EA Forums - Banner

Limitations to Substitution

According to the latest patch notes:
"From now on, a player account can no longer be substituted on a world for more than half of its total lifetime on said world" and
"only a period of 30 consecutive days can be substituted at a time, after that the original owner needs to re-issue a substitution request."
I know of many accounts that have existed only as subs for most of the existence of our world, including one that I have controlled forever. Why do these accounts continue to exist as before even after the patch was installed on 2/12?

Replies

  • gamerdruid
    2526 posts Moderator
    edited February 14
    Because the timer wasn't working prior to the patch being installed. Many of my old worlds have similar long term subs but show that the sub has been active for only 1 or 2 days out of 1000's of days.

    They have not implemented the substitution rules or the loot rules on existing worlds:
    We are currently considering the upcoming worlds as the first where we will enable the restrictions to substitution and loot distribution. Should we find it necessary we may enable them on older worlds as well.
    Post edited by gamerdruid on
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • We have, for now, decided to only enable these limitations on future worlds, starting with Tib38. Older worlds will be "safe" for now from any purge.
    Envision Entertainment Community Liaison
  • Thanks. To be clear, will these rules not be enacted at all on older worlds, or is it just that the timers have only now started ticking, and a new substitution will need to be issued once 30 days are up?
  • YulsEast wrote: »
    Thanks. To be clear, will these rules not be enacted at all on older worlds, or is it just that the timers have only now started ticking, and a new substitution will need to be issued once 30 days are up?

    The devs have stated repeatedly in multiple threads, including this one, