Incentive to get people to play, player created missions

[Kissy My]

Add gold payout to approved missions. Doesn’t have to be a large amount.

Like players get 5 gold when they complete an approved mission.

5 gold + 100 plays = 500 gold

2 gold + 100 plays = 200 gold

But we know, most people are not going to play 100 missions, but that shows the amount wouldnt be huge.


Even if a cap is added to the amount they are able to earn, it would still incentivize players to play missions.

[Shane Fahey]

I think this is a great idea, Kissy

5-10g per play is a fair amount; if capped at 500g per week, this can still encourage mission play quite a lot and activity with players being more incentivised with the gold reward

Another way to break it down would be Milestones, such as a weekly mission which rewards 50 gold per 10 approved missions completed

500g per week is still the equivalent of 50-100 missions - hardly a huge reward for someone investing that much time into the game & the community!

[Amanda Storm]

I think it is a great incentive, Kissy!

[Jamie Bondason]

Definitely a good idea. Instituting a cap is probably sensible as it'll protect the business interests of SmallVerse too. As both yourself Kissy and Shane have pointed out, to reach a cap you'd need to play upwards of 50 missions, which is a very hefty time investment into the game, so a 500g cap is hardly overly generous. But there are plenty of players who probably would search for 50-100 missions to play per week to reach that cap - on the grind as it were. Fully support this. Great idea!

[Kissy My]

I wish the powers that be of SV would listen.
I have been trying hard to get old SW players to join this site and one of the first and often questions I get is...
do they treat mission makers better, do they promote missions more etc.. :s

[Penguin Disco]

This is a great idea Kissy! And since fellow mission makers tend to play missions than the average player, that also addresses previous suggestions we've brought up to compensate our efforts. It's not direct, but it does incentivize us to support each other. A low amount like 5g is also super fair, because it's not nothing, but it also doesn't step on SV's business goals.

[Ozzy Robbins]

Good idea Kissy! Great incentive and would motivate more people to play missions which would make more mission maker's happy because their mission's would get more plays. Mission maker's deserve more for making this game more interesting so it would at least help out to give a little gold for playing to give them more plays. I found Smallworlds and continued to play because of missions and I came to Smallverse because I missed my friends and missions. If mission maker's start getting discouraged from making missions because they don't get many plays and the huge cost to make them I won't continue to play Smallverse~!

[Kissy My]

"discouraged" ... thats the word for the day... month ....
and exactly where I am .... I have 3 missions in the works and have lost motivation and desire to complete them..
and that makes me sad ...
I will finish one of them that I am further along in ... and hope this feeling passes

[Adriella Spencer]

Some questions:

1. Would missions pay out both tokens and gold or one or the other?
2. Would there be special criteria for a mission to reward gold?
3. Would players have to pay a gold entry fee to the mission creator in order to be eligible to receive a gold reward?

A couple observations:

1. The 500g weekly cap translates to 2,000 - 2,500 gold/month (depending on the # of Saturdays) on top of the max 775 gold from daily rewards. That gives more free gold than the cheapest gold or VIP packages. It's much too high. It should not be more than 2,000 gold altogether, so 25 gold for logging in daily and 5 gold per mission play (up to 50 missions per week)
2. Adding more ways to add gold in circulation in such a widespread manner would necessitate a counter-balancing effect to remove it. Expect gold prices on catalogue items to go up to compensate for more players having more pocket change

I believe that this will encourage players to play more missions but, since they are motivated by reward, they will gravitate towards the mini-mishes. This might also exacerbate the muling problem

[Kissy My]

1. Would missions pay out both tokens and gold or one or the other? Both, gold would just be added
2. Would there be special criteria for a mission to reward gold? no, follow the same guidelines, be approved.
3. Would players have to pay a gold entry fee to the mission creator in order to be eligible to receive a gold reward? No gold entry fee

The cap wouldnt have to be weekly.. like widgets, farming etc there could be a cap..

