrong things too. But I think it is a very very good idea!! Nice brain work Alpha-Avis!!:thumbsup:

[803735] CalculusNerd (US1) [None] :: Aug. 12, 2014, 8:36 p.m.

I think it would be a good idea to allow players in the same cooperative to share/exchange crops, produce, seeds, products, etc.

[803808] WinnerGold4 (US1) [None] :: Aug. 13, 2014, 12:19 p.m.

I think that players should be able to put in collectibles in their co-ops on a collective basis.
For example you need 455 puzzlepieces (or teamwork) Player A had 255 she/he adds them Player B has 50 and he/she can add those and Player C has 150 puts those in and the collectible is collected.

This way all levels of people can feel like they have contributed to their coop for projects. Instead they feel like they are riding the coat tails of the higher levels.

[804196] Aphasia [None] :: Aug. 14, 2014, 11:34 p.m.

Shortfalls are a major source of revenue for GGS, because they can be purchased with gold, which players purchase from them. There will never be anything allowed or added to Big Farm that isn't making money for the publisher.

[3221877] Aedman [None] :: Aug. 19, 2014, 6:36 p.m.

Presently, it's all or nothing for a player to assist his/her cooperative for collection items to start a project. Since it's a COOPERATIVE; wouldn't it be sensible to allow members to donate part of the needed total?

Just my 17 1/2 (adjusted for inflation).
8|

[804762] Neonite [None] :: Aug. 19, 2014, 8:33 p.m.

It's suggested before.
And it could have the outcome that the number of items would be upscaled.
Because more people can have their items placed.

Meaning nothing to gain of it in total.

[810507] Gyjoh31 (US1) [US1] :: Oct. 7, 2014, 2:47 p.m.

I agree and I believe another idea would be if members could donate items to the co-op if they choose too. it takes forever to collect those items for lower level players and they often have some that could be used collectively if they was a central point for donations with the co-op leader.
Have a good day every one! Happy Farming!:)