Graviton
Well-Known Member
No, he was comparing the concept of a problem that starts small, is allowed to grow, and then gets to the point where it must be dealt with, to Inno's (apparent) approach to this issue.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
2000 Aborted quest limit per day
- Thread starter BigSpence4
- Start date
- Status
No, he was comparing the concept of a problem that starts small, is allowed to grow, and then gets to the point where it must be dealt with, to Inno's (apparent) approach to this issue.
iPenguinPat
Well-Known Member
Analogies are great for teaching new ideas because the teacher can focus on the parts that are related and make sense.
Analogies are terrible for persuasion because the audience can point out all the ways the analogy makes no sense. For example, did you advertise to the gophers to come to your yard? Did some of the gophers pay you money to get better equipment for making bigger mounds on your lawn? Were the gophers an accepted part of your community before they were building mounds and would you allow them to stay if they stopped? How would the police respond if inno "ended the problem" with RQs the same way you ended the problem with gophers?
Is your point that mass recurring quests and perpetual motion CF's were quite rare until recently, so addressing them any sooner wasn't important? And now more players are being able to leverage CF/RQs and causing imbalance, so Inno took a first stab at bringing the strength of RQs back in alignment with the rest of the game?
It's a fair point. Especially, if the playstyle/strategy became more widespread faster than inno expected. It's not just good business or business ethics.
Like @Algona mentioned, we don't actually know what the purpose of the 2000 Abort limit was/is. We have vague wording and speculation. I have brought real data with actual numbers to the table regarding serve usage and the amount of potential resources generated daily.
I'm not against a reasonable limit on RQs. I'm against ghost changes with no explanation or transparency. Based on those two things which were the closest to cited reasons for the limit, this change doesn't make sense without adding bot prevention/reduction into the mix. Even then, it seems likely there's something else missing that none of us are privy to.
5 Minutes of GBG uses more resources than 1 hour of RQ's. Slight adjustments to how a player cycle RQ's and he/she can complete 1000+ per day - I'm pretty sure that falls far into the range of "unlimited coin/supplies" if the player was already able to make unlimited coins/supplies.
So yes, this is fishy.
IKR! Can you believe the same people keep posting? You were talking about Razor, Agent and you, right?
Let's see here...
JBG... - About 75 messages on this thread... see?
Razorback How about 50?
Agent clocks in at only 40.
Oh yeah, there's this.... (on page 9)
For reference. This will be my 11th and probably final post on this thread. Most of the players I checked had less than 10 posts on the thread.
Please lecture us on how 3-4 players are dominating the thread. At least Ember and Algona are keeping the conversation open and moving forward. Shall I count the number of unique players that have come, left feedback, and got run off? Seems a bit like bullying? Being territorial, if nothing else. The complete opposite of building the community.
A lot of the heavy RQ's have mentioned the biggest issue is lack of communication and transparency. Grownups don't tend to respond well to reasons like "because I said so."
I'm posting on this thread with these outcomes as my goal--
1) Inno will provide the reason for the update in more clear terms
2) Inno will stop with the ghost update(s) and note updates in the changelogs
3) Players will be able to provide feedback and alternative solutions to the issue -- solutions with less or no collateral damage while pinpointing the actual issue (which could include limiting RQs, if that's the only goal) -- for inno to consider and implement instead.
4) To help players that are being mocked and bullied off of the forums to continue to have a voice and know they are not alone or wrong for their frustration.
5) Inno will enforce their own rules of fair play with respect to bot/script users --- because I know this is a real issue and likely artificially inflating the number of players able/willing to do more than 2000 aborts per day.
6) If this change remains, at least provide a counter, so we know where we're at.
@Johnny B. Goode and @RazorbackPirate - Do you really need 50 or 80 posts to share your opinion on a topic? Are you just here to "win" on the forum and get another thumb up from your buddies? Completely serious - what outcome are you hoping to accomplish?
What do you recommend for encouraging inno to revert a change and provide feedback in a meaningful way? As consumers, these are the options we have if we want to see change? Aren't the forums and support tickets the appropriate channels to provide feedback? And you're mocking that?
Is your opinion so righteous and flawless that it should be forced on everyone, and anyone that disagrees should not be welcome here?
Last edited:
Agent327
Well-Known Member
It is really amazing how you twist what someone says to make your own point. It seems to be a habit with you. Are you mocking other peoples opinions?
r21r
Member
i fail to see where he is trying to twist anything on his last post, but that could be just me.
i agree with him on the transparency thingy as it's a long term game and when they move the goal posts it's not anymore imo
Johnny B. Goode
Well-Known Member
Generally speaking, yes. (76)
Interestingly enough, I am the one who is constantly told in plain terms that my opinion isn't welcome here. Isn't that strange? Yet you say I'm the one telling people their opinions are worthless? That's a nice twist on reality!
