• Dear forum reader,
    To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can
    REGISTER HERE!
    Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
  • We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply
  • Forum Contests

    Won't you join us for out latest contest?
    You can check out the newest one here.
  • Jupiter Moon Era now taking passengers!


    Our latest era, Jupiter Moon is soon to be ready to explore! Read all about it here!

Update 1.201 Feedback

Behelzebhu

Private
Not broken. Players taking advantage of a broken mechanic for a long period of time, looks more like players whining and complaining that they cannot use their version of cheating (which a broken mechanic is often considered to be). If anything, the 2000 limit should be lowered OR better yet, leave the 2000 limit alone and only reset it with the regular weekly reset.
Let me know if you feel the same when your guild cant afford sieges for gbg or gvg, or even open GE; noone takes your trades for negos in ge-gbg, can´t trade down or up to prepare move age cause nobody has enough goods, or to complete the quests in events,



One of my daily quests is "Complete 1 other quests."

Guess what! ;) Can't do that. So there go the daily quests as well.
Wow, didnt even thought of that one;
Yep, the list of problems caused by this just getting bigger
 
I like my high level CF's. I get a lot of nice reward boosts from them, even if there's now a quest abort limit. I'll probably never reach that limit anyway. I have more enjoyable things to do in the game than looping RQ's all day long.
 
Last edited:
Let me know if you feel the same when your guild cant afford sieges for gbg or gvg, or even open GE; noone takes your trades for negos in ge-gbg, can´t trade down or up to prepare move age cause nobody has enough goods, or to complete the quests in events,
Rarely a problem. Treasury gets filled sufficiently from a lot of high level Arcs in the guild, and trades flow smoothly most of the time. No need for any heavy RQ loopers in the guild to keep it sustainable.
 
Last edited:

Plankt0n

Private
Dear Inno,


Implementing an abort restriction (or at least one at as little of 2000 aborts, which equates to around a couple hundred quests. Nudging 300 in lower eras. Or under an hours worth) just screws over the players that have spent thousands of FPs in their CF and hundreds of hours into their city development around this playstyle. If it really was breaking game balance, then Inno, a message stating so would have been appreciated and would definitely reduced some of the kick back you have received. This was never an issue, and was even encouraged, in the past.
As it has been pointed out, the developers have a right to change their game. But common curtesy and respect would indicate that giving a heads up to a changing mentality, and/or an affected game balance, would be a baseline to work from as developers. Otherwise you only alienate your players. You indirectly call your players time worthless and forgettable. We are not strangers on the street with no invested interest. We are the people that play your game and pay your bills through voluntary purchases. (An example of how this can affect your income - I stopped buying diamonds in August last year when you changed the capacity of the guild contribution list without notice. This meant I had no opportunity to gather the data before it got lost. If people get pissed off at you, they will stop supporting you.)

On that note, this abort limit makes even less sense in regards to diamond spending's and GBG performance. If you are in an active GBG guild, thousands of diamonds can be spent in a couple of hours to speed up camps, traps, forts, etc. In my guild, we have had multiple people spend tens of thousands of diamonds in a particularly intense season. This was only made possible because we had the goods to spend on these buildings. Goods produced from dedicated players cycling RQs and trading heaps of goods to required eras. The GBG model even seems to encourage RQ goods production, due to the potentially limitless spending of GBG buildings. (Or maybe it was made to counter RQ production? In which case, an appropriate adjustment needs to be promised and/or implemented, if this RQ change is to be permanent.)
An especially ruthless strategy in GBG can see 9 buildings built on a single sector in 5 minutes. 3 camps, 3 traps, 3 forts. 27,000 goods and 450 diamonds. On a single sector! There isn't any goods production in the game, outside of RQs, that can make this type of spending possible. And this type of capability in a guild encourages people to spend more diamonds to heal troops to keep fighting despite the attrition, to diamond that extra negotiation chance and squeeze out that little more in a race. While, yes, this only applies to the top 10 guilds in a server, or diamond league guilds, this is a fault of high building costs and limited sufficient production methods. Only those who where willing to dedicate their cities and game time to helping their guilds with goods production where able to bring the most out of GBG. Now that is being severely limited to the point of basically being taken away?

(I am not going to talk about any GvG problems this causes. For your sake, Inno.)

