Being kicked from a NH should still provide derby rewards

Printable View

March 21st, 2015
MisterV

Being kicked from a NH should still provide derby rewards

When a player is kicked from a neighborhood, they should still be eligible to receive the rewards earned by the neighborhood in the currently running derby if the member was present in the neighborhood when the derby started. This prevents neighborhood leaders from abusing new members by kicking them after they have contributed but before the derby ends.

Its true that under this system, even players who get kicked early in the derby cycle may gain access to rewards earned after they were kicked but before the derby ends. This is preferable to the alternative: that neighborhood leaders can kick members without warning or reason, and cost the player resources they contributed to the derby (for example, using up rare lures to accomplish fishing tasks).

A kicked player who subsequently joins a new neighborhood before the current derby ends should still receive rewards from the old neighborhood's progress in the current derby. Rationale: players who join a neighborhood cannot participate in that neighborhood's derby until the current derby ends, so there is no reward overlap.
March 21st, 2015
Tomville

I take your point about the possibility of abuse by exploitation, but have a different view on it.

Maybe think about this scenario: I invite a group of people to my house, and all of them bring various nice ingredients for us to make a feast to eat together. Then while we are making the feast one guest gets nasty or rude (drunk maybe) so I as host have to look after the group by asking that person to leave, which happens before the feast is ready to serve. Should that person be sent a share of the feast dishes, or is it all just an unpleasantness we need to move on from?

Not saying you are wrong, just that there are other ways to look at this (taking deliberate exploitation case separately - that is nasty host, not badly behaved guest).
March 21st, 2015
MisterV

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomville

...while we are making the feast one guest gets nasty or rude (drunk maybe) so I as host have to look after the group by asking that person to leave, which happens before the feast is ready to serve. Should that person be sent a share of the feast dishes...?

A fair point. But in this scenario, the people who were kicked are not getting a "share" of the feast dishes - rewards that go to kicked players who participated in the current derby in no way subtract from the rewards received by the other neighborhood members. To put it a different way, members of the neighborhood are not affected by what rewards the kicked members receive.

I would even take it one step farther - kicked members should still be able to participate in the derby until it ends, and be eligible for the collective rewards.

The problem is that the current implementation gives too much power to neighborhood leaders, allowing them to diminish the playing experience of new members by kicking them after they contribute to a derby. There needs to be a counterbalance.
March 21st, 2015
MarySWiggins

I kicked a player before the derby finished because he was not as committed as all the other players he did one task then said he wouldn't be around for a while, no reason given, and logged out while I was speaking with him. Everyone in the nh was busting a gut to do the derby. Not interested if he got prizes or not if u don't fit in bye bye
March 21st, 2015
Tomville

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterV

A fair point. But in this scenario, the people who were kicked are not getting a "share" of the feast dishes - rewards that go to kicked players who participated in the current derby in no way subtract from the rewards received by the other neighborhood members. To put it a different way, members of the neighborhood are not affected by what rewards the kicked members receive.

I would even take it one step farther - kicked members should still be able to participate in the derby until it ends, and be eligible for the collective rewards.

The problem is that the current implementation gives too much power to neighborhood leaders, allowing them to diminish the playing experience of new members by kicking them after they contribute to a derby. There needs to be a counterbalance.

I think I made the point with less clarity than I might have. I think few people would agree the ejected guest should have feast dishes sent, or their ingredients returned half cooked, or the ingredients replaced... Supposing of course what the guest did warranted being asked to go in the eyes of the host and the other guests present.

But to return to reality, so far as a Hay Day NH counts as that, is it really true that someone who, e.g. was kicked for making personal attacks on others or stealing trades or making unwelcome sexual comments, should share in the collective NH rewards simply because they made some small input to it prior to being kicked? It doesn't happen often, thankfully, but it does happen.
March 21st, 2015
Thobi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomville

I think I made the point with less clarity than I might have. I think few people would agree the ejected guest should have feast dishes sent, or their ingredients returned half cooked, or the ingredients replaced... Supposing of course what the guest did warranted being asked to go in the eyes of the host and the other guests present.