Last edited:
RazorbackPirate
Well-Known Member
Ding, ding, ding, then the analogy was successful.
As far as good business practice, why expend resources when you don't need to? If there are alternative uses of capital that make more sense, you push it off. As far as ethics, there is nothing unethical about what Inno did. They did a crap job of communicating to be sure, but poor execution is not unethical, just sloppy.
What I find fishy is the timeline and communication. I don't find it fishy they fixed a problem. Although @Algona's timeline, for me, it's missing a few components.
Feb 21, 2021 - The Abort slowdown is added to, and discovered on Beta.
Pay particular attention to post #16 where @lordwasa a Community Manager on the Beta forums said,
The complaints ensued from there. Then on,
Taken together, it doesn't seem the original delay was a mistake/bug. They knew about the delay on Beta, where they intentionally added it.
Which is why I was dismayed when I read the update above. To paint it as a mistake when it was live and intentional for weeks on Beta seems contrary to the facts.
Bots may have exacerbated the issue, also missing from the timeline when what appears to be bot users were discovered on various servers and complained about on various forums. While a festering issue may have been growing at reasonable rate not yet big enough to be dealt with, the bot users made it a 'fix it now' priority.
While inelegant, the current fix fixes everything. bot user and extra heavy questers are both capped, the rest never even noticed.
No argument from me. Had they not gone live with the slowdown, not had to walk it back, and had just moved forward with the Abort limit with the statement they eventually made, we'd be much better off. Still in the same place, but a lot less angst getting there.
1) we can always hope, but at this point, I see nothing to be gained for Inno. I suspect this is now in 'let sleeping dogs lie' mode.
2) Not unreasonable.
3) While you always have the ability to do this, what you want is to have an actual dialog with developers which won't happen. That's not how Inno works. They never had. To expect them to change for this issue is silly.
4) No one has mocked you, just the bad arguments.
5) No disagreement here, but if the support post is any indication, the problem is proof. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. Not sure about EU law, but you better be really sure before you start booting customers who've invested real money in their cities. I hope they are serious and will implement something that will give them the proof they need. In the meantime, this is the quick fix. A fix that may not change one the bot user s are cut lose, if they ever are.
6) I would support a counter as a proposal.
Can't speak to any of that. You're the one who's keeping score.
r21r
Member
bots as far as i know, work by running ID's (instead of clicks)
from my personal experience on java and C coded files, if they just change the ID's, bots will turn inactive for some time till those who program them, find the ID's and reprogram them.
that's 2-3 hours work though, on the cheaters side.. but could be a start
Johnny B. Goode
Well-Known Member
I appreciate the thought, but I won't be mocked or bullied off of the Forums...and this is kind of ironic, given that you don't think I should be posting here. (77)
icarusethan
Active Member
dude, this razor guy spent more time on the forum instead of playing FOE... you can tell by his city, lol. no need to argue with him
Algona
Well-Known Member
Thanks for posting that.
That certainly changes perspective.
Caught lying to the player base and slipping unannounced changes into the game.
Flush six years of trust down the toilet. gg, INNO. It was a fun run.
INNO has muddied this up so badly that we'll never know what is going on or if we can trust them to tell us the truth if they ever do try to explain the events of the last few months.
SCollins23
Member
Yeah we can tell that you have a lot of pursuits when you post 70+ messages in just one thread, on a subject that is irrelevant for your "playing style."
icarusethan
Active Member
Inno and beta's forum mods are two different thing
but if its that easy to throw the trust away I guess it should be thrown away anyway
Algona
Well-Known Member
Lessee if i got this striaght. You're telling a 25M RP player not to listen to a 30M RP player when you were a 40M RP player 6 months ago?
Right.
You, a player with less then 5% of the RP of the top players in the game think that a player's city reflects their knowledge of the game?
So you know 1/20th of the game? Gigapoint players should ignore your opinions?
Of course not. You're a good player with a good understanding of the game.
That extends to everyone in this discussion.
However, expertise in game does not equate to being a good or knowledgeable forum poster.
Inno and beta's forum mods are two different thing
Got any clue as to the difference between a mod and Community Manager?
Save your sneering at me for when you've played for six years, spent six years teaching players in game and on the forums and battled thousands of haters and poor thinkers.
Or in more colloquial terms, don't try to teach your grandfather how to suck eggs.
