2000 Aborted quest limit per day

[Lady Shintina]

I don't understand why the people using bots aren't found and shut down. Simple solution and doesn't punish more people than necessary.

 

[tr0p]

If you spend thousands of dollars a month on a computer game...and then can't find anything better to do in the game than loop RQs, that's the very definition of sad. And if you don't spend thousands of dollars a month yourself, then your post is meaningless because you have no idea what this change will mean to Inno's bottom line. (Incidentally, what would you spend "thousands of dollars on" in this game that would still leave you needing to loop RQs? If I spent thousands of dollars on this game, it would be so I could do the more fun aspects of the game without worrying about acquiring resources. But you do you.)

Really? Because my CFs haven't been nerfed. They'll still provide the same boost to all the quests I complete in all my cities.

Strictly an opinion, not a fact. My opinion differs, obviously.

I never said I spend thousands of dollars a month on this game. There are players who spend just like me who are also not in favor of the change, and like me have decided not to spend any more. My choice to no longer spend money has nothing to do with what I use my CF for or what I've spent my money on. It has to do with me no longer wanting to support a company who makes changes that negatively impact the game for a lot of people, because they can't find a solution to a problem without affecting a lot more people.

As a consumer, I can take my money elsewhere which is exactly what I will do.

However, since this change doesn't affect you and your CF hasn't been nerfed your post is also meaningless.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

I never said I spend thousands of dollars a month on this game.

If you actually understood my post, I covered that possibility.

There are players who spend just like me who are also not in favor of the change, and like me have decided not to spend any more.

Hearsay. You don't know if they're serious or not, or if they'll follow through on that threat or not. As I've stated, I've heard this threat many times over the 6 years I've been on the Forum and there are still thousands and thousands of players and Inno is still making money.

My choice to no longer spend money has nothing to do with what I use my CF for

Ummm. your choice is because they're limiting the number of RQs you can do, and that is specifically what the CF affects, so this statement is simply not true.

As a consumer, I can take my money elsewhere which is exactly what I will do.

You have a perfect right to do that, and I doubt it will make much difference to Inno's bottom line. A small minority of players (according to Inno) are affected by this change, so I think they must know what they're doing. I am pretty sure that they're smart enough to have looked at the potential revenue loss from this change and factored that into their decision.

However, since this change doesn't affect you and your CF hasn't been nerfed your post is also meaningless.

Nice try, but wrong. If I didn't understand what was being talked about, my opinion would be meaningless, but that is not the case. I understand perfectly well what is under discussion. Your statement was meaningless because you were stating what you thought might happen to Inno's cash flow without any basis other than your intent to quit spending money on the game. Since you don't personally spend "thousands of dollars", then you have no idea how much or how little Inno may potentially lose (or gain) in the fallout from this change.

 

[ShaeKit]

Many motivated players that put time/FPS into leveling our CF's will hit. 150 to 350 cycles in a day is doable to hit for more casual players to achieve these marks. I see where INNO is going with this but it still limits the use of the CF that spent a lot of time of FPs to level.
For GVG/GBG we click so many times just for an action to attack a province/sector; it's expected most would put that same effort into Recurring Quests. Please remove or the maximum quests per day.

Yes! I’d like a refund of all FP invested beyond 70ish please!

 

[Just An Observer]

What also got nerfed was Himeji Castle. Who is going to bring it to a high level for the Supplies now? At least I can boost the Chateau up to make each recursion have more value but now the primary driving force in providing volume is now been taken down considerably.

I hit the 2000 mark with a bit under an hour left in the gaming day. Being an honest player who punches out recursion manually. it would be nice to see the 2000 mark increased.

 

[matto1]

At some point, "adapting" to disrespect is simply codependent.

My impression is that InnoGames is confident that after years of using game addiction as their business model, they can continue their disrespectful style of game management without financial consequences. The blatant sabotage of the second most powerful building in the game (now useful for only one hour per day) should be a sobering wakeup call for many players.

