I have to say that your twist on scaling is interesting(in a good way).
In general your ideas fit in category 2. They MIGHT help small fleets more than large, but it's hard to be sure.
I like your idea about making project inputs more flexible, but I have enough experience with larger fleets to know that they will like that too. It would DEFINATELY help small fleets, but it would also help large fleets a lot.
Is that such a bad thing? Ideally any solution that helps the small fleets needs to have the support of the big guys otherwise there will be more changes later, potentially rolling back the benefits. I've seen too many mechanics pendulum back and forth.
Every month you don't increase by a tier, your fleet gets a buff that increases gains by 25% from all projects.
This stacks up to 8 times.
In theory this is ok, however the real problem is that the fleets can't finish. A giant buff to a project that never gets completed is a buff you'll never see the benefit of.
Maybe a buff to the input items directly? Like every 4 doffs contributed one "free" gets counted? or every 20 commodities 5 more get counted?
Fleet special project slot should award fleet XP directly. (Ie. cosmetic projects.)
This would award STARBASE XP but NOT the individual categories (tac/sci/eng).
Likewise, have straight 200k dil sinks that also award STARBASE XP directly.
This means, for example, that a small fleet could get a starbase to T5 without any of the categories getting to T1. They'd still need to level the categories for certain rewards but, for example, if they're just into the Fleet ships, they could focus on nothing but Tactical and hit T5 with Tac in a T5 Starbase while having 0 Sci or Eng XP.
This would be interesting. Having complete freedom to pick and choose where the development goes could be a real help.
Offer individual category XP for ZEN. Maybe something like 200 ZEN per 1000.
I agree with the other poster that said I think this creates a dangerous incentive for longer and longer grinds.
It's more about Fleet Marks than small fleets, but he has quite a bit to say about that too.
My views may not represent those of Cryptic Studios or Perfect World Entertainment. You can file a "forums and website" support ticket here Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
It's more about Fleet Marks than small fleets, but he has quite a bit to say about that too.
A post which basically says "If you're in a small fleet, too ****ing bad" and "check back in 3 months when we've added our super secret projects in S8".
I have a proposal for allowing multiple fleets to contribute to the same project and share its benefits. It allows small fleets to pool their resources, and does not require scaling back project requirements (either by fleet size or universally). Since the proposal is somewhat long, I have put it in a separate thread.
New special project. Takes 1 week, minimal Fleet Marks, decent number of Fleet Credits, and some other resources. Rewards 1,000 exp to all 3 categories.
Here is another idea which I know they devs will just laugh at, but add Fleet Coalitions where Fleets can work together in building their bases together or a better way for Fleets to merge instead of one Fleet were everyone quits to join the other hopefully.
Here is another idea which I know they devs will just laugh at, but add Fleet Coalitions where Fleets can work together in building their bases together or a better way for Fleets to merge instead of one Fleet were everyone quits to join the other hopefully.
Please see my proposal for allowing multiple fleets to cooperate on a project:
How does having a large fleet equate to "extreme effort"? Members of a larger fleet have it a whole lot easier as they can contribute much less as an individual due to sheer numbers.
Except members of a larger fleet have less provisions on a per-individual basis. A larger fleet needs to run more projects than a small fleet to provide the same amount of provisions on a per-individual basis. They also need to run special projects to provide similar amounts of Fleet Credits on a per-individual basis. On a per-Fleet basis, those special projects allow you to sink 4000% resources to progress 16.6% faster (at least for T1).
The "per-individual" excuse to massively benefit small fleets doesn't fly either, since it literally is nothing more than asking to devalue the contributions of people in larger fleets.
If a project costs 200k dilithium, one person contributing 100k gets 50% progression. Why should they need to contribute 200k instead just to get 50% progression? Why is their time and money suddenly worth less?
One possibility might be a special Recruitment channel.
And watch it turn into another ESD zone chat. Also, the Find A Fleet tab in the social window is basically useless. Most fleets tick every option so that filtering is a joke. Not that similar attempts in other MMOs work any better.
The tried and true method of guild recruitment is for existing members to group up with potential recruits and go out and do stuff together. But this would require that members of small fleets in STO be social and communicate with players outside of their fleet, rather than simply spamming blind fleet invitations.