Johnny B. Goode
Well-Known Member
70+ messages over a 42 day period is less than 2 posts per day. Leaving plenty of time for real life.
SCollins23
Member
He made no reference to points. You're the only one who made a reference to points. He told to look at his city. And yes, you can judge a player's knowledge of the game by looking at their city (assuming you have an idea about how long they have been playing).
For the top posters of this forum, who seem to flood any meaningful thread ("dead horse thread?"), this is really not about the game. It's just a debate club. They could have picked gardening or knitting, but unfortunately it had to be FoE Forum.
Last edited by a moderator:
Taeshire
Member
Think you're spot on with this, it's not the game he enjoys it's repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeat repeating the same arguments over and over and over and over and over again. Its almost as if there's the belief that if they are repeated often enough they'll become hard fact rather than the opinion of a passive player with a passion for forum spam.
Last edited:
Johnny B. Goode
Well-Known Member
Off topic much? How come you guys always end up attacking me instead of what I say? Oh, yeah, because you're just here to whine and don't really have any facts on your side. It's almost as if you believe that if you repeat your whining often enough it will become valid rather than the sour grapes of players whose gravy train just ended.
Algona
Well-Known Member
Of course. Graphed Ranking Points tell a tale now unlike years past.
Very little progress for months or years then off to the races. It occurs after any given player acquires powered Arc then dives into 1.9 and a lot of GBG fighting.
Ir's far and away the fastest technique for accelerating city growth.
With the advent of GBG it became commonplace, you can see a lot of players in the last year who took that turn sometime mid 2020 or later.
That graph says a lot about the player. Are they the type who is going for the fastest growth, the most capability they can get out of the game? Or are they playing the game at a different pace?
You're a splendid example of this phenomenon Played about a year and you have capabilities undreamed of three years ago. The sky is no limit for you, you'll go much farther. You've done a great job building a massively productive city all in a year.
Job well done.
Do you think there is any chance that anyone who read the forum daily for the last couple years doesn't understand exactly how you've managed your spectacular growth? Even if they chose to forego it themselves?
Aside from the genius pioneers who originally figured out RQ farming and Arc leveling and 1.9 and all the other player created esoterica that define this game, this is not a massively difficult feat. It takes dedication and brains to do what you've done, but there are about 50K other players who have the same skillset.
So I'll stand by my assertion that every player in this thread has the play skill and knowledge to be in this thread.
My comment about time in game?
Incredibly pretentious and patronizing on my part, huh? Made you mad to have me belittle your and other opinions just because others haven't played as long or been on the forum as long.
A dirty trick on my part, but as Grampa 'Gona said after clobbering the stubborn mule with a 2x4, "Sometimes you got to get their attention."
Ir's far and away the fastest technique for accelerating city growth.
With the advent of GBG it became commonplace, you can see a lot of players in the last year who took that turn sometime mid 2020 or later.
That graph says a lot about the player. Are they the type who is going for the fastest growth, the most capability they can get out of the game? Or are they playing the game at a different pace?
You're a splendid example of this phenomenon Played about a year and you have capabilities undreamed of three years ago. The sky is no limit for you, you'll go much farther. You've done a great job building a massively productive city all in a year.
Job well done.
Do you think there is any chance that anyone who read the forum daily for the last couple years doesn't understand exactly how you've managed your spectacular growth? Even if they chose to forego it themselves?
Aside from the genius pioneers who originally figured out RQ farming and Arc leveling and 1.9 and all the other player created esoterica that define this game, this is not a massively difficult feat. It takes dedication and brains to do what you've done, but there are about 50K other players who have the same skillset.
So I'll stand by my assertion that every player in this thread has the play skill and knowledge to be in this thread.
My comment about time in game?
Incredibly pretentious and patronizing on my part, huh? Made you mad to have me belittle your and other opinions just because others haven't played as long or been on the forum as long.
A dirty trick on my part, but as Grampa 'Gona said after clobbering the stubborn mule with a 2x4, "Sometimes you got to get their attention."
So instead of deciding who should and should not be posting, let's discuss the issue at hand?
You remember? The Abort cap and the elephant, err, I mean, elegant way it was designed, tested, and implemented?
Lando6
Member
Pat, I want to sincerely thank you for posting constructive and thought-provoking responses to this otherwise chaotic thread. Others who want to say that this thread is a whine-fest hasn't fully appreciated some of the good responses that have been posted here.
Including Pats, other posts that come to mind (for those who actually care about having a constructive conversation) would include 23, 25, 29, 41, 80, 95, 170, 175, 199, 229, 232, 308, 372, 405, 428, 475, 480, 594, 596, 600, 652, 677.
- Status