2000 Aborted quest limit per day

[Sheriff Of Rottingham]

Wow, these are all perfectly legitimate ways of playing the game. These are not "schemes." Are you here to actually play the game or did you just sign up for an online discussion forum/debate club and the game came with it?

You can deny terminology all you want, but aborting literally THOUSANDS of quests to repeat one or two of them over and over and over and over and over and over is a "scheme" designed to accomplish a goal in a way that it wasn't originally intended by the designers. Gravy train is over. If you are that upset about it, see if they will compensate you for the cost of your Chateau if you delete it.

 

[Lando6]

You can deny terminology all you want, but aborting literally THOUSANDS of quests to repeat one or two of them over and over and over and over and over and over is a "scheme" designed to accomplish a goal in a way that it wasn't originally intended by the designers. Gravy train is over. If you are that upset about it, see if they will compensate you for the cost of your Chateau if you delete it.

Ok. We got it. We understand this is not the game style you have incorporated into your city (It's not mine either). However, that doesn't mean you need to bash others for figuring out different ways to play this game. You may think it's stupid or even idiotic, but I applaud those who came up with this style of gameplay. I would rather celebrate the fact that people have found so many ways to play this game, but now Inno has severely limited a particular game style. Inno can do whatever they want, it's their game, but tell me, what happens when they try to limit the game style you have incorporated because they have found another "exploit"? Stop fighting each other and fight the powers that be. United we stand, divided we fall. Let Inno hear us. If they care about the happiness of their players, eventually they will have to do something to stop the sounds of shuffling feet headed for the exit sign. Those feet have wallets.

 

[Sheriff Of Rottingham]

Ok. We got it. We understand this is not the game style you have incorporated into your city (It's not mine either). However, that doesn't mean you need to bash others for figuring out different ways to play this game. You may think it's stupid or even idiotic, but I applaud those who came up with this style of gameplay. I would rather celebrate the fact that people have found so many ways to play this game, but now Inno has severely limited a particular game style. Inno can do whatever they want, it's their game, but tell me, what happens when they try to limit the game style you have incorporated because they have found another "exploit"? Stop fighting each other and fight the powers that be. United we stand, divided we fall. Let Inno hear us. If they care about the happiness of their players, eventually they will have to do something to stop the sounds of shuffling feet headed for the exit sign. Those feet have wallets.

I'm not bashing people's play style, i'm calling out people that violate the TOS and then whine about not being able to abuse a mechanic anymore. Inno can plug any and all of their exploits, and I will cheer all of them. They should have done it long ago. I play the game the way they intended it to be played. I don't use bots, scripts, abuse exploits, or do anything thousands and thousands of times over and over knowing full well they didn't intend us to do that. Don't believe me? Check my stats. I don't blame anyone for doing things that are INSIDE THE RULES, b/c Inno made it possible, and it isn't a TOS violation. But I won't lose sleep over the fact that you can't get away with it anymore. This topic is a dead horse, i'm done participating.

 

[Algona]

If you look at the post

You missed my point.

I made no reference to your opinion on either thread. I noted a disparity.

One thread you reject an argument because they don't believe what INNO says.

In another thread you reject what INNO says and insist that your argument is valid.

Sauce, goose, gander.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

You missed my point.

I made no reference to your opinion on either thread. I noted a disparity.

One thread you reject an argument because they don't believe what INNO says.

In another thread you reject what INNO says and insist that your argument is valid.

Sauce, goose, gander.

I get your point, but there is context to the two threads (and subjects) that is important in understanding why it is not a contradiction. For players that have been around long enough, it is understood (or should be) that Anwar's untimely death is the reason GvG went stagnant (from a development standpoint.) For those players who haven't been around long enough to know the story, it is just simpler for Inno to say "we can't port it" than to go to the effort to explain the history behind that true but incomplete statement. That's why I said that porting was just an excuse. As I said above, that was probably not the right word to use. Maybe I should have said that porting is a crutch that Inno uses to avoid explaining the long answer of why it can't/won't be ported. Here, players are claiming that Inno hasn't said anything about the abort limit or the reason for it. That is simply not true. Players just don't want to accept the reason Inno gave because it means that their playstyle will be limited instead of unlimited like it has been. They speculate that there is another, deeper reason without any evidence of one. Anwar's death, and its effect on the development (or lack thereof) of GvG is an accepted fact.