Next it will be the Arc. They'll lower all percentages at every level and your level 80 Arc will now only give a 30% reward bonus. I'm sure no one who has used one for the last 5 years will complain at all

CF questing has been an established part of this game for 8 years... EIGHT YEARS! To simply change it now on a whim cause some higher age players are abusing fight quests is a completely short-sighted and bogus move. Remove the fight quest or remove the battle points given by the fight quest. Very simple solution! But no, let's instead nuke the whole system.

And no, there is nothing free about the gains players earn from their CF, as some 'players' on this forum have tried to argue. At level 80, it will cost the owner at least 33k FPs. And I know at least one player on my main world who has hit level 180, which cost over 1 MILLION FPs, all spent with the sole intent of heavy questing. There's nothing free about that kind of investment, especially considering that for the last 8 years there hasn't been a single peep out of Inno that would have anyone believe this was not intended behavior for this particular GB. Just another BS knee-jerk reaction by Inno to a problem that could have been solved through much simpler measures.

 

[blodgaarm]

If you actually understood my post, I covered that possibility.

Hearsay. You don't know if they're serious or not, or if they'll follow through on that threat or not. As I've stated, I've heard this threat many times over the 6 years I've been on the Forum and there are still thousands and thousands of players and Inno is still making money.

Ummm. your choice is because they're limiting the number of RQs you can do, and that is specifically what the CF affects, so this statement is simply not true.

You have a perfect right to do that, and I doubt it will make much difference to Inno's bottom line. A small minority of players (according to Inno) are affected by this change, so I think they must know what they're doing. I am pretty sure that they're smart enough to have looked at the potential revenue loss from this change and factored that into their decision.

Nice try, but wrong. If I didn't understand what was being talked about, my opinion would be meaningless, but that is not the case. I understand perfectly well what is under discussion. Your statement was meaningless because you were stating what you thought might happen to Inno's cash flow without any basis other than your intent to quit spending money on the game. Since you don't personally spend "thousands of dollars", then you have no idea how much or how little Inno may potentially lose (or gain) in the fallout from this change.

I read your post, you basically called loopers sad, insinuating your way was the only correct way. Sadly this likely means you are here for no good reason and add nothing of value to this thread

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

I read your post, you basically called loopers sad, insinuating your way was the only correct way.

Wrong again. I said that if you spent thousands of dollars on this game and then still felt the need to loop RQs, then that was sad. I don't like the fact that players could fatten their coffers by endlessly looping RQs, but that does not equate to me saying they are sad for doing so.

Sadly this likely means you are here for no good reason and add nothing of value to this thread

Well, I don't add anything of value to someone who doesn't like my opinion, but that's not the same thing as adding nothing of value to the thread.

 

[Just Auggie]

I'm not in a snit about there being a limit. Aside from starting a new city, I don't do more then a few RQs per day.

My problem centers around making changes to a years long play styles with no explanation.

The lack of an Official Announcement and a Feedback Thread on this and the previous attempt to nerf RQs is significant..

Yes, it's INNO's game and they can do whatever they want with it.

I'm wondering what prompted this sudden change in policy of not officially Announcing changes or explaining why changes are being made.

I guess its symptomatic that they haven't Announced why they are omitting some Announcements.

I have spent over a year developing a guild based on a concept that INNO introduced. All of my time and money and effort are for nothing? Why? We were given no notice of a quite fundamental change in the game. No chance to adapt to a new strategy. It is just plain wrong to say heavy questing is acceptable and part of the game one day, and then make it impossible the next. What's next? Making arcs useless? Those who think that those of using this strategy are "whining", how would you feel if you spent a year working on a strategy and the rug was pulled out from under you like this? I can hit 2000 aborts within an hour and a half. It is ludicrous that I cannot do more.

 

[DevaCat]

I do RQs using a Chateau doing each day's city collection, I'm nowhere near that cutoff limit (I think, never counted them), but I've been impacted by Inno's ham-fisted approach to a problem in the form of abort delays introduced into the RQ cycling. I play on an iPhone, this was supposed to have ceased, but in variable lengths it persists.