Only thing I really care to say about this subject is that fleets never should have been allowed to reach hundreds of members. sub 100s is always best and even then, the normal guild size was always sub 50s because of group limits. There's always the group size of 5 or 6. Then the alliance size of 18 or 24. STO has a limit of 20. Why is the fleet membership limit at like 500? Very excessive. Large fleets exploit the starbase system by being large.
I couldn't resist the opportunity to spew the word "exploit" back at people who consistently throw the word around to describe everything they or cryptic dislikes.
the normal guild size was always sub 50s because of group limits.
http://www.wowwiki.com/Guild#Guild_size Q: What do you mean when you say small guild? A: Most people consider a small guild one with less than 100 members. A guild with less than 50 members is getting really small, but most guilds start out that way.
It holds true for a lot of games, and at any one time you tend to have only around 20% of the members online for international servers. Also consider that unless the guild strictly enforces participation, there's a lot of silent members who don't really get involved but take advantage of services (while passively contributing something to the guild simply by being a member).
Only thing I really care to say about this subject is that fleets never should have been allowed to reach hundreds of members. sub 100s is always best and even then, the normal guild size was always sub 50s because of group limits. There's always the group size of 5 or 6. Then the alliance size of 18 or 24. STO has a limit of 20. Why is the fleet membership limit at like 500? Very excessive. Large fleets exploit the starbase system by being large.
Based on the infographic from the other day, the average fleet is 121 somethings. It's unclear whether "somethings" is players or characters; however, if "Captains" in that infographic meant characters, then it appears (based on there being only 1 million accounts last time we got told how many accounts there were) that most people only have 2 characters.
Any way you slice it, the average fleet is at least 60 people.
Former moderator of these forums. Lifetime sub since before launch. Been here since before public betas. Foundry author of "Franklin Drake Must Die".
My only suggestion would be a way to convert something to FM. Heck, 1 million EC for 10 FM (or 100,000 EC for 1 FM) is ludicrously easy. But something like that ...
Put a FM Booster in the C-Store (you want $ for Zen, you got it).
You can convert CXP to fleet marks. 10k CXP converts to 75 FM, 100 on a crit.
Also, there is a Fleet Marks booster available from your Ops officer at your starbase. 15k Fleet Credits for 100 extra marks, you get 20% extra until the booster is empty.
Based on the infographic from the other day, the average fleet is 121 somethings. It's unclear whether "somethings" is players or characters; however, if "Captains" in that infographic meant characters, then it appears (based on there being only 1 million accounts last time we got told how many accounts there were) that most people only have 2 characters.
Any way you slice it, the average fleet is at least 60 people.
Average means absolutely nothing without knowing the actual breakdown of fleet populations. You're also making a huge assumption that everyone is in a fleet to get to the 60 person fleet average number(based on the 2 characters per account you're running with).
Small fleets will take a huge amount of time and per individual resources to max out the tier, large fleets have the same resouce requirement but have the advantage of less resources per individual and quicker development. I do not believe scaling would be fair and could create cumbersome mechanism to implement.
One of the goals of a fleet is to access better stuff (ships, weapons, doffs, etc.) and share the community Right now people are advertizing or requesting .. pay our fleet a fee and pick up something you want. This is not an unreasonable way to help out people not in a fleet or smaller fleet.
In City of Heroes groups could form coalitions and each have their own base. Each group had common access to certain shared features (teleporters - transwarp gates, crafting stations) but banks and few other things were locked out. I think a similar mechanism could help a small fleet if it entered a coalition with a larger one.
EX. Four people in tier 2 fleet form a coalition with a tier four fleet-60 people. Transwarp gates mail and exchange access can be shared by allowing visiting priveledges to Tier 4 base. (shared quality of life benefit) Or have a small fee .. to use transwarp gate of larger fleet .. like 100Dil into bank of larger fleet. If smaller fleet member wants to purchase an item, ship that person would have to bring their resources plus a differential based on tier difference to pick up said item. Smaller fleets could grow their base and pay a smaller diference and the larger fleet will gain resources.
I think a similar mechanism could help a small fleet if it entered a coalition with a larger one.
This and other ideas for some sort of alliance/coalition have been brought up before. Some way to let a number of smaller fleets pool their resources. So 10 fleets with 10 people each would have the same production power as a 100 person fleet.