 

[Agent327]

Inno can do whatever they want, it's their game, but tell me, what happens when they try to limit the game style you have incorporated because they have found another "exploit"? Stop fighting each other and fight the powers that be. United we stand, divided we fall. Let Inno hear us. If they care about the happiness of their players, eventually they will have to do something to stop the sounds of shuffling feet headed for the exit sign. Those feet have wallets.

As player, I like to think I play the game the way it is intended. I do not camp. Never have. I have a level 119 CF. I do 3 RQ's, but just when they come up. I do not abort RQ's endlessly just to fill my day. GvG I sometimes pick up a sector when I have to do some fights. I do not use GvG to score points. My Guild is active in GBG, but we do not make any agreements with other Guilds. We do what we can. Most times in Diamond where we can do little, sometimes in Platinum where we dominate the map and get back to Diamond right away. I am really curious when you think Inno will be limiting my playstyle.

 

[Just An Observer]

Agent, why does a strong player like you play in a weak (for GBG) guild? I am in a Big Dog guild and it is great! I also see some other highly rated players in weak (for GBG) guilds so I wonder why that is? This is not a snarky question or personal attack by the way. I am just curious as to why strong players wind up in such poor performing guilds when GBG is involved?

 

[Lando6]

I play the game the way they intended it to be played.

As player, I like to think I play the game the way it is intended.

So does this mean you know exactly how Inno intended people to play this game? Please don't flatter yourself. I want you to show me that Inno said there are particular ways they intended this game to be played. Otherwise, your comments are baseless and a detraction from the issue at hand. Agent, I doubt Inno will touch your "playstyle" because it does not seem to be one (Although, I highly doubt you painted an accurate picture of your "playstyle" given the fact you have a CF 119. Those just don't happen by accident). Why are you so against people strategizing in this game and finding creative ways to excel?
Agent, I'm not taking the bait about "your playstyle". You're just trying detract from the issue and trying to further divide players instead of unite.

 

[Agent327]

Agent, why does a strong player like you play in a weak (for GBG) guild? I am in a Big Dog guild and it is great! I also see some other highly rated players in weak (for GBG) guilds so I wonder why that is? This is not a snarky question or personal attack by the way. I am just curious as to why strong players wind up in such poor performing guilds when GBG is involved?

When I started to play I joined a Guild. I worked my way up in the Guild and became a leader, just to wake up one morning to notice the founder had pulled the plug. So we picked up the pieces and started a new guild with the old members. Then the same thing happened again. To many founders and one pulled the plug again. Third time was lucky. I have been in that guild ever since. Other founders left the game, so now I am the only one. I could leave, but why? It would be leaving behind what I have helped building, just to participate in the ratrace of another guild. Even in a bad GBG season I can do 1000 fights. I can live with that. I can play my game. I do not want to be part of all sort of agreements with Guilds that backstab you the next round. We are fine with how we perform as a Guild.

So does this mean you know exactly how Inno intended people to play this game?

It really help if you read what I wrote. I said I think, not I know!

Although, I highly doubt you painted an accurate picture of your "playstyle" given the fact you have a CF 119. Those just don't happen by accident.

Correct it didn't. Part of it is that I am like a magpie that loves those shiny diamonds. The 40 goods also come in handy, but not enough to start clicking like crazy to get them. Got over 100.000 of each SAM good without doing that, so no need to rush. Other part is that I have to spend my fp's anyhow. Attack GB's came first. Changed that momentairy for the Arc and after that back to attack. When that was finished why not CF.

Why are you so against people strategizing in this game and finding creative ways to excel?

Cause most of those creative ways are bordering on cheating.

Agent, I'm not taking the bait about "your playstyle". You're just trying detract from the issue and trying to further divide players instead of unite.

I play this game just like you do. Why should I unite or help you unite others for what I am against as a player?

 

[SCollins23]

Hey guys, I have detected some new exploits!

Some people are using something called swap threads, which allow both parties to collect BPs, illegitimately! I NEVER USE THEM, THEREFORE IT'S BORDERLINE CHEATING. I'd like to think Inno didn't intend this game to be played THIS WAY. Players CREATED swap threads THEMSELVES. I'll write a 10,000 word essay about this tomorrow. I have the time, because I don't do GBG, GvG, settlements, etc. So I post on the forum. THIS IS MORE FUN!!!!