If the problem is exploits made possible via click bots go after the script users and leave the rest of us the hell alone. If someone wants to manually click away to "perpetual motion" status with their CF I would question their sanity, but also suggest that maybe their masochism should be rewarded and not punished. Automated scripts are the problem -- deal with them instead of doing this easy "fix"

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Those who think that those of using this strategy are "whining", how would you feel if you spent a year working on a strategy

In a game that is constantly changing? Why would you waste an entire year on a strategy based on one relatively minor game mechanic?

I can hit 2000 aborts within an hour and a half. It is ludicrous that I cannot do more.

This is an almost perfect example of irony, but I'm sure you won't see it.

If the problem is exploits made possible via click bots go after the script users and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

Everybody keeps repeating this, but Inno has never said it. Inno has never mentioned script users/click bots in reference to this as far as I know. They have referred to "exploits", but that is not necessarily the same thing.

 

[DevaCat]

In a game that is constantly changing? Why would you waste an entire year on a strategy based on one relatively minor game mechanic?

This is an almost perfect example of irony, but I'm sure you won't see it.

Everybody keeps repeating this, but Inno has never said it. Inno has never mentioned script users/click bots in reference to this as far as I know. They have referred to "exploits", but that is not necessarily the same thing.

And Inno is not going to address this directly (yet?) because to do so would be to admit to an existing problem it has been unable/unwilling to effectively deal with. For the same reason we are discouraged from bringing up or discussing cheating in the game. So for now it remains "exploits" - are you being willfully obtuse?

 

[Algona]

have spent over a year developing a guild based on a concept that INNO introduced. All of my time and money and effort are for nothing?

Can you please explain how this limit renders your concept null and void?

Don't get mad at me, it's a legitimate question. Possibly there is some way to mitigate the effect the limit has on your concept?

Slightly different topic:

I'm sorry, but you do need to learn a lesson. This:

In a game that is constantly changing?

is a fundamental of this game.

I understand your frustration Just Auggie, but this game can and does change constantly. Strategies, goals, concepts can and will be effected by changes in the game.

Having a basic strategy become outdated is bitter Happily good city design and game play make it easy to have the fundamental tools in place to adapt current strategies or adopt new ones.

This game rewards players for understanding the ramifications of changes and quickly adopting to those changes.

Think of it as evolution in action.

----------

Sigh.

If only we knew what was going on and if we knew whether or not there are further plans in place for unannounced changes it would be a lot easier to prepare our cities and psyches for those surprise changes.

That's not gonna happen.

So we just have to muddle on through.

 

[CDmark]

OK, did some more math. Since 100 FPs is a limit for UBQs, I will use it for placing a limit on GBG
75 attacks or negotiation (or an attack/nego combo equal to 75) in a day would get about 100 FP (diamond league). So lets do that too. This will help fix the problem of map domination and be fair to the other 5 to 6 guilds that get crumbs. Well, players leveling Zeus, CdM, CoA to 60+, sorry, but it is a changing game. The CF based, "FPs Down the Drain Club" is accepting new members.
Some may feel this is off topic but I would argue that the topic is exploitation of the game and limiting the lepers, the Abbys, from having a distinct advantage over others.

 

[BruteForceAttack]

Who all have got this message in the first place?

 

[Aonply]

Reducing a city down to 150 quest collections a day is absurd. Who thought this was a good idea when they were talking at the zoom meetings? Do they think people are so dumb that they will hear the 2000 number and agree with them? 2000 clicks is a bare minimum if you are a quester. You can burn that up on your lunch hour on the phone.

 

[UBERhelp1]

I don't understand why the people using bots aren't found and shut down. Simple solution and doesn't punish more people than necessary.

It's actually rather difficult to do, depending on how it is done. If it's an auto clicker, it may or may not just be clicking at the same rate over and over in the same spots on screen. However, if done smartly, the rate and spots can be slightly varied so that it looks much more natural. At that point, you have to look at the time that this is being done (all day every day). But at the same time, that isn't really proof. Someone could just be going on a suicidal game playing streak.