But to return to reality, so far as a Hay Day NH counts as that, is it really true that someone who, e.g. was kicked for making personal attacks on others or stealing trades or making unwelcome sexual comments, should share in the collective NH rewards simply because they made some small input to it prior to being kicked? It doesn't happen often, thankfully, but it does happen.

Agree with you. If a member get kicked, it can very well be because there's reasons for it, and it that case the kicked member deserves nothing.

If there's no reason, the player that got kicked, just have to take it as a lesson, about maybe not having been at the right place at the right time, and try to find way to a better NH. Can't win them all.
March 21st, 2015
Tomville

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thobi

Agree with you. If a member get kicked, it can very well be because there's reasons for it, and it that case the kicked member deserves nothing.

If there's no reason, the player that got kicked, just have to take it as a lesson, about maybe not having been at the right place at the right time, and try to find way to a better NH. Can't win them all.

Yes, and to get real about it, in a NH with, say, 20 members or more, with 75% active, any one member's input isn't vital to the outcome. It is only a tiny NH run by a mad dictator that would bother taking a new member solely to exploit them for one-off derby points.
March 21st, 2015
haydayforum

Although the player may not receive the horseshoe prizes, which are not that good, they were compensated for their input by experience points or coins. Not as if they received nothing for their efforts. Choose neighbourhood wisely, find out the rules, and follow the rules
March 21st, 2015
Mummysmith2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterV

When a player is kicked from a neighborhood, they should still be eligible to receive the rewards earned by the neighborhood in the currently running derby if the member was present in the neighborhood when the derby started. This prevents neighborhood leaders from abusing new members by kicking them after they have contributed but before the derby ends.

Its true that under this system, even players who get kicked early in the derby cycle may gain access to rewards earned after they were kicked but before the derby ends. This is preferable to the alternative: that neighborhood leaders can kick members without warning or reason, and cost the player resources they contributed to the derby (for example, using up rare lures to accomplish fishing tasks).

A kicked player who subsequently joins a new neighborhood before the current derby ends should still receive rewards from the old neighborhood's progress in the current derby. Rationale: players who join a neighborhood cannot participate in that neighborhood's derby until the current derby ends, so there is no reward overlap.

Fair enough those who have participated before getting kicked out getting prizes but you have to also look at the other side of the spectrum at the people in neighbourhood not doing ANY tasks but reaping the hard earned rewards that others have achieved!! I recently kicked out a member of our hood who has been with us a while after saying that she needed to contribute as was not fair on others to which she totally ignored me.. Why should she be entitled to prizes that she hasnt earned?!
March 30th, 2015
marme2500

NH Leader

We have a small neighborhood. only 9 members. We have 3 students, 3 work from home and 3 that have jobs where they can't get on during working hours. We have been in the NH long enough to know who likes to do what so we make sure the board has items that everyone can do. One big thing that we did during the first derby was ask what people wanted to do. the 3 of us that are home most of the time do things like mine, town and animal tasks. We did ask that all members try to do one task a week. We also look really closely at the board. I try to take down tasks that are worth less than 100 points and also ones that are unreasonable for our NH. 20 boat orders is a little much for our group. The main thing is that we all try to do at least one task and make sure if we are only doing one for the derby it is a big order.
The cool thing about our NH is that the members are either friends or family of another member. I know that it is not that way in each NH but this is what makes our group work. NOW!! If SC could just fix the problem about us not receiving our derby stuff for the past derby, we will all be happy campers.
March 30th, 2015
star3105

member kicked out of NH should still get rewards

Giving rewards to those kicked out of a neighbourhood does not take into account those who are kicked out because they do not contribute to the neighbourhood, do not participate in the derby and expect to ask for help from others but don't reciprocate. Why treat all leaders as malicious and untrustworthy? where is the deterrent if people can claim rewards no matter what they do or don't do?
March 30th, 2015
XYZZY

I think it would be fair if the neighborhood that did the evicting would have any derby points earned by the evicted player removed from the totals. That way the evicted player gets nothing (as today), and the neighborhood cannot reap any rewards from what the evicted player contributed.
March 30th, 2015
Daisy1st

Quote:

Originally Posted by XYZZY

I think it would be fair if the neighborhood that did the evicting would have any derby points earned by the evicted player removed from the totals. That way the evicted player gets nothing (as today), and the neighborhood cannot reap any rewards from what the evicted player contributed.