I think this could work, provided that the main issue is the lack of access to the various gear. There are a few issues to work out, but depending on how they did it, those may not be real difficult to sort though.
The issue however is this.
Is it the lack of gear or lack of fluff that people in small fleets are upset about?
Is it the lack of gear or lack of fluff that people in small fleets are upset about? "
I think it more an issue a small fleet has large requirements per individual to advance over a long time frame to get same stuff a larger fleet has an easier time getting. I believe when you can see and measure progress you more interested when compaeing a fleet project take 1-day to fill compared to smaller fleet that takes 12-15 days to move along. Some folks toss there hand up in the air and say "why bother."
with a coalition mechanism smaller fleets can have access to gear but at higher cost when pruchased from larger fleet instead of using its own resources.
Probably the easiest solution would be to just make all Fleet stores fully unlocked from get-go like people have mentioned, and instead make Fleet advancement provide a new and different benefit (besides e-peen). As an example: Eliminating the need for provisions at T5. Or some generally useful or expedient things that are available otherwise, as a different example a discount commodity vendor that sells what the Embassy vendor doesn't.
If a project costs 200k dilithium, one person contributing 100k gets 50% progression. Why should they need to contribute 200k instead just to get 50% progression? Why is their time and money suddenly worth less?
why is it that a member can contribute MORE but get less?
540 marks for the 10 man fleet.
54 marks for the 100 man fleet.
one does consistently more than the other. The current system devalues massively the amount of "time and money' of a small fleet. All we want, is equality. My time and effort should be worth the same as yours, should it not?
The question of the day is how to get to that point. Several interesting proposals have been put for that do damn good at achieving the balance we need. We need to look at them in depth and see which of them would be the best.
Maybe just create a generic fleet that really isnt controlled by anyone and create a fleet reputation for it. Let players max it out in 1/2 the time, but only give half the rewards. Still give max gear that fleet starbases offer, just less choices. If fleet starbases offer 5 types of MK XII gear, the generic fleet only offers 2.
The aesthetics of the fleet starbases are honestly lame and unimpressive. I belong to a big fleet and never see anyone there when I walk through. If you just want the gear, then know exactly what gear you want, and when you max out the reputation, you only have two choices for types at the end, like only picking phaser and disruptor Mk XII gear, and those are the only two types you unlock for that character. Whereas in a real fleet, you have all the (tetryon, plasma, etc) options available. You can get unlimited phaser and disruptor gear, but thats IT. If you want ships from fleet starbases, then you only get two ships per character per reputation, whereas in a real fleet you have access to all the ship types.
Ive decided Im not going to grind for the STF gear, and just stick with maxing my four toons on fleet gear, and live my STO life in PvE, official content, and Foundry forever. And if you want more gear options, just join a big fleet, get yours, and get out eventually.
If its hard to get all the gear you want for your toon from one big fleet, just ***** yourself out to many fleets and get what you can from each after doing a small part for each. Ask the fleet leadership, how much do they want to see you contribute to get x amount of gear, strike up a deal with them, get your stuff, and on to the next fleet, rinse and repeat. Holding yourself back from the gear you want just so you can see the name of a clan name you like over your head is silly and your own fault.
STO: @AGNT009 Since Dec 2010
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
My time and effort should be worth the same as yours, should it not?
Here's the fundamental flaw in your line of thinking.
You're looking at it from the stand point of a individual, not at it from the standpoint of the Fleet as a whole. The whole point is something a group of people work together on, so this idea that it should be balanced based on a per-member basis simply doesn't work.
The system was not set up on a per-member cost, it was set up on a fleet wide cost.
Be it a 5, 50, 250 person fleet. Not everyone is going to put in the same amount of effort, but yet everyone gets about the same amount of benefit. More effort means more fleet credits, but that doesn't change what's available.
We need to look at them in depth and see which of them would be the best.
We have done everything we can, it's now up to the Dev's to decide if they have any intention of changing the system at all.
I myself have made at least 3 different suggestions about something they could do. Because I can understand why small fleets feel frustrated with the current system. But the dev's have so far shown no interest in changing the status quo, so rehashing the same old ideas isn't going to change anything.
You're looking at it from the stand point of a individual, not at it from the standpoint of the Fleet as a whole. The whole point is something a group of people work together on, so this idea that it should be balanced based on a per-member basis simply doesn't work.