But even if it were simply a 500 a week cap... let's even go with a month... that would require 100 mission plays in a week/month... people seriously arent going to do that LOL
Players complain about having to do 3 to 14 a week to complete loyalty.. really think they are going to play 14 or more a day? LOL

I always find it interesting that people believe that any improvement to help get player created missions get a small boost is wrong..
it is literally the only area of the game in terms of activity that is at a huge disadvantage ...

Making missions for the most part is expensive... then the amount of time invested..

My missions on average cost... at minimum 15,000 gold and at least 20 to 30,000 in tokens.
and I currently have 16 approved, 3 in the works .. do that math..

I personally think mission makers should not only earn xp for making missions, but should earn gold for each one they create.. even a miniscul amount..
We invest and support this game... they should return the favor...
at the very minimum have something to encourage players to play missions.
Is that really asking too much?

[Shane Fahey]

1. Would missions pay out both tokens and gold or one or the other? Both, gold would just be added
2. Would there be special criteria for a mission to reward gold? no, follow the same guidelines, be approved.
3. Would players have to pay a gold entry fee to the mission creator in order to be eligible to receive a gold reward? No gold entry fee

The cap wouldnt have to be weekly.. like widgets, farming etc there could be a cap..

But even if it were simply a 500 a week cap... let's even go with a month... that would require 100 mission plays in a week/month... people seriously arent going to do that LOL
Players complain about having to do 3 to 14 a week to complete loyalty.. really think they are going to play 14 or more a day? LOL

I always find it interesting that people believe that any improvement to help get player created missions get a small boost is wrong..
it is literally the only area of the game in terms of activity that is at a huge disadvantage ...

Making missions for the most part is expensive... then the amount of time invested..

My missions on average cost... at minimum 15,000 gold and at least 20 to 30,000 in tokens.
and I currently have 16 approved, 3 in the works .. do that math..

I personally think mission makers should not only earn xp for making missions, but should earn gold for each one they create.. even a miniscul amount..
We invest and support this game... they should return the favor...
at the very minimum have something to encourage players to play missions.
Is that really asking too much?

Once again I agree on almost all points, Kissy

I know it's very easy to burnout from missions fast, even moreso at the higher XP levels when it gets more grindy.

Also the sentiment of high quality missions costing more than they're worth is something I definitely feel! I've easily spent 100k-200k gold on my missions and spent a lot of time and effort programming advanced interactions with NPCs to try make them feel more engaging for users - something again which eats up expenses.

The only thing which has me creating missions right now is my joy from decorating and creating the interactions, however that is not financially viable - even moreso when I have other goals in the game too! I can't afford to make missions and do all the other activities I want to do unfortunately

Maybe it's just better to just keep flooding Smallverse with cheap, short, low-quality missions instead as they seem to be the ones that have been having a lot more success in the community due to the current system

Bring back the Featured Mission rotation, with increased rewards for players, to promote Missions please. I definitely like the idea of gold for mission makers too and I think it'd be hard to find a system that worked without a cap. However, the Featured Missions could tie into your gold for mission makers rhetoric by simply rewarding the mission makers who have Featured Missions each month with a gold reward they pay out + visibility on the featured tab to increase plays.

[Aribella Lafonte]

When this was suggested, I really didn’t have a thought either way, but when really thinking about it, I agree with Adriella. While it seems to be a good thing, I think that it could potentially affect the economy. And you wonder who would play 14 missions, lol, I do. Anyone that doesn’t have VIP is required to play 13-14 missions a week in order to receive their monthly loyalty. While you scoff to think nobody will, they do, while you only need to play 3-4 missions a week as VIP unless you feel like playing more for fun that are on the approved panel, so therefore, you fail to consider other players and why they are pressured into playing fast, more efficient missions. They are pushed into hating them so much, they want to get them over with.