In other words, there are ways you can find potential people who are doing it, but unless you catch the actual bot or script behind it, you can't be 100% sure. There are scripts that alter the input of the device so that it looks like the mouse was actually moving to the game, and that can be extremely difficult to detect for a browser game that's not actually downloaded on the device.

For all intents and purposes, the most you can do is look at someone's actions and guess that they are using a bot. However, someone attacking really fast could be legit (there's strategies built around that where you don't have to move your mouse to fight quickly), and some people do RQs for a really long time each day, so it's really hard to nail down precisely who is doing the cheating and who isn't.

 

[Tony 85 the Generous]

It's actually rather difficult to do, depending on how it is done. If it's an auto clicker, it may or may not just be clicking at the same rate over and over in the same spots on screen. However, if done smartly, the rate and spots can be slightly varied so that it looks much more natural. At that point, you have to look at the time that this is being done (all day every day). But at the same time, that isn't really proof. Someone could just be going on a suicidal game playing streak.

In other words, there are ways you can find potential people who are doing it, but unless you catch the actual bot or script behind it, you can't be 100% sure. There are scripts that alter the input of the device so that it looks like the mouse was actually moving to the game, and that can be extremely difficult to detect for a browser game that's not actually downloaded on the device.

For all intents and purposes, the most you can do is look at someone's actions and guess that they are using a bot. However, someone attacking really fast could be legit (there's strategies built around that where you don't have to move your mouse to fight quickly), and some people do RQs for a really long time each day, so it's really hard to nail down precisely who is doing the cheating and who isn't.

There is one distinuighing feature between a program clicking and a human clicking. The program will click the same pixel everytime. A human will not. That is VERY detectable and VERY easily done.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

There is one distinuighing feature between a program clicking and a human clicking. The program will click the same pixel everytime. A human will not. That is VERY detectable and VERY easily done.

Funny that you didn't even read the post you quoted. You may want to read it, your point is covered.

 

[Graviton]

From the announcement on the 'unintentional' RQ slowdown, HERE ...

I've put in bold what I think is the most relevant part. From this perspective, it doesn't matter what quest folks are aborting around to complete, each abort has an impact and why the limit is aborts.

I remember reading from an old article about Inno where they said Data costs were Inno's largest expense. If that's still the case, then think about all the new things that impact the server that have been introduced since the concept of Heavy Questing was introduced.

Okay, infrastructure and its capacity is a legitimate concern (and one that nobody else in this thread has addressed). But the first response to that should be not to kneecap your customers, but to buy more servers and/or improve the code.

If they are not buying more servers and/or improving the code, then the issue has to be the cost of doing that.

Someone else quoted Support as saying that they've analyzed their player data and determined that this won't impact the majority of players.

tl,dr: Inno has determined that it's cheaper to lose a few heavy questers than to fix this problem. All the complaints on all the forums in the world ain't gonna change that. Which means that this:

Sad when Inno loses thousands of dollars a month in revenue ...

...has already been taken into consideration, and they believe whatever they're projecting to lose is worth it. Many in this thread are angry and accusing the devs of being stupid or short-sighted, but really they're neither. We aren't privy to their conversations and they aren't explaining their thought process very well, but I guarantee they've had these conversations and they are aware of the impact this will have. Inno has chosen what it sees as the best course of action with the information it has available; information we don't have. We can't see the big picture from here.

... many have long asked for the ability to choose which RQs appear in the rotation. This would reduce the load from aborts.

That proposal gains some traction now, I agree. At least, it should get some reconsideration. Something that would've aided the heavy questers even more now might save their play style, to an extent anyway.

Can you please explain how this limit renders your concept null and void? ... [Change] is a fundamental of this game ... This game rewards players for understanding the ramifications of changes and quickly adopting to those changes. Think of it as evolution in action.

This is also a legitimate point. There are so many aspects to this game that tweaking one of them isn't going to break it for the vast majority of players. This isn't the first time the game has been modified; we old-timers have seen many things changed over the years (and some of us have been resistant to almost every one!). Most players adapt, some players don't. New players will come along who will have no clue what the fuss is about. Same as it ever was.