Also, some lower era players got this GB called Cape Canaveral. That's ALREADY an exploit, but to make it worse, they created a perpetual motion machine. They ended up getting more FPs than they invested!! BORDERLINE CHEATING. I think.

There are many more exploits I have detected. It's a gravy train. The game is not supposed to be played like this. I have been playing this game since 1967.

This thread is a dead horse, everybody STOP commenting and play it the way I play!! Or delete your GBs and ask Inno to give you your FPs back!!!

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Hey guys, I have detected some new exploits!

Some people are using something called swap threads, which allow both parties to collect BPs, illegitimately! I NEVER USE THEM, THEREFORE IT'S BORDERLINE CHEATING. I'd like to think Inno didn't intend this game to be played THIS WAY. Players CREATED swap threads THEMSELVES. I'll write a 10,000 word essay about this tomorrow. I have the time, because I don't do GBG, GvG, settlements, etc. So I post on the forum. THIS IS MORE FUN!!!!

Also, some lower era players got this GB called Cape Canaveral. That's ALREADY an exploit, but to make it worse, they created a perpetual motion machine. They ended up getting more FPs than they invested!! BORDERLINE CHEATING. I think.

There are many more exploits I have detected. It's a gravy train. The game is not supposed to be played like this. I have been playing this game since 1967.

This thread is a dead horse, everybody STOP commenting and play it the way I play!! Or delete your GBs and ask Inno to give you your FPs back!!!

An attempt at comedy? Don't quit your day job.

 

[Agent327]

Hey guys, I have detected some new exploits!

Some people are using something called swap threads, which allow both parties to collect BPs, illegitimately! I NEVER USE THEM, THEREFORE IT'S BORDERLINE CHEATING. I'd like to think Inno didn't intend this game to be played THIS WAY. Players CREATED swap threads THEMSELVES. I'll write a 10,000 word essay about this tomorrow. I have the time, because I don't do GBG, GvG, settlements, etc. So I post on the forum. THIS IS MORE FUN!!!!

Also, some lower era players got this GB called Cape Canaveral. That's ALREADY an exploit, but to make it worse, they created a perpetual motion machine. They ended up getting more FPs than they invested!! BORDERLINE CHEATING. I think.

There are many more exploits I have detected. It's a gravy train. The game is not supposed to be played like this. I have been playing this game since 1967.

This thread is a dead horse, everybody STOP commenting and play it the way I play!! Or delete your GBs and ask Inno to give you your FPs back!!!

Really original!

Hey guys, I have detected an exploit! Certain players have leveled their Arcs beyond lvl 80, and by using 1.9 threads, they have effectively created a perpetual motion machine. Also think about the burden they create on Inno servers! Inno should implement a 5000 FPs daily investment limit. Vast majority of players don't invest beyond that. Certain players spend all day investing FPs in their personal 1.9/1.95 threads. Who does that? I don't. It's clearly very boring. It's a gravy train. Delete their Arcs and give them their FPs. Inno can do whatever it wants.

You could try it a third time, but I doubt it will ever be as funny as you think it is.

 

[r21r]

@Agent327 by all means, reading your ingame story really touched my heart.
to all but 1 i can't agree, everything that is within the game rules, it is pretty much intented, or at least, it is not un-intented as you like to think.

PS you could play some more instead of posting here - wouldn't hurt you unless you really love the forums more than the game.

with love - your beloved buddy =)

 

[CrabbyOldMan]

Maybe I am dense but I am a little confused.
The chateau bonus is a percentage increase in rewards from quests. Not just event quests, not just storyline quests, but ALL quests. Recurring quests are just that, quests that occur over and over and over again. The option to abort quests is also part of the quest menu. So you can abort the quests that you ddon't want to do, for the ones you do want to do.
All of these things are legitimate parts of the game and have been for years. Doing RQ"s is not exploiting the game. nor abusing it. I have been enjoying the rewards from them for years. And no, I don't sit here all day, hour after hour, aborting quests. I doubt that anyone does. Go ahead and try it. After a couple hours of that you will be ready to quit the game lol.
Then we have so called players like Johnny B. Goode who believe they are the supreme arbiter on how to play the game. I knew him when he was Stephen Longshanks 5 1/2 years ago. He didn't get the game then and he doesn't get it now
Peace out

 

[CrabbyOldMan]

So that may be the worst analogy I've ever seen on the Forum. It would make more sense if your analogy said the lottery was ending (from your viewpoint) or that the prizes were being reduced going forward (realistically speaking).