I know of several people that have said they are going to quit because they no longer have an infinite (rewarding) cycle that they can sink their time into. One of the better parts of the game for those stuck at home sick, retired with nothing to do, in a wheelchair with restricted movement/severe injuries, etc, was that they had a loop they could forget themselves into. And this loop would reward them for the time invested, or allow them to help their guild with goods, medals and FPs. With 2000 aborts, your game losses that loop and the interest of some of these dedicated/hardcore players. The players that will spend too much time on the game. Your game may make a quick dollar on casual players, on those that spend money on a one time purchase and quit the game the next day, but it thrives on the hardcore. If the issue is your hardcore player base and those 'long term investments' are dwindling, this restriction is only going to make the issue worse.

Inno, it seems that those making the decisions are failing to take in the big picture and consider all the effects. I highly advise that you take in a group of players that can help you see angles you are failing to spot on your own. Or start utilising the beta to a more efficient extent. Developers no longer know the most about, or are the best at, their own game. It has been this way for years, across all platforms and genres. And the recent decisions about RQs further confirm this knowledge. Until you explain what you are trying to achieve, you are going to annoy players, and be annoyed by the feedback they are giving you. I will note that this could still happen after you explain, but it will be about a disagreement in regards to the bigger goal and not as a result of the symptoms.
I know which one I would rather put up with.


Warm Regards,

Plankt0n - Korch
 

Knight of ICE

FoE Team
Forum Moderator
As it has been pointed out, the developers have a right to change their game. But common curtesy and respect would indicate that giving a heads up to a changing mentality, and/or an affected game balance, would be a baseline to work from as developers.

https://forum.en.forgeofempires.com...-experienced-during-reoccurring-quests.44153/

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.
 

Ati2

Legend
https://forum.en.forgeofempires.com...-experienced-during-reoccurring-quests.44153/

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.
What I still don't get is why this is considered an exploit. This is the purpose of CF. It was designed for this. Years ago. Nothing changed. How did it become an exploit, all of a sudden?

When will Inno, out of the blue, suddenly realize that people are making FPs with the Arc, and put a limit on the number of FPs you can gain from the Arc per day?
 

Jungkook-

Lieutenant
What I still don't get is why this is considered an exploit. This is the purpose of CF. It was designed for this. Years ago. Nothing changed. How did it become an exploit, all of a sudden?

When will Inno, out of the blue, suddenly realize that people are making FPs with the Arc, and put a limit on the number of FPs you can gain from the Arc per day?
totaly agree with you Ati

i guess FOE considers everything that doesn't go the way they could have thought of. if CF's an exploit, why havent arc and 1.9 not banned?
 

Jungkook-

Lieutenant
i've been building up my CF for ages and costed numerous fps...and now i hear quests absortable limited
makes all my effort on it as NOTHING lol
 

Ati2

Legend
i've been building up my CF for ages and costed numerous fps...and now i hear quests absortable limited
makes all my effort on it as NOTHING lol
I even spent a ton of diamonds on it to get all the prints I needed. I'm regretting spending money on it at this point. With a single change, they made the entire strategy I've been working on for three years, completely worthless.
 

Knight of ICE

FoE Team
Forum Moderator
What I still don't get is why this is considered an exploit. This is the purpose of CF. It was designed for this. Years ago. Nothing changed. How did it become an exploit, all of a sudden?

Being able to do endless UBQ's without any costs could be considered as an exploit. They did remove it from the RQ's in later ages for a reason. Why it has taken so long would be guessing. Probably cause the complaints finally got to them.

When CF was designed this was not possible. It became possible when the cap on GB levels was removed.

When will Inno, out of the blue, suddenly realize that people are making FPs with the Arc, and put a limit on the number of FPs you can gain from the Arc per day?

They are not putting a limit on a GB with this. CF is not nerfed. Number of quests you can do is.
 

r21r

Major-General
limit is short , at least for me who have plenty of time doing quests.
on the second city i made, i quitted the gbg farming and made a CF instead, which was pretty much like a 24/7 gold league map in FP's means.
 

Knight of ICE

FoE Team
Forum Moderator
Limiting the number of daily GB investments to ten would not nerf the Arc either.

I hope you see my point.

I do see your point, but I have a different view on it. This is only guessing of course, but this is how I see it.

Through the ages RQ's have always been the same. Like Event quests, age up and the numbers change, but not the quests. I think they decided to come up with new quests for SAM, to spice things up a little. As a result of that the UBQ got cancelled resulting in an uproar similar to this with a lot of mad players. That must have made them look at the UBQ's with as a result they have decided to make a change to it. Players should be careful what they ask for. The result can be unexpected.
 