I agree that this would be a fair way forward for evicted players.

what happens if the player leaves of their own accord, do the points still get deducted?

In my experience the majority of evicted players are either long term inactive or are non contributors generally so I cannot see fair and reasonable neighbourhoods losing many points.
June 5th, 2015
jcasares

It happened to me! I was kicked a few hours before it ended.
I did the 5 tasks and most were around 300 points.
I helped others getting goods to complete their tasks by loosing my stock.
I still wonder until today what happened besides the leader being abusive.

Anyway, I left this bad experience behind and found a nice neighborhood that is helpful and reasonable. We're all involved and the people that don't participate are kicked out. They don't lose anything as they didn't participate at all.

I agree that points of a member being kicked out should be deducted from the total. In most cases this won't affect the neighborhood, and if it was an active member it's justified that if one doesn't get the rewards the others as well don't get the help from his/her points.
June 5th, 2015
haydaygirl03

please no

Okay i get your point . But there are frequently members who do not participate in the derby AT ALL meaning that they get prizes for holding the neighborhood back from first once we were 10 points behind 1st this wouldn't have happened if 8 members from our derby never contributed its unfair so you decides enough is enough and you kick them out in the middle of the derby this is the only way to stop unparticipants from collecting prizes for other peoples hard word . Money and sometimes diamonds
April 29th, 2016
Zooma

why isn't there a structured system?

Quote:

Originally Posted by haydaygirl03

Okay i get your point . But there are frequently members who do not participate in the derby AT ALL meaning that they get prizes for holding the neighborhood back from first once we were 10 points behind 1st this wouldn't have happened if 8 members from our derby never contributed its unfair so you decides enough is enough and you kick them out in the middle of the derby this is the only way to stop unparticipants from collecting prizes for other peoples hard word . Money and sometimes diamonds

Why not, if your score is within 10% of the neighborhood average you get full share, if it is 20% lower then you lose 1 horseshoe,,,, 30% lower lose 2 horseshoes and so forth,,, I've heard computers are pretty good at calculating this stuff,, maybe even a bonus horseshoe for the best performer
April 30th, 2016
Midori669

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterV

When a player is kicked from a neighborhood, they should still be eligible to receive the rewards earned by the neighborhood in the currently running derby if the member was present in the neighborhood when the derby started. This prevents neighborhood leaders from abusing new members by kicking them after they have contributed but before the derby ends.

Its true that under this system, even players who get kicked early in the derby cycle may gain access to rewards earned after they were kicked but before the derby ends. This is preferable to the alternative: that neighborhood leaders can kick members without warning or reason, and cost the player resources they contributed to the derby (for example, using up rare lures to accomplish fishing tasks).

A kicked player who subsequently joins a new neighborhood before the current derby ends should still receive rewards from the old neighborhood's progress in the current derby. Rationale: players who join a neighborhood cannot participate in that neighborhood's derby until the current derby ends, so there is no reward overlap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomville

I take your point about the possibility of abuse by exploitation, but have a different view on it.

Maybe think about this scenario: I invite a group of people to my house, and all of them bring various nice ingredients for us to make a feast to eat together. Then while we are making the feast one guest gets nasty or rude (drunk maybe) so I as host have to look after the group by asking that person to leave, which happens before the feast is ready to serve. Should that person be sent a share of the feast dishes, or is it all just an unpleasantness we need to move on from?

Not saying you are wrong, just that there are other ways to look at this (taking deliberate exploitation case separately - that is nasty host, not badly behaved guest).

Hmmmmmm. You, two, sure make a good point on both sides.

If the person in the neighborhood joined the derby and left in the middle, if he/she did some part of the work to help, he/she should get the prize, too. But, on the other hand, if that person started the derby why doesn't he/she wait til the derby is over, collect the prizes, then leave the neighborhood.

The other scenario is a good point, too, but if you go to a potluck dinner and each brings a certain thing, they don't do any work when they get to that person's place, so nothing is earned to get the food anyway. If a person gets kicked out, they can very well take their food back, too. After all, their food might be in a dish/plate/bowl that they want to take back anyway... Or did I not understand this scenario. My apologies if that is the case.