01-20-2012 at 5:22 PM

I believe the payouts overall should be decreased and limit the number of times a dog can trial each day.

01-20-2012 at 5:20 PM

oh and "massive influx of cash" with trial teams is so not true. My average team generates about 1k per trial. Maybe 1500 in Toto. A lot of people do NOT have monsters. .

01-20-2012 at 5:18 PM

I don't think there is anything wrong with how trials work now. Teams are absolutely needed, or the lower dogs, customs especially, would never get anywhere, and on the higher levels trials would never run. Additionally, you do not hurt anyone with your monster if you have only your own dogs to beat. <br /> <br /> If the money for trials would decrease, I would probably not need to bother running the dogs anymore either. Considering that a high TP dog takes millions in quick training before it can start to earn - MWB/MFB and several MRBs etc - it is not like those dogs make any money back until they are at least Toto level. <br /> <br /> <br /> I used to think decreasing the age would be good, but not any longer. ry calculate how long it takes for the average Ala player to max a capped dog without having the money for the MFB. Basically, they barely start trialing when they are over 100. It would mean you give the rich players an advantage and punish the poor. <br /> <br /> I'll think of more later, the small entry boy for text on the forum gives me a headache :)

01-20-2012 at 5:15 PM

I agree with Rasdashan. She said exactly what I was thinking.

01-20-2012 at 4:57 PM

Option 4 seems fair.<br /> <br /> If option 1 is implemented, I will have to stop trialing. A trial team is the only way to prevent some players from complaining about their dog being beaten by a high TP dog.<br /> <br /> If you want to realign the economy, lower the item prices. If I want to buy a MFB, I will have to send my trial teams out to trial for a couple of days just to earn the price. If the item cost less, I would not have to trial as often.<br /> <br /> I imagine that option 1 will be implemented, but it will not fix the economy, it will just give people running lower TP dogs a reason to complain as they will never win against the higher TP dogs that will then be forced to run with them. <br /> <br /> Trial teams prevented that, so trying to fix one problem will likely uncover another.

01-20-2012 at 4:57 PM

I don't like number one at all for higher trials. Maybe three dogs instead of two dogs but I know right now from experience limiting how many dogs per trial is going to kill any trials Gromit or higher because they do not run with just 2 dogs. I have had more than 11 trials in Gromit cancel on me because there are not enough dogs in Gromit. I have had to timestop my dogs when they get to Gromit so that others can get to that level just to get one to run (which I have yet to do). <br /> <br /> Dogbert to Otis, fine, there are enough dogs in those levels it works out but anything higher than that and you are just asking for canceled trials.<br /> <br /> I had to edit this to say I agree 100% with Rasdashan (Ceilidh) (#7625)'s post above mine.

01-20-2012 at 4:40 PM

1 and 4

01-20-2012 at 4:40 PM

I like the combination of 1 and 4.

01-20-2012 at 4:15 PM

I voted for #1, but I also agree that #4 would help.

01-20-2012 at 4:08 PM

Combination 1 and 4!

01-20-2012 at 4:07 PM

If I had to absolutely choose, I would choose #1. I am not at all pleased with the rest of the decisions because a lot of us work for our $$ to get good trial dogs. I got where I am now simply by buying/selling until I could get a good capped dog, then I spent $$ that I got the same way to buy a magical water bowl, which costs me millions to get each time.<br /> By allowing only 2 dogs in each team, others would get a chance to compete and I support this.<br /> I do not at all support limiting the number of times a dog can trial per day. I use companions and revitalizers and golden leashes and agility chow <b>just so</b> I can trial more than 4 times per day.<br /> <br /> Not very pleased with the decision to remove the MFB from the shops, either. I know that the intentions here were probably to slow down the players with capped dogs, but people with capped dogs are not the only people who use them. People who do not get as many training sessions per day buy them to half max 2-4KTP dogs. Taking the MFB out of the shops will inevitably inflate the price up to insane amounts [like the MWB] and I really don't think a MFB is worth 2 million.<br /> It kind of "messes up" [for lack of a more appropriate term] everybody who wants to max a dog over 1KTP, depending on the amount of sessions they have.<br /> <br /> <b>EDIT:</b> By "put into rotation as a rare item" are you saying they're going to be sold for just bones?<br /> <br /> <b>EDIT #2:</b> My idea is that by making the MFB rare/limited, it will funnel millions [seriously!!] into the pockets of other players. It doesn't get $$ off the site, it just funnels it into another users hands lol<br /> My idea is to leave the MFB in the shops for an insane amount and put in new items that do <b>not</b> aid in trialing/auto-maxing and price them insanely.<br /> Look at the Amur Leopards. Those sell for insane amounts! I've heard of them selling for <b>300 bones</b>. People want them, they make training easier, people want them so badly that they;re willing to pay the equivalent of $300 USD for one. Griffins? Sleighs? Those are being priced at 100 bones and a lot of the times they just bring brushes or bath tubs.. thing is, people want that chance to win something big.<br /> Put in a good, expensive shop item and people will funnel $$ out.<br /> I know back during the sales I spent over 1 million on griffins alone.

01-20-2012 at 4:06 PM

Id say a combo of 1 and 4

01-20-2012 at 3:57 PM

No, darkiss4428, we need to take steps to actively fix the rampant inflation problem and this is our best chance to do so. The trial system will be changing somehow and this is your opportunity to let us know how you think it should be fixed!

01-20-2012 at 3:56 PM

I'd combine a limit on the number of entrants per player per trial with a decrease in the total payout.<br /> <br /> Personally I think limiting the number of dogs in a trial of 3 per user - if payouts were also decreased - would accomplish both the goal of fixing the economy and keeping the users of this site happy (and isn't that why we're all here, anyway?)<br /> <br /> I am enthusiastic about the return of competition and realism over trial teams. I really think that will help things a lot, regardless of where the line is placed.<br /> <br /> I hope that everyone can be mature about this and understand that a change must be made for the good of the site and everyone on it... hopefully the reactions that tend toward burning the staff in effigy can be avoided by cooler and more insightful heads

01-20-2012 at 3:55 PM

Combination of 1 & 4

01-20-2012 at 3:54 PM

Options #4 and #1, by order of preference.

01-20-2012 at 3:53 PM

can you out a none of the above button? i'm happy with trial's the way they are

01-20-2012 at 3:50 PM

Combination of 1&4