I as a mission maker have easily spent 10-30k on my missions, but again, I am in control of my own spending. I can easily try to be more economical by using smaller spaces, only token items and limit or forgo the NPCs. A good quality mission doesn’t require those things, (proven by Bituin Bulandi’s mission challenges so long ago) but a wow kind of mission will that goes above and beyond. I HAVE seen smaller, faster missions put effort into their spaces/missions, it IS possible. But while I focus on putting more wow into mine, I won’t be a snob and dismiss every other one out there that puts less than 15k into it … please. I myself have been known to use starter spaces to make one, I just put more into decor (which is cheaper due to size) and all other effort into storyline and interaction programming (since that’s what I put more into). Does that mean they are lower quality because they don’t have a 100-200k performance going on? I’m sorry, but this comes off as being snob and a half way of thinking.

The biggest issue of all this is the issue of loyalty’s pressure to complete so many missions (pushing towards one’s efficiency) and the high cost of items in game that mission makers have to buy in addition to the mission maker’s own decorative preferences. But in all honesty, even if you add gold to the mission payout, players will be playing the same fast missions they want to play and we all will STILL be complaining.

I am in favor of featured missions though with an extra incentive, it’s not really any different than our old additional xp/tokens from bonus cherries. I think that will not only give incentive to the mission player, but also encourage we as mission makers to want to put more effort into a mission than making a wham bam kind of mission, since technically, that is all that is required into making one. All approved missions pay out the same and have the same purpose, to gain xp, and let’s all be reminded that opinions of what makes a good mission and what one enjoys is subjective. I personally prefer a wow kind of mission, but I’m not going to completely dismiss the simpler ones too.

I am not in favor of receiving xp or gold creating missions as I believe this can be exploited. I do question if you are truly for all mission makers though for incentive/rewards because most if not all of your suggestions on this matter seem to involve incentive/rewards being limited to certain creators based on how many missions they create. (which I strongly oppose) That’s not truly supportive of ALL mission makers. Please forgive me if I am wrong, this is just off my own observations. If the majority of the issue was based on how much we spend creating a mission (in which we all complain about this), the solution is simple, lower the prices of spaces and decorative items restoring them to their old original SW token/gold ratio of 1:100 instead of making everyone pay twice as much in tokens as they do in gold.

But …… spending more gold on a mission doesn’t give anyone more entitlement to get more mission plays, so the expense put into them shouldn’t always be brought up into the conversation. It dismisses the true reason to why we create them to begin with. Who cares what they cost if that were the case.

Missions/Mission Makers, should however, get more appreciation than what they have been getting and have as much equal importance as other hobbies in the game. And I think there needs to be more incentive to play missions so they are found to be less of a negative requirement of something else to do on the game. (Sorry to say, but reality check, this is what most players think of them to be)

[Shane Fahey]

When this was suggested, I really didn’t have a thought either way, but when really thinking about it, I agree with Adriella. While it seems to be a good thing, I think that it could potentially affect the economy. And you wonder who would play 14 missions, lol, I do. Anyone that doesn’t have VIP is required to play 13-14 missions a week in order to receive their monthly loyalty. While you scoff to think nobody will, they do, while you only need to play 3-4 missions a week as VIP unless you feel like playing more for fun that are on the approved panel, so therefore, you fail to consider other players and why they are pressured into playing fast, more efficient missions. They are pushed into hating them so much, they want to get them over with.

I as a mission maker have easily spent 10-30k on my missions, but again, I am in control of my own spending. I can easily try to be more economical by using smaller spaces, only token items and limit or forgo the NPCs. A good quality mission doesn’t require those things, (proven by Bituin Bulandi’s mission challenges so long ago) but a wow kind of mission will that goes above and beyond. I HAVE seen smaller, faster missions put effort into their spaces/missions, it IS possible. But while I focus on putting more wow into mine, I won’t be a snob and dismiss every other one out there that puts less than 15k into it … please. I myself have been known to use starter spaces to make one, I just put more into decor (which is cheaper due to size) and all other effort into storyline and interaction programming (since that’s what I put more into). Does that mean they are lower quality because they don’t have a 100-200k performance going on? I’m sorry, but this comes off as being snob and a half way of thinking.

The biggest issue of all this is the issue of loyalty’s pressure to complete so many missions (pushing towards one’s efficiency) and the high cost of items in game that mission makers have to buy in addition to the mission maker’s own decorative preferences. But in all honesty, even if you add gold to the mission payout, players will be playing the same fast missions they want to play and we all will STILL be complaining.

