Tell us what to do with Pies and Dessert!

 UPDATED (April 9): Thanks very much for all the responses. Our decision and the future of Pies and Dessert is detailed here if you click this link. This blog has been closed for commenting.

Yesterday we had lots of feedback on our proposition to release Even Bigger Pieces of the Pie (#7 and #8). We then had an internal discussion on the technical and customer support issues surrounding this, because the view of some of our most engaged users and the way we had viewed the situation were not congruent.

To summarize the issues:

  • In our view, a Pie upgrade increases the maximum number of Shares you can buy in someone to a certain level. A Bonus allows you to break that level at a specific given time, so you can have “first-mover” advantage in gaining dividends, etc. Breaking the Pie for us was a way for you to collect dividends and garner more engagement while waiting for an overall Pie upgrade. By introducing a new site maximum for yourself, you would need to buy new Bonuses to go beyond your new maximum.
  • In many of your views, however, it seems that both a new Pie upgrade and the Bonuses used on an individual should be honoured. Meaning that if you could buy a maximum of 500 Shares in someone and then bought a “More Dessert” Bonus to go up to 600, you should then be able to get the persistent Pie Upgrade to 600 at some point and buy up to 700 in the person who you had used “More Dessert” on without getting a new Bonus for that person.

Unfortunately, our system currently allows for the first scenario and not the second.

This leaves us in a quandary on what to do, so we decided to let you, our community, write this story, and for you to tell us how we should proceed.

Here are the options based on the resources we can commit to this at this point in time:

Vote on it on our Facebook Page and get others to vote, and the winning option in the next week is the one we will implement.

Option 1. Leave as-is; no more Pie, no more Dessert

  • We maintain the status quo, and no changes will happen. We will not add Pie #7 and #8, and we will leave prices for More Dessert and Even More Dessert as they are.

Option 2. Introduce Pie #7 and #8, but Bonuses must be bought again to break your new maximum number of Shares.

  • We introduce Pie #7 and Pie #8 so you can make your overall site maximum larger, but the Dessert Bonuses will need to be bought again to break the maximum for an individual by up to 100 or 200 shares for a given use, depending on the Bonus you purchase.

Option 3. No new Pie, but we introduce two new Bonuses to allow +300 and +400 in a person, and reduce pricing on +100 and +200.

  • In this option we do not move beyond our current Pie maximum (#6), but we do introduce new Bonuses that allow you to invest +300 and +400 in a person, and we reduce the costs on the current Bonuses (More Dessert and Even More Dessert).

You have until next Wednesday April 11th to have your voice heard.

Go Vote now!


  1. rather than a refund, consider simply allowing those who bought desert and used them to still have those bonuses in place if they buy more pie, that is to say if you own 700 or 800 in someone today because of bonuses then perhaps when you buy a new pie 800 you would then be able to buy 900 or 1000 of those same users without having to buy a costly desert for those same accounts again.

  2. I dislike Option 2 and I have bought a bonus 4 or 5 times. Here is why.

    1. It was a bonus. I expected to earn extra benefit for the Eaves invested. I thought about what might happen if the limit was raised with more pie options.

    2. You can buy more pie and choose to upgrade those which are not already upgraded.

    3. The price paid for the bonus was not proportional to a lifetime upgrade. If the system is going to offer a lifetime upgrade, it should be priced higher.

    In some ways this is an arms race. The more the limit is raised the more people will want it raised again as they earn more Eaves. At some level a limit needs to stick and alternative ways for people to compete invented. Ways to use Eaves for more than just buying more of the leaders, etc.

  3. I was not clear so let me re-state.

    Option 2 is the best option in that it reflects what people were buying when the offer was made.

    Option 1 ignores the issue. Option 3 does something similar.

    At no time should there be an option that implies a life time upgrade unless people actually pay for that upgrade with a higher priced bonus. When we buy things we are not guaranteed free access to the latest and greatest, the biggest and the best unless that is what we buy.

    Sorry if I was confusing two options when I wrote my prior comment.

  4. TRUST is key – lose the trust of others and you lose the game .

    Why would anyone spend virtual eaves or real money to buy Desert or More Desert when it takes 6 months or so to even break even on that expense knowing it’s just a temporary boost?

    those smart people like zen, dr_evil… that haven’t fallen for all these bait and switch games are rewarded by not getting ripped off!!!

    Fool me once, (Luxury Items) and even with the refund rip me off for 10 million or so…
    Fool me Twice with dessert ok fine screw me out of 40 million
    i currently own 280 powerups / desserts and my current cost is 142k

    Buy Back what you are trying to sell me ONLY if i upgrade to PIe700 that super-seeds the bonus.

    I’m sorry i spent $50 just a few days ago and supported Eav buying portfolio24
    what i find the most disturbing is the lack of managements comments here.

    as Omar Habayeb said

    This is totally punishing those who PARTICIPATE by engaging in Empire Avenue’s new offerings.

    steven healey
    April 5, 2012 at 1:39 pm

    When EA takes hard earned $ from players for upgrades it should honour the terms under which they were purchased . As mentioned by respected fellow players simply ignoring this will lead to grief down the line.

    In the rush to attract new players EA MUST keep existing players happy .

    In another online network , TRUST is key – lose the trust of others and you lose the game .

  5. Your options are confusing, but like Omar I feel screwed if you proceed with options 1 & 2 with the amount of desserts I have bought, and I’m not even in his league or others with much more wealth and portfolio than I.

    How many times do I have to repurchase more desserts for the same people?

    I choose Option 3.

  6. I would like to propose a new scale that increases more than +100 per upgrade. If this is meant to scale, the rewards need to scale also.

    5 levels of +100
    4 levels of +200
    3 levels of +300
    2 levels of +400
    1 level of +500

    Run a report to see who of the current users would be eligible for this scale and see if it fits the current trend. the most common mistake of any game or technology venture is ignoring diminishing returns and thereby ignoring your mainstay in the field and your longtime investors. Make it worth someone’s effort to be a member 5 years from now, not just 5 weeks.

  7. Pingback: Empire Avenue – Redux » Beyond Bridges

  8. I am with Paul Houston and Omar I feel screwed twice aswell, I am for option 4 !! Option 1 is out of the question the game will be over, option 3 is compared to the PIE update much to expensive, and with option 2 we loose our money again 😦 so back to the table for option 4 ! 😦

  9. Option 2 + refund

    Personally, I would be fine with just option 2 (and no refund as suggested by some). The way I understood desserts is that they would be redundant when new pie appeared, but you really don’t want to be making your dedicated customers unhappy. Therefore, I think it would be best to find a way to refund or compensate people who bought desserts. It’s worth keeping them happy.

Comments are closed.