Topic

Giants

I was wondering if by the time the game is launched if Giants & donations will have a larger impact on the world. For instance, you can see already which giants are most donated to in the leader boards, so lets say Zille was the most donated to - we would see increased bonus' from mining, or an increased rate at which rocks regenerate - and for instance if Mab was the least donated-to giant, gardening would take longer & so on & so forth etc etc.

Posted 17 months ago by Taylor Swift Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • I LOVE this idea. That the giants are more than things we donate to and pigs talk about. That they affect gameplay as well :) Hope it happens!
    Posted 17 months ago by Nea Subscriber! | Permalink
  • it would be amazing. A very cool way to build even more community.

    Various groups or guilds would basically be in competition to win favor with their primary giant.
    Miners working for \Zille, Gardeners for Mab, the list goes on. 
    Posted 17 months ago by JDtreble Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Hey rocks and trees talk about Giants also...  :)
    Posted 17 months ago by MeherMan Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Haha, touche :)

    But still!!
    Posted 17 months ago by Nea Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm all for more impact in your interactions with the giants. It's only fitting since you live in their brains anyway.
    Posted 17 months ago by Fabulon Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I like the idea but feel it should be more individualistic (says the former Democrat turned Socialist). Let's use me as an example. Let's say I donate to Zille much more than I donate to, oh, I dunno, Spriggan. So let's say that because of that I get added bonuses for mining but diminished bonuses for Spriggan-related things (like harvesting from trees or gardening, from what I understand). BUT, this has no effect on others. I just don't want a majority to form and for people in the minority to have to just "deal with it." Everyone should benefit from the game and be able to enjoy it as much as possible.
    Posted 17 months ago by Cerulean Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 cerulean  (and a bit spooky because I was just thinking about this earlier today when looking at the favor leaderboards)

    Would be interesting to see this having very little impact at first but somewhat significant once a player reaches higher levels.
    Posted 17 months ago by goodstory Subscriber! | Permalink
  • i understand not wanting to create a system in which a large group monopolizes bonuses by overwhelming numbers.
    A compromise might be having the an effect such as a learning speed bonus for skills supported by the Giant with the leading favor. I feel like having the buff be something positive, but not affecting anyone negatively. ( Individuals could still donate and use favor to speed up they're own skills) and with the size of Ur, i'm sure no giant would remain in the lead for very long, which would keep the balance of individual play versus community play. Basically, a player could continue interacting with the giants as he always has and every now and then might enjoy an increase in skill learning speed.
    Posted 17 months ago by JDtreble Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I really like this idea. you should repost this is the ideas forum! Maybe more people will see it:)
    Posted 17 months ago by Muncey Mango Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @ Cerulean, I thought about that before I posted but for some reason Im not too keen on the idea of making it an individual prerogative - and I'll tell you why. Glitch is heavily community based, the entire world relies off of the players relying on each other. For example someone posted about how Glitch players could make certain flowers go extinct.

    However, I will contribute with a different idea, perhaps every month or so, the favor counter could be reset so that it never becomes an issue of mass overpowering on the favor of one giant to another.
    Posted 17 months ago by Taylor Swift Subscriber! | Permalink
  • yes to all of this! we want it all :D
    Posted 17 months ago by goodstory Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I like this, because I feel like it boosts the importance of the Giants.  However, I think the negative aspect of the idea (the increase in time for activities, for example) should be nixed.  Instead, I think everything should work at their baseline, but if a certain Giant is on top of the leaderboard, then their sponsored actions would be positively affected, but the Giant lowest down on the leaderboard would not *negatively* affect it's sponsored actions.  So if Zille was on top, Miners might be able to mine faster, experience in increase in gems, etc, but if Alph was on the bottom, Tinkerers would still be working at their baseline--they wouldn't experience a negative effect in gameplay. 

    I think the positive is enough to motivate players to donate to their Giant of choice--the negative would simply make the Glitchen angry and annoyed.  I don't think the negative would help to foster community--in fact, I think it would only work to splinter certain groups; self-professed Miners against Cooks against Gardeners, Tinkerers and Engineers, etc.
    Posted 17 months ago by Kross, the Empress Subscriber! | Permalink