I am in favor of featured missions though with an extra incentive, it’s not really any different than our old additional xp/tokens from bonus cherries. I think that will not only give incentive to the mission player, but also encourage we as mission makers to want to put more effort into a mission than making a wham bam kind of mission, since technically, that is all that is required into making one. All approved missions pay out the same and have the same purpose, to gain xp, and let’s all be reminded that opinions of what makes a good mission and what one enjoys is subjective. I personally prefer a wow kind of mission, but I’m not going to completely dismiss the simpler ones too.

There's a few things here, so I'll just run through each one individually

1. Kissy said 14 missions a DAY, not a WEEK - so you've picked up a mute point. Most people don't do 14 missions a day, but 14 missions a week, for loyalty. So you're only just agreeing with her? This is also an assumption that every person plays missions for XP/Tokens - some of us do them because we genuinely enjoy an amazing story/interactions which you highlighted in an earlier comment.
2. You're choosing to nit pick and call me a snob than actually look at the content behind the message - that is the total amount of a 5 part missions series with many NPCs and interactions. It was to chip in just how expensive missions can be if you're going for the high quality stuff! You can keep spending low amounts all you want; as I also agree that lots of people can make great missions on low budgets, just through their creativity and interactions alone
   HOWEVER this is not the case for most and I 100% stand by that most missions are low quality and boring due to lack of interactions/boring decor!
3. I'm also not saying I deserve to have my missions featured or that my missions are better than anyone elses - as they're not, everyone does have their own preferences and that's for SV to decide.
   My actual point, is that missions which are recognised as exceptional should be highlighted and have more visibility rather than sitting on a list of 1000's of approved missions, waiting for someone to discover it. Also the low-quality missions don't deserve attention, sorry but they don't - you can cook most of those missions up in less than an hour, and as a direct result OTHER MISSIONS MAKERS (not just me) don't get the recognition they deserve.
4. In reference to the more gold = more quality, once again I agree! However if you are using NPCs they are 2-2.5k per NPC and as you also mentioned, most THEMED catalogue furniture is gold only and both interactive NPCs and themed decorations add a whole layer to the story and feel of a mission, so a result they do actually end up better missions on almost every occasion!
5. Let's also not forget the maths, if 50 tokens = 1 gold then you'd need 2000 plays (100k tokes) to recoup the cost of just 1 NPC...

I really think Kissy's point is just more visibility and recognition for those investing into making these types of missions, especially when this game is barely even out of beta yet - some of these missions that new players play will either keep them playing or thinking "what the heck did I just waste 5mins of my life on there??" and never playing again.

I'm glad you like the Featured missions idea though and I think even if we are in disagreeance on some points, our sentiment that the current system isn't good enough stands the same!

Also this below, was a post you made in January about your thoughts on missions, in Kissy's other thread: https://www.smallverse.app/forum/thr...ker-incentives

You've already agreed with most of what I've said, Aribelle, you just did it in January before I could even make that comment

"I made the suggestion about a month ago about how there needs to be more support for the mission making community by offering more incentives and rewards for mission players and their mission makers. Right now, the problem seems to be that mission players prefer playing missions that are five minutes or less and tend to overlook quality missions with more storylines or heavier interactions. (This has always seemed to be the case) They also tend to only play those listed on mission lists/discord servers and don’t explore newer missions that come available. I feel that incentives should be that higher quality/longer missions should offer more of a payout and perhaps reintroduce cherries (minus any preferential nepotism) that would provide mission makers more of an incentive to create a mission longer than 5 minutes and perhaps put more time and effort into them. Perhaps in addition to offering a higher payout for the mission player and the achievement of having a cherry mission, that the mission maker could receive some sort of bonus or incentive as well. Idk about having such rewards just for any mission created, what would be considered as a gold reward or sold as one, including missions that take less than five minutes to complete. Of course, even if they get 500-1000 plays which is awesome, that’s not hard to accomplish with a fast mission. Players will always flock to those. I think it would be better to reward those with some sort of wow factor. Putting on more mission contests with a very good gold prize would be great too, providing it’s not as restrictive and confusing as the last one, and has fair judging. We not only need better incentives as a reward to creating and reimbursement for one, but also more of an incentive to put a little more wow factor into them. Even make playing missions more fun and rewarding to the players too because for many, the longer missions or playing them all is unenjoyable for them."