This is your opinion, I differ. If the idea is to do it based on a group then the group should be taken into consideration, how big is it? Bigger means it should have to do more as a group not less. Currently one group does much more than the other.
The system was not set up on a per-member cost, it was set up on a fleet wide cost.
Right it was set up on a fleet wide cost. which is the error. This allows a Massive exploit in fleet size. the more members the less group effort from the group as a whole In a smaller fleet, this isn't the case. Even you must agree its easier to get 54 marks than it is 540.
Be it a 5, 50, 250 person fleet. Not everyone is going to put in the same amount of effort, but yet everyone gets about the same amount of benefit. More effort means more fleet credits, but that doesn't change what's available.
Except for the fact, because we're doing the same projects you are we actually do have more available right now, because we don't have as many people trying to buy it all. 70 ship slots or so currently. Yes we have more Fleet credits, but WHY is that? We do MORE in the fleet as a group.
The larger your group, the less you have available, per man, that is your choice, you choose to be in the large fleet so you don't have to work so hard. Yes I choose to be in a small fleet, I knew that it would take longer, I don't mind that, My fleet is currently doing the indy fab to T3, all of our catagories are ready for the T3 upgrade, at the same time. All we want, is the same credit for work done; right now, thats not the case. My time and effort, isn't worth the same.
I myself have made at least 3 different suggestions about something they could do. Because I can understand why small fleets feel frustrated with the current system. But the dev's have so far shown no interest in changing the status quo, so rehashing the same old ideas isn't going to change anything.
I know you have, and in once case I really like the idea and think its just about the perfect solution, or as near to it as you can get. I would love your idea to be implemented it puts value on effort, and size. It balances them quite well in fact.
Smaller (group) effort= longer time -> Reward
Larger (group ) effort=shorter time ->Reward
each side gains from this system, each side loses. both sides can progress at a reasonable pace
Currently one group does much more than the other.
No, each group does exactly the same amount. If it costs 500 marks, 5,000 dil, 3500 stuff, then everyone pays the same amount. Yes each member of a smaller fleet may need to contribute a greater % of the total. But the cost is the same regardless of how many people contribute.
Even you must agree its easier to get 54 marks than it is 540.
Easier, no, faster yes. It was made very clear that it would take longer for smaller groups to earn the resources needed to advance their SB. The fact that it's easier for a large group people to accomplish a goal does not mean they're somehow exploring the system. The whole point is a group of people pool their resources to achieve something, this naturally means more people will do it faster.
My time and effort, isn't worth the same.
Yes it is. The amount of resources you can make per hour is the same as the amount I can. I just have more people generating resources then you. That doesn't mean I have to work less, only that I'll get there faster.
I would love your idea to be implemented it puts value on effort, and size. It balances them quite well in fact.
Thanks Perhaps the difference is, I look at it from the terms of manhours. The idea I had would give those groups with less manpower a break on the cost, but increase the amount of time it takes.
To me this seems fair, less resources = more time. More resources = less time.
both sides can progress at a reasonable pace
This is the issue isn't it, I know that no reasonable person group expects to get to T5 in the same amount of time as the super fleets. The frustration is the lack of any sort of progress. Even though my fleet isn't having that issue I understand why others want to see a change.
The trick is, to allow progress without changing the basic balance, of more members=faster progress.
Comments
Is that such a bad thing? Ideally any solution that helps the small fleets needs to have the support of the big guys otherwise there will be more changes later, potentially rolling back the benefits. I've seen too many mechanics pendulum back and forth.
Maybe a buff to the input items directly? Like every 4 doffs contributed one "free" gets counted? or every 20 commodities 5 more get counted?
This would be interesting. Having complete freedom to pick and choose where the development goes could be a real help.
I agree with the other poster that said I think this creates a dangerous incentive for longer and longer grinds.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showpost.php?p=8070831&postcount=1
It's more about Fleet Marks than small fleets, but he has quite a bit to say about that too.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
A post which basically says "If you're in a small fleet, too ****ing bad" and "check back in 3 months when we've added our super secret projects in S8".
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?p=8082821
Please read.
Small Fleets take longer but can still get there.