If you step back and look at who is to blame for players who have dedicated their cities to heavy RQ looping, it isn't Inno. Players are always looking for "get rich quick" schemes. GvG farming for points, hyper leveling Arcs, sector swapping in GBG, hyper leveling CF/heavy RQ looping. All player constructs. All results of players looking for shortcuts to game riches. So the players that discovered it on their own have no one else but themselves to blame for putting all their eggs in one basket, so to speak. And if you were advised by another player that this was the way to play, then that player (and yourself for listening) is responsible, not Inno.

If you want a better analogy, think of FoE as running a marathon. Many players over the years have used that comparison. Over the course of running the marathon, however, some players notice a side street that cuts a mile off the length of the marathon. They decide to take it. They don't get caught. So they use it again next race. And again. And then other runners ask for their advice in running the marathon and are told about the shortcut (which is exactly what an exploit is), and they start taking it. Then, the race organizers/designers notice that the runners' race times overall are much faster than they used to be (server load comes to Inno's attention). So they block off the shortcut. Now all the runners who were using the shortcut start complaining that it isn't fair. They cite the fact that the race organizers didn't catch the shortcut at first as a reason why they should still be able to use it. Then, when other runners who never used the shortcut start speaking up, the shortcut runners try to tell them that they shouldn't say anything because they never used the shortcut and the issue doesn't affect them.

All are legitimate activities. Just like your numerous postings here in an attempt to raise your reaction score. You sucked at the game in Lords of the Realm, and you suck at it now, that\s why you spend your time here instead of actually playing the game
Oh, you are in iron age. on all worlds. Wow, you really do suck at this game

 

[timrwild]

They said they were implementing an abort limit on RQs to deal with an exploit.

Saying that they're trying to deal with an exploit is not remotely the same thing as saying why they chose this specific solution when plenty of others would do just as well. It also doesn't address plenty of other "exploits" that still exist in the game. Why was this one chosen? The fact that they didn't adjust the abort limit based on age gives more credence to the idea that the bigger issue is server resources, and not the infinite goods/FP, and that they're calling the goods/FP production an "exploit" as an excuse to cut it off when there are other areas of the game that are a bigger concern for goods/FP abuse.

If you want a "solution" implemented, it has to satisfy FoE's developers.

The reason they picked this "solution" instead of a dozen others is because it's easy. It's a quick fix. Picking the quick fix over an actual solution that works long term is poor management. If the reason why they picked this exploit is because of the impact to their servers, they're just kicking the can down the road, and it's going to bite them sooner or later. I guarantee it.

I don't recall calling anyone stupid, so I think you're reading that into posts...or you're just saying that for effect, which is more likely. As to your "concerns" being legitimate...they aren't really concerns, they're complaints.

You and a few others have been incredibly dismissive of all our "complaints" as if they're not legitimate, that we don't know what we're talking about. No one has taken an issue with Inno saying they're trying to deal with an exploit. The argument is that they've done a poor/incomplete job of addressing exploits. Since this decision to not address the actual issue is going to come back to hurt Inno in the future, it actually is a concern. For them as a company. For the future of the game. It's not a long term solution and if they keep it up, they're not going to be here in 5-10 years.

If you're not stupid, it's clear to you, too.

Ok, now you actually are calling me stupid

I'm calling out people that violate the TOS

There's been one person who allegedly admitted that, and there were immediately calls to delete this entire thread. Not cool.

Aborting literally THOUSANDS of quests to repeat one or two of them over and over and over and over and over and over is a "scheme" designed to accomplish a goal in a way that it wasn't originally intended by the designers.

I play the game the way they intended it to be played.

So you have no creativity? Did you ask the designers how they intended RQs to work when they were first introduced to the game? The only reason games continue to be played year after year, decades even, is because people keep coming up with new ways to play the game. Playing a game the way it was intended to be played kills the game. If it's the same game year after year, people get bored of it and stop playing. Yes, there are events every month or so, but those have been the same thing over and over to the point where there's no more strategy involved. The game is very formulaic. Games rely on people to push the boundaries and innovate to keep them interesting. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with doing the same thing year after year. I've never bashed any play style. If you're happy with how you're currently playing the game and what you get out of it? That's great. Just don't tell me what I can and can't do as long as I stay with TOS. If you want to get to the end of the Tech tree and expend every resource you have to get there? Good for you. Just don't criticize me for staying in Iron for a year or two to build up resources and help those around me.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

Agent, why does a strong player like you play in a weak (for GBG) guild? I am in a Big Dog guild and it is great! I also see some other highly rated players in weak (for GBG) guilds so I wonder why that is? This is not a snarky question or personal attack by the way. I am just curious as to why strong players wind up in such poor performing guilds when GBG is involved?