[Noctus Silvet]

Kissy, thank you for creating this thread.

In a perfect world, your ideas and asks are reasonable. I agree something should change. My opinion:

The top %, along with the 'mulers', presently hold the majority of wealth, and control, the game's economy. What is a 'muler'? Unfortunately, there exists active players who have gotten away with, and continue, to create multiple accounts, and dump all their earnings into their main. They repeat this behavior over and over again. Just like criminals they are not sorry or ashamed when they do this. They are only sorry when they get caught. It's a way of life for them. Mulers hoard and happily set the new monthly price, above store catalog value, within, say, two days of the monthly's release (when it's sold out). They sell it for profit and then dump the earnings into their main. Rinse and repeat. They will do this, too, when they earn gold from missions even if there is a cap. How does this happen? And why? Who is monitoring this 'muling'? The economy? I have no idea. What I do know is it lives on as the wealthy get mysteriously wealthier in the game.

Just like in the real world, pumping money into an economy is risky. There will always be unethical behavior enabled by a system. A good system is built on methods that mitigate it.

From a business perspective, what's to change if money is coming in, perhaps, more now than ever?

The ones at the top determine what's right and wrong. Not you or I. I don't have the answer, but my intention was to help you see what may be going on and why business may be silent on this one.

[Shane Fahey]

Kissy, thank you for creating this thread.

In a perfect world, your ideas and asks are reasonable. I agree something should change. My opinion:

The top %, along with the 'mulers', presently hold the majority of wealth, and control, the game's economy. What is a 'muler'? Unfortunately, there exists active players who have gotten away with, and continue, to create multiple accounts, and dump all their earnings into their main. They repeat this behavior over and over again. Just like criminals they are not sorry or ashamed when they do this. They are only sorry when they get caught. It's a way of life for them. Mulers hoard and happily set the new monthly price, above store catalog value, within, say, two days of the monthly's release (when it's sold out). They sell it for profit and then dump the earnings into their main. Rinse and repeat. They will do this, too, when they earn gold from missions even if there is a cap. How does this happen? And why? Who is monitoring this 'muling'? The economy? I have no idea. What I do know is it lives on as the wealthy get mysteriously wealthier in the game.

Just like in the real world, pumping money into an economy is risky. There will always be unethical behavior enabled by a system. A good system is built on methods that mitigate it.

From a business perspective, what's to change if money is coming in, perhaps, more now than ever?

The ones at the top determine what's right and wrong. Not you or I. I don't have the answer, but my intention was to help you see what may be going on and why business may be silent on this one.

This is a good point as well, Noctus, but is a separate issue entirely to what Kissy highlighted - this should be managed by the Smallverse team themselves, if there are players using those methods this should be easily detectable especially whilst the player base is currently smaller in it's early stages and should be punished
I think the issue with muling is moreso people creating many accounts to hoard monthlies/gain mass amounts of monthly loyalty items/mission items to resell! The greedy players are apparent too

Adding a small gold incentive for mission makers and players wouldn't tie into this I believe, as it still takes time and effort to complete a mission - the reason those people mule is because they're looking for a quick buck.
For example, your Bloodstone mission clearly had a lot of time and effort put into the creation of it - so why should those mulers benefit more than you? You're putting yourself at a deficit for the good of the community!!

And from a business perspective, their selling point isn't just "Rares and Wears" - there's a whole bunch of communities out there who play this game for others reasons, whether it be missions, art, social, sculpting, arena, etc... So if they want to expand the player base from the usual 200 players they need to start looking after these other communities and pronto, before established players start leaving and using their talents elsewhere!