Please see my proposal for allowing multiple fleets to cooperate on a project:
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/showthread.php?t=553181
The "per-individual" excuse to massively benefit small fleets doesn't fly either, since it literally is nothing more than asking to devalue the contributions of people in larger fleets.
If a project costs 200k dilithium, one person contributing 100k gets 50% progression. Why should they need to contribute 200k instead just to get 50% progression? Why is their time and money suddenly worth less?
You had pretty much the only proposal that isn't "give members of small fleets a massive advantage". Kudos to you.
The tried and true method of guild recruitment is for existing members to group up with potential recruits and go out and do stuff together. But this would require that members of small fleets in STO be social and communicate with players outside of their fleet, rather than simply spamming blind fleet invitations.
I couldn't resist the opportunity to spew the word "exploit" back at people who consistently throw the word around to describe everything they or cryptic dislikes.
I don't know of a single MMO that limited guilds to 50 total members.
I know TR had a very low cap on their guilds, so much so that the system actually exploded when one group exceeded the limit and the guild was wiped.
But I don't think it was 50. 100, 150 maybe? Been so long I can't remember...
http://www.wowwiki.com/Guild#Guild_size
Q: What do you mean when you say small guild?
A: Most people consider a small guild one with less than 100 members. A guild with less than 50 members is getting really small, but most guilds start out that way.
It holds true for a lot of games, and at any one time you tend to have only around 20% of the members online for international servers. Also consider that unless the guild strictly enforces participation, there's a lot of silent members who don't really get involved but take advantage of services (while passively contributing something to the guild simply by being a member).
Based on the infographic from the other day, the average fleet is 121 somethings. It's unclear whether "somethings" is players or characters; however, if "Captains" in that infographic meant characters, then it appears (based on there being only 1 million accounts last time we got told how many accounts there were) that most people only have 2 characters.
Any way you slice it, the average fleet is at least 60 people.
You can convert CXP to fleet marks. 10k CXP converts to 75 FM, 100 on a crit.
Also, there is a Fleet Marks booster available from your Ops officer at your starbase. 15k Fleet Credits for 100 extra marks, you get 20% extra until the booster is empty.
Average means absolutely nothing without knowing the actual breakdown of fleet populations. You're also making a huge assumption that everyone is in a fleet to get to the 60 person fleet average number(based on the 2 characters per account you're running with).
One of the goals of a fleet is to access better stuff (ships, weapons, doffs, etc.) and share the community Right now people are advertizing or requesting .. pay our fleet a fee and pick up something you want. This is not an unreasonable way to help out people not in a fleet or smaller fleet.
In City of Heroes groups could form coalitions and each have their own base. Each group had common access to certain shared features (teleporters - transwarp gates, crafting stations) but banks and few other things were locked out. I think a similar mechanism could help a small fleet if it entered a coalition with a larger one.
EX. Four people in tier 2 fleet form a coalition with a tier four fleet-60 people. Transwarp gates mail and exchange access can be shared by allowing visiting priveledges to Tier 4 base. (shared quality of life benefit) Or have a small fee .. to use transwarp gate of larger fleet .. like 100Dil into bank of larger fleet. If smaller fleet member wants to purchase an item, ship that person would have to bring their resources plus a differential based on tier difference to pick up said item. Smaller fleets could grow their base and pay a smaller diference and the larger fleet will gain resources.
This and other ideas for some sort of alliance/coalition have been brought up before. Some way to let a number of smaller fleets pool their resources. So 10 fleets with 10 people each would have the same production power as a 100 person fleet.
I think this could work, provided that the main issue is the lack of access to the various gear. There are a few issues to work out, but depending on how they did it, those may not be real difficult to sort though.
The issue however is this.
Is it the lack of gear or lack of fluff that people in small fleets are upset about?
Is it the lack of gear or lack of fluff that people in small fleets are upset about? "
I think it more an issue a small fleet has large requirements per individual to advance over a long time frame to get same stuff a larger fleet has an easier time getting. I believe when you can see and measure progress you more interested when compaeing a fleet project take 1-day to fill compared to smaller fleet that takes 12-15 days to move along. Some folks toss there hand up in the air and say "why bother."
with a coalition mechanism smaller fleets can have access to gear but at higher cost when pruchased from larger fleet instead of using its own resources.
why is it that a member can contribute MORE but get less?