Bretonas

Private
Being able to do endless UBQ's without any costs could be considered as an exploit. They did remove it from the RQ's in later ages for a reason. Why it has taken so long would be guessing. Probably cause the complaints finally got to them.

The UBQs exist in every era apart apart from SAAB (and SAV). But they instead have a RQ to defeat a large army which is exploited even worse (just look at the daily fight counter of some players on Fel Dranghyr).
 

Plankt0n

Private
https://forum.en.forgeofempires.com...-experienced-during-reoccurring-quests.44153/

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.
If that announcement was for transparency purposes, why was it only available for those that are regular visitors on this forum?
I was not even aware that message existed until it was first linked in this thread. The least that could have been done is that message being shared in the same manner other changes and updates are. On the front page of the log in screen until the next update takes it spot. When I last contacted support about the slow down, a few days before that message, they were all very secretive about it and told me the exact opposite of that message. While that could fall under 'unexpected circumstances' stated in the third paragraph, no effort was put forward to correct that mistake (other then a potential hidden message from an Inno forum bot. That unexpected circumstances could be referring to something completely different). Not very transparent in my books.
 

Ati2

Legend
Through the ages RQ's have always been the same. Like Event quests, age up and the numbers change, but not the quests. I think they decided to come up with new quests for SAM, to spice things up a little. As a result of that the UBQ got cancelled resulting in an uproar similar to this with a lot of mad players. That must have made them look at the UBQ's with as a result they have decided to make a change to it. Players should be careful what they ask for. The result can be unexpected.
This would mean that even though this has been how it worked from the very beginning, and there are multiple guides online on what levels to reach, what to build, what not to attack, Inno was—for several years!—not aware of how their own game works.

If that's the case, then this decision is even worse. This means that because of their own incompetence, they allowed people to give them money in hopes that they would be able to continue playing like this, and when enough people gave them money, they finally looked at how these paying customers actually played, and then decided to not allow that game style anymore. I'm totally aware that the T&C say Inno can change the game in any way at any time, so legally it's all fine. But morally, not so much.
 

Ati2

Legend
The UBQs exist in every era apart apart from SAAB (and SAV). But they instead have a RQ to defeat a large army which is exploited even worse (just look at the daily fight counter of some players on Fel Dranghyr).
Exactly. If anything, their new additions made the game worse. Not how it's been for years.
 

Knight of ICE

FoE Team
Forum Moderator
If that announcement was for transparency purposes, why was it only available for those that are regular visitors on this forum?
I was not even aware that message existed until it was first linked in this thread.

And you blame Inno for that?

When I last contacted support about the slow down, a few days before that message, they were all very secretive about it and told me the exact opposite of that message.

Another example of a player spreading misinformation that start to leads it's own life. Support has never been secretive about it. They had not been given the correct information and acted upon wrong information they had gotten. Wrong information started on the German forum by someone that isn't even a CM. You really should do some research before you come up with statements like this.

While that could fall under 'unexpected circumstances' stated in the third paragraph, no effort was put forward to correct that mistake (other then a potential hidden message from an Inno forum bot. That unexpected circumstances could be referring to something completely different). Not very transparent in my books.

If you are selective about what you want to read you should not complain if you miss something. That "Inno bot" is a message coming directly from HQ.

This would mean that even though this has been how it worked from the very beginning, and there are multiple guides online on what levels to reach, what to build, what not to attack, Inno was—for several years!—not aware of how their own game works.

Do you really believe they are aware of the guides that are online?

Want me to list the mistakes they made and found out much later?

If that's the case, then this decision is even worse. This means that because of their own incompetence, they allowed people to give them money in hopes that they would be able to continue playing like this, and when enough people gave them money, they finally looked at how these paying customers actually played, and then decided to not allow that game style anymore. I'm totally aware that the T&C say Inno can change the game in any way at any time, so legally it's all fine. But morally, not so much.

What does money have to do with it? The money argument is getting very stale. Every change players don't like they tell they will stop buying diamonds and that they have heard of players that will leave the game because of this. Arguments would probably make a much bigger impact if for once that wasn't used. As far as morailty goes, that works both ways and I did not see you address this:" One of the better parts of the game for those stuck at home sick, retired with nothing to do, in a wheelchair with restricted movement/severe injuries, etc, was that they had a loop they could forget themselves into. " Besides that Inno has been trying out things without announcing them from the start of the game. Nothing new there, or did you knew how to get Galata BP's?

That's my final say on this. I am now in the discussion I wanted to avoid.
 
Top