2000 Aborted quest limit per day

[tr0p]

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:


...has already been taken into consideration, and they believe whatever they're projecting to lose is worth it.

That's great that they are in such a strong financial situation that they can afford to lose players who are capable of investing 5 digit figures into games. Good for them.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

That's great that they are in such a strong financial situation that they can afford to lose players who are capable of investing 5 digit figures into games. Good for them.

Oh, come on. Businesses make these kind of decisions all the time. And if they are a successful business, which InnoGames is, they look at all aspects of a change. Apparently, InnoGames (which actually knows who spends money on the game) believes that the potential number of big spenders who will actually quit over this is very small in the big picture. In addition to knowing who spends money on the game, Inno has the data to know how many players' play styles will be affected by this change. And they have stated it is very few relative to how many play the game overall.

Most players who don't frequent the Forum will never even know this change has been made, because they will never come close to the limit. And undoubtedly there will be some who will run up against the limit and simply adjust their play style in response.

Even though someone looking through this thread could get the impression that a large portion of the playing community knows about the change and is opposed to it, those of us who understand the dynamics of this Forum in the big picture of FoE know that this is deceiving. The vast majority of players either never visit the Forum, or only visit it when there is a Forum contest that they got a message about in-game. And if there had been a large number of players affected by this change and outraged by it, rest assured that you would have seen many more of them show up in this thread. That has happened several times over the years. The relatively small number of outraged players posting on this thread (and the fact that multiple threads about it are not showing up) tells me that Inno correctly assessed the ramifications of this change.

And also rest assured that there are players like myself who are pleased when exploits like this are capped or eliminated. I only wish Inno did it more often. I kind of look at them like cheat codes. Sure, they exist and they're part of the design of the game, but is someone really playing the game when they use cheat codes? As far as I know, FoE doesn't have cheat codes as such. And cheat codes, when you boil it down, are what you use when you don't want to bother with most of the mechanics of a game. That sounds a lot like heavy RQing to me. Bottom line to me is that they didn't eliminate RQ looping, they merely put a reasonable cap on it. Reasonable to the vast majority of players, that is.

 

[BigSpence4]

Oh, come on. Businesses make these kind of decisions all the time. And if they are a successful business, which InnoGames is, they look at all aspects of a change. Apparently, InnoGames (which actually knows who spends money on the game) believes that the potential number of big spenders who will actually quit over this is very small in the big picture. In addition to knowing who spends money on the game, Inno has the data to know how many players' play styles will be affected by this change. And they have stated it is very few relative to how many play the game overall.

Most players who don't frequent the Forum will never even know this change has been made, because they will never come close to the limit. And undoubtedly there will be some who will run up against the limit and simply adjust their play style in response.

Even though someone looking through this thread could get the impression that a large portion of the playing community knows about the change and is opposed to it, those of us who understand the dynamics of this Forum in the big picture of FoE know that this is deceiving. The vast majority of players either never visit the Forum, or only visit it when there is a Forum contest that they got a message about in-game. And if there had been a large number of players affected by this change and outraged by it, rest assured that you would have seen many more of them show up in this thread. That has happened several times over the years. The relatively small number of outraged players posting on this thread (and the fact that multiple threads about it are not showing up) tells me that Inno correctly assessed the ramifications of this change.

And also rest assured that there are players like myself who are pleased when exploits like this are capped or eliminated. I only wish Inno did it more often. I kind of look at them like cheat codes. Sure, they exist and they're part of the design of the game, but is someone really playing the game when they use cheat codes? As far as I know, FoE doesn't have cheat codes as such. And cheat codes, when you boil it down, are what you use when you don't want to bother with most of the mechanics of a game. That sounds a lot like heavy RQing to me. Bottom line to me is that they didn't eliminate RQ looping, they merely put a reasonable cap on it. Reasonable to the vast majority of players, that is.

There is nothing wrong with fixing exploits. However, fixing exploits shouldn't punish or limit the honest people. They could of found another way of doing it but they chose the easiest way on there end.

 

[lemur]

The CF based, "FPs Down the Drain Club" is accepting new members.