For me, it's time and interest. Being in a Top Dog guild means being on when a sector is available, not taking available sectors when I'm on. Being in a Platinum/Diamond guild means even when we have a farming agreement, I can generally fight as much as I want, whenever I want.

I also don't have the pressure of living up to the guild's standards, or hearing grief when I don't. I play far below my city's capacity because I'm not that interested in spending my day in GBG. After a while, the rewards just aren't that interesting and 5 SoHs is about the limit I'm ever putting down.

 

[Johnny B. Goode]

Doing RQ"s is not exploiting the game. nor abusing it.

Apparently, Inno (you know, the creators of the game) disagrees.

Then we have so called players like Johnny B. Goode who believe they are the supreme arbiter on how to play the game. I knew him when he was Stephen Longshanks 5 1/2 years ago. He didn't get the game then and he doesn't get it now

Nope. Players decide how they should play the game within what Inno allows. That now includes an abort limit. Their decision, not mine. And I was Stephen Longshanks just a few weeks ago as well as 6+ years ago. And I get the game. I just don't play it the way you do. That says nothing about my understanding of the game, it just speaks to what I feel like doing within the parameters that Inno sets.

You sucked at the game in Lords of the Realm, and you suck at it now, that\s why you spend your time here instead of actually playing the game
Oh, you are in iron age. on all worlds. Wow, you really do suck at this game

Is that one of the dozens of guilds I've been a part of? That one seems to me to be one of those that couldn't make up its mind on what it was going to do in GvG when I was in it. You know, one of those that would have you build up for a GvG campaign on a certain map, then change their minds after you redesigned your city. Of course, that was years ago, maybe they "get" the game now.
And your info is incorrect on my cities. I have one in SAM, two in FE, one in TE, one in HMA, one in EMA, and then 21 in Iron Age. Just to be clear. I have also deleted a few dozen cities over the years, some as far along as Progressive Era. I also have led, or helped lead, several guilds over those 6+ years. I don't now because I play how I want, not how other players think I should.

Saying that they're trying to deal with an exploit is not remotely the same thing as saying why they chose this specific solution when plenty of others would do just as well.

You think that Inno should share their entire thinking process with all changes to the game, including why they rejected other solutions that you (in your infinite wisdom, knowing the entirety of the big picture) believe would do "just as well"? Good luck getting any gaming company to do that.

The reason they picked this "solution" instead of a dozen others is because it's easy.

You have no idea if that's true. That is your spin on it simply because you don't like what they did.

You and a few others have been incredibly dismissive of all our "complaints" as if they're not legitimate, that we don't know what we're talking about.

When you're talking about the impact the change has had on your game, you know what you're talking about. When you stray into speculating on some reason other than the one stated as to why Inno did what they did, you don't. When you or others start throwing around "facts" that aren't supported by data, you don't.

Ok, now you actually are calling me stupid

Actually, you're probably just willfully ignorant. That's when someone dismisses facts in evidence because those facts don't fit their agenda.

There's been one person who allegedly admitted that, and there were immediately calls to delete this entire thread. Not cool.

I believe there was one "call" to close the thread. There may have been several calls for Inno to address the admission of cheating.

 

[Just An Observer]

When I started to play I joined a Guild. I worked my way up in the Guild and became a leader, just to wake up one morning to notice the founder had pulled the plug. So we picked up the pieces and started a new guild with the old members. Then the same thing happened again. To many founders and one pulled the plug again. Third time was lucky. I have been in that guild ever since. Other founders left the game, so now I am the only one. I could leave, but why? It would be leaving behind what I have helped building, just to participate in the ratrace of another guild. Even in a bad GBG season I can do 1000 fights. I can live with that. I can play my game. I do not want to be part of all sort of agreements with Guilds that backstab you the next round. We are fine with how we perform as a Guild.



It really help if you read what I wrote. I said I think, not I know!