540 marks for the 10 man fleet.
54 marks for the 100 man fleet.
one does consistently more than the other. The current system devalues massively the amount of "time and money' of a small fleet. All we want, is equality. My time and effort should be worth the same as yours, should it not?
The question of the day is how to get to that point. Several interesting proposals have been put for that do damn good at achieving the balance we need. We need to look at them in depth and see which of them would be the best.
The aesthetics of the fleet starbases are honestly lame and unimpressive. I belong to a big fleet and never see anyone there when I walk through. If you just want the gear, then know exactly what gear you want, and when you max out the reputation, you only have two choices for types at the end, like only picking phaser and disruptor Mk XII gear, and those are the only two types you unlock for that character. Whereas in a real fleet, you have all the (tetryon, plasma, etc) options available. You can get unlimited phaser and disruptor gear, but thats IT. If you want ships from fleet starbases, then you only get two ships per character per reputation, whereas in a real fleet you have access to all the ship types.
Ive decided Im not going to grind for the STF gear, and just stick with maxing my four toons on fleet gear, and live my STO life in PvE, official content, and Foundry forever. And if you want more gear options, just join a big fleet, get yours, and get out eventually.
If its hard to get all the gear you want for your toon from one big fleet, just ***** yourself out to many fleets and get what you can from each after doing a small part for each. Ask the fleet leadership, how much do they want to see you contribute to get x amount of gear, strike up a deal with them, get your stuff, and on to the next fleet, rinse and repeat. Holding yourself back from the gear you want just so you can see the name of a clan name you like over your head is silly and your own fault.
Capt. Will Conquest of the U.S.S. Crusader
Here's the fundamental flaw in your line of thinking.
You're looking at it from the stand point of a individual, not at it from the standpoint of the Fleet as a whole. The whole point is something a group of people work together on, so this idea that it should be balanced based on a per-member basis simply doesn't work.
The system was not set up on a per-member cost, it was set up on a fleet wide cost.
Be it a 5, 50, 250 person fleet. Not everyone is going to put in the same amount of effort, but yet everyone gets about the same amount of benefit. More effort means more fleet credits, but that doesn't change what's available.
We have done everything we can, it's now up to the Dev's to decide if they have any intention of changing the system at all.
I myself have made at least 3 different suggestions about something they could do. Because I can understand why small fleets feel frustrated with the current system. But the dev's have so far shown no interest in changing the status quo, so rehashing the same old ideas isn't going to change anything.
The larger your group, the less you have available, per man, that is your choice, you choose to be in the large fleet so you don't have to work so hard. Yes I choose to be in a small fleet, I knew that it would take longer, I don't mind that, My fleet is currently doing the indy fab to T3, all of our catagories are ready for the T3 upgrade, at the same time. All we want, is the same credit for work done; right now, thats not the case. My time and effort, isn't worth the same.
this is the question of the day.
I know you have, and in once case I really like the idea and think its just about the perfect solution, or as near to it as you can get. I would love your idea to be implemented it puts value on effort, and size. It balances them quite well in fact.
Smaller (group) effort= longer time -> Reward
Larger (group ) effort=shorter time ->Reward
each side gains from this system, each side loses. both sides can progress at a reasonable pace
No, each group does exactly the same amount. If it costs 500 marks, 5,000 dil, 3500 stuff, then everyone pays the same amount. Yes each member of a smaller fleet may need to contribute a greater % of the total. But the cost is the same regardless of how many people contribute.
Easier, no, faster yes. It was made very clear that it would take longer for smaller groups to earn the resources needed to advance their SB. The fact that it's easier for a large group people to accomplish a goal does not mean they're somehow exploring the system. The whole point is a group of people pool their resources to achieve something, this naturally means more people will do it faster.
Yes it is. The amount of resources you can make per hour is the same as the amount I can. I just have more people generating resources then you. That doesn't mean I have to work less, only that I'll get there faster.
Thanks
To me this seems fair, less resources = more time. More resources = less time.
This is the issue isn't it, I know that no reasonable person group expects to get to T5 in the same amount of time as the super fleets. The frustration is the lack of any sort of progress. Even though my fleet isn't having that issue I understand why others want to see a change.
The trick is, to allow progress without changing the basic balance, of more members=faster progress.