Consider the origin of those Forge Points. All player progress in Forge of Empires ultimately comes from one of two things — time or money. When a major playing style is thoroughly undermined, when one of the most important Great Buildings in the game is suddenly nerfed, it is that time or money that is being flushed.

So we just have to muddle on through.

Or we can do something else with our time and money. As I wrote yesterday, we are under no obligation to be codependent with the continual disrespect from InnoGames.

This isn't the first time the game has been modified ...

Your comment inaccurately minimizes the extent of the damage. When has a Great Building ever been so thoroughly nerfed before? The Château boost is now effective for only one hour per day.

 

[tr0p]

Oh, come on. Businesses make these kind of decisions all the time. And if they are a successful business, which InnoGames is, they look at all aspects of a change. Apparently, InnoGames (which actually knows who spends money on the game) believes that the potential number of big spenders who will actually quit over this is very small in the big picture. In addition to knowing who spends money on the game, Inno has the data to know how many players' play styles will be affected by this change. And they have stated it is very few relative to how many play the game overall.

Most players who don't frequent the Forum will never even know this change has been made, because they will never come close to the limit. And undoubtedly there will be some who will run up against the limit and simply adjust their play style in response.

Even though someone looking through this thread could get the impression that a large portion of the playing community knows about the change and is opposed to it, those of us who understand the dynamics of this Forum in the big picture of FoE know that this is deceiving. The vast majority of players either never visit the Forum, or only visit it when there is a Forum contest that they got a message about in-game. And if there had been a large number of players affected by this change and outraged by it, rest assured that you would have seen many more of them show up in this thread. That has happened several times over the years. The relatively small number of outraged players posting on this thread (and the fact that multiple threads about it are not showing up) tells me that Inno correctly assessed the ramifications of this change.

And also rest assured that there are players like myself who are pleased when exploits like this are capped or eliminated. I only wish Inno did it more often. I kind of look at them like cheat codes. Sure, they exist and they're part of the design of the game, but is someone really playing the game when they use cheat codes? As far as I know, FoE doesn't have cheat codes as such. And cheat codes, when you boil it down, are what you use when you don't want to bother with most of the mechanics of a game. That sounds a lot like heavy RQing to me. Bottom line to me is that they didn't eliminate RQ looping, they merely put a reasonable cap on it. Reasonable to the vast majority of players, that is.

That's great, but your feedback and opinions are irrelevant to the people who are trying to push back on the change since you don't work for InnoGames, and don't make decisions on their behalf. There are plenty of people posting their disdain for the change, and those posts are directed to Inno, not you. It's up to Inno, again, not you, to take the feedback of the players who are posting on the forums or opening up support tickets to communicate their feelings on this.

It's great you have an opinion, but whether you agree or disagree doesn't really matter.

The voice of the affected are what matter, and the influence they have towards a game designer matters. I've played enough games, seen enough vocal outrage from the players of other games which changed updates and fixes that a developer has put in place. This game is no different.

 

[Graviton]

Your comment inaccurately minimizes the extent of the damage. When has a Great Building ever been so thoroughly nerfed before? The Château boost is now effective for only one hour per day.

This is an example of what I was talking about: over the top. First, there is no "damage", not in any real sense of the word. Secondly, if anyone is minimizing the affect of this change it's Inno, when they say that they've analyzed this change and determined it's not going to affect the majority of play styles. And thirdly, I don't think there's as much minimization of this change as there is exaggeration of it.

I am sympathic to those who have developed their cities around heavy questing. I am sympathetic to those who say that Inno is wielding a club when a scalpel would suffice (athough, again, we aren't privy to the information they have, nor do we know what analysis they've done). But I am unsympathetic to hyperbole.

To wit:

Or we can do something else with our time and money. As I wrote yesterday, we are under no obligation to be codependent with the continual disrespect from InnoGames.

Then put your money where your mouth is. If I had a nickel for every time players threatened to quit (and you're on that list already) I'd be wealthy by now. Stop making empty threats and, if you really mean it, make Inno feel it by actually quitting and letting them know why.