Correct it didn't. Part of it is that I am like a magpie that loves those shiny diamonds. The 40 goods also come in handy, but not enough to start clicking like crazy to get them. Got over 100.000 of each SAM good without doing that, so no need to rush. Other part is that I have to spend my fp's anyhow. Attack GB's came first. Changed that momentairy for the Arc and after that back to attack. When that was finished why not CF.



Cause most of those creative ways are bordering on cheating.



I play this game just like you do. Why should I unite or help you unite others for what I am against as a player?

Having seen so many guilds with enough high level players who could do well in GBG wind up MIA when a season is ongoing led me to wonder why these players do not step up and compete when their chances are actually decent. Thank you for providing some insight into this Agent as well as Razorback.

 

[CDmark]

3/5 official statement - the 2 sec delay
To provide some context, for transparency purposes, we have been collecting feedback on quest abort exploits, and trying to figure out a way to tackle this. This week, we moved forward with an update that sets a limit on Quest Aborts to prevent this exploit, and the impact it has on our servers.
Unfortunately, as a byproduct, there was a technical issue that caused a slowdown during reoccurring quests. Due to unexpected circumstances, this then led to many players believing this was an intended feature.

For the record, I was still able to do over 2000 aborts, I know this bcs I did about 500 UBQs, slowly, at least 2 times. So, there was never a 2000 abort limit active. Not sure what "limit" they actually imposed, but it is transparent, they didnt mean to have the 2 sec delay. Fine.

3/15 official statement -
We have fixed an exploit that allowed players to generate endless coins and supplies.

Ok, sticking with the transparency theme, the ONLY exploit that was of concern, was "endless coin and supplies" per Inno.

The only place where you can get endless "coins and supplies", SAAB RQ. Some post that a Perpetual Motion CF makes unlimited resources. It does not, it is governed by a 24 hour clock and you have to PAY coins and supplies. So, keeping in context with unlimited coins and supplies, please present YOUR CALCULATIONS for players using the UBQ, not a blanket "Unlimited" without doing the math.
Now, you do make goods and FPs, that was never mentioned by Inno but. lets kick this one around too, since it seems people love to mention it.
3000 UBQs (can only be done by a bot, but this is the extreme case) = 1050 FP, 31500 goods (used CF L78, Iron Age), NET GAIN in coins and supplies, 195,000 each (far from unlimited). I am not saying the 31,500 goods is fair, it is the number. Higher ages/eras require a higher CF. until colonial, where there is a significant jump in CF level.
PM CF - 73-IA, 116-EMA, 147-HMA, 128-LMA then the jump Colonial-215, lowest level CF for PM after that, 167-PME and TE
none of these produce unlimited coins and supplies
L2s values are lower BUT, there is no way to program a bot to know, it is bot-proof, has to be done by hand o know when to collect the residual RQ..

To be transparent, all those values were determined pre HC. Most all of the lower ages are supplies limited, the HC changed that. Those Ls values will actually be a bit lower, I didn't calculated exactly because it will depend on the coin revenue. One thing is for sure, the impact of the HC decreases with increasing age/era. You can actually generate the values of a CF and possibly CoA, to generate the appropriate coin needed, along with a L58 HC. I use L58 bcs it is the last level many do, you get the extra spoils of war, #9. But, it can be optimized along with CF/CoA and city coin and supplies to produce a lower Ls value for IA to LMA. Col and above, this scenario is relatively, insignificant, TO DO UBQs.

Note, this requires doing nothing but UBQs and it would have to be done automatically, which I agree, is not fair and against the rules.
Another Note: The PM CF article on this forum was written 10/2018 so, now it is an issue?

Where can I get that many FPs? Hmm, GBG comes to mind. To get 1000 FP in GBG you need to do 606 battles a day for 1000 FP, basis, 50% rewards, of the 50% rewards, 33% are 10 FP packs. Goods would be 750 (5% of the rewards), 75 units (5% of the rewards), and 150 diamonds (2% of rewards). Time required, 2 hours maximum, given the way guilds set up farming. I did it the other day, since I couldn't do RQs. My cost was 15 units which I replaced easily via unit rewards.

So, for me, I have mentioned 4000 aborts would cover most of my needs, 6000 aborts, I cant see doing that many, daily, maybe once in a while.

OK, DIAMOND farms, fair? they are within the rules, Exploit? I have nothing against diamond farmers, I dont have any farms but I know a few players that make 750 to 1000 diamonds a day.