That's great, but your feedback and opinions are irrelevant to the people who are trying to push back on the change since you don't work for InnoGames, and don't make decisions on their behalf. There are plenty of people posting their disdain for the change, and those posts are directed to Inno, not you. It's up to Inno, again, not you, to take the feedback of the players who are posting on the forums or opening up support tickets to communicate their feelings on this.

It's great you have an opinion, but whether you agree or disagree doesn't really matter.

The voice of the affected are what matter, and the influence they have towards a game designer matters. I've played enough games, seen enough vocal outrage from the players of other games which changed updates and fixes that a developer has put in place. This game is no different.

Well then, stop trying to shut him up. Ignore him and keep expressing your opinion to Inno.

 

[blodgaarm]

Sigh, as usual instead of a respons on this INNOGAMES forum, we have two or three members that have taken it upon themselves to justify this change. Doubtless these players have a level 10 Chateau and have never had a reason play in the heavy questing style. Some of us enjoy that style of play. I regularly have competitions with a few friends as to who can generate the most forge points/cloth/coins...in an hour and easily hit that mark in that time. Graviton and Johnny please ignore my posts as your opinion has no value to me. Your post only reflect that you are not impacted. Kind of like me boycotting footbal for their recent antics. I havent seen a game since the 80's so my boycott does not affect me.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Or we can do something else with our time and money. As I wrote yesterday, we are under no obligation to be codependent with the continual disrespect from InnoGames.

Honestly, lemur, you've complained constantly about this game for as long as I can remember. You aren't going to quit playing or you would have done it by now. You are the perfect example of empty threats to quit.

That's great, but your feedback and opinions are irrelevant to the people who are trying to push back on the change since you don't work for InnoGames, and don't make decisions on their behalf. There are plenty of people posting their disdain for the change, and those posts are directed to Inno, not you. It's up to Inno, again, not you, to take the feedback of the players who are posting on the forums or opening up support tickets to communicate their feelings on this.

Except this isn't a feedback thread, this is a discussion thread. Inno didn't ask for feedback about this change, which should tell you something.

It's great you have an opinion, but whether you agree or disagree doesn't really matter.

And this doesn't apply equally to you? Hint: Yes it does.

The voice of the affected are what matter, and the influence they have towards a game designer matters. I've played enough games, seen enough vocal outrage from the players of other games which changed updates and fixes that a developer has put in place. This game is no different.

Yeah, and I've been playing this game and frequenting the Forum for 6 years and I've seen other changes that sparked more outrage than this that didn't get reversed. So good luck with your outrage, I think Inno already took it into account before making the change.

Graviton and Johnny please ignore my posts as your opinion has no value to me.

Maybe not, but our opinions matter to Inno at least as much as yours do, so I'll keep posting when I feel the urge. Feel free to ignore my posts if that's how you have to deal with differing opinions.

 

[lemur]

First, there is no "damage", not in any real sense of the word.

You seem to be implying that the time and money spent by heavy-questing players is not real. Are you employing the "it's only a game" fallacy?

Secondly, if anyone is minimizing the affect of this change it's Inno ...

But I am replying to what you wrote. I cannot reply to what InnoGames wrote, because canned messages from Ingame Support are "private" communication that are forbidden by the Forum Rules. Do you see how that works?

And thirdly, I don't think there's as much minimization of this change as there is exaggeration of it.

Right ... it's only the most significant nerf of the Great Building in the history of the game. "Nothing to see here, folks! Move along!"

If I had a nickel for every time players threatened to quit ...

I already debunked your canard the last time I saw it:

https://forum.us.forgeofempires.com/index.php?threads/feedback-for-update-1-199.41189/page-4#post-350269

 

[lemur]

Inno didn't ask for feedback about this change, which should tell you something.

When is Inno ever interested in feedback about its changes? That should tell us something.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

When is Inno ever interested in feedback about its changes? That should tell us something.

Well, they have a feedback thread almost every time they announce changes, so...

I really have to laugh at being referred to by one player as Inno's "lap dog". Why? Because unlike the empty threats here, I have actually cut way back on my spending in this game due to the many changes over the last few years that I didn't like. The difference is that I didn't use the ridiculous tactic of trying to "blackmail" Inno into changing the game back to the way I liked it. I just reduced my spending and adjusted my game.

Here's an interesting question: Who is more likely to spend money on a game?
A) A player who has a way to acquire massive amounts of resources for free, or...
B) A player who doesn't have a way to acquire massive amounts of resources for free.
If your answer is "A", then I don't think you understand economics.

 

[lemur]

Well, they have a feedback thread ...

To what end? Is there evidence that the game programmers do anything with the comments here?

The fundamental problem here is that InnoGames is motivated entirely by profit. They are not unique in that respect. Capitalism plagues our entire society.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

To what end? Is there evidence that the game programmers do anything with the comments here?

Well, I've seen it over the years. Several times they have adjusted changes and referred to "receiving player feedback" among their reasons. That's as close to proof as you'll ever get unless you go to work for Inno and sit in on their meetings.

The fundamental problem here is that InnoGames is motivated entirely by profit. They are not unique in that respect. Capitalism plagues our entire society.

Well, I'm sure if enough players quit playing and/or spending money on FoE, the U.S. will switch to some other economic system to fix everything for you.

 

[Ebeondi Asi]

-

 

[Algona]

To what end? Is there evidence that the game programmers do anything with the comments here?

Yes.

There is a long list with the most recent additions being the removal of the 2 second lag and the auto zoom on collection.

----------

lemur, while I personally don't like this limit, I don't have enough data to judge personally whether this change is reasonable or more important, necessary.*

BECAUSE AS I'VE NOTED BEFORE

Some person has made the decisions that INNO won't talk to us about this.**

That decision has shaken my confidence in this game much more then all the design decisions and dumbass QA mistakes I've disagreed with over the years. It;s a lot harder to be a fanboi when you aren't worthy of being talked to.

My thoughts on this (which appear to have vanished over night) are that INNO is making a clear statement, that JBG and Graviton are right.

INNO doesn't think the 'non-normal' (heh) players who are affected by this limit are worth the expense of fixing the underlying problem.


*Yeah, it's INNO's game and it doesn't matter to anyone but me what my judgement is about the necessity of this change.

**I'm starting to wonder if this communication change is related to the recent acquisition of INNO. Not that we would be told given the change.

 

[Emberguard]

Except this isn't a feedback thread, this is a discussion thread.

Sure, but that doesn’t mean nothing is being passed on from it

Your comment inaccurately minimizes the extent of the damage. When has a Great Building ever been so thoroughly nerfed before? The Château boost is now effective for only one hour per day.

Ok, what’s your normal use of the Chateau? How much is it realistically effecting your normal game play?

 

[CDmark]

Ah, for the record, I do quest, LMA player, L90 CF (so 3000 goods, works for me). All my other GBs, military are 60+ so I am not crippled. I never planned to get the CF PM, L128, single questline bcs the cost versus the time was not worth it (note: the article in the forum is outdated, with HC and SMB + event buildings, the actual Lc and Ls numbers are lower, all ages). I did like doing quests when I want, without a limit. Now, I adjust my game, can do 250 a day instead. I do think the limit is a bit low. If it were 2x, better. 3x, really, probably ideal and the maximum (for me), should eliminate most all legitimate complaints.

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Only took 38 minutes of regular questing to hit the limit:



I wasn't even doing anything outside the ordinary, just some normal cycling while placing fp, along with a mix of ubq's. And it's only morning. When does this reset? Midnight server time? ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE.

 

[BruteForceAttack]

Only took 38 minutes of regular questing to hit the limit:

View attachment 18630

I wasn't even doing anything outside the ordinary, just some normal cycling while placing fp, along with a mix of ubq's. And it's only morning. When does this reset? Midnight server time? ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE.

Is it 2000 cumulative of different quests or one quest?

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

Not only this, but now my spink recurring quest slot (pictured above) has disappeared, so I can't even finish that quest even if I gain the supplies otherwise now.

edit - refreshing didn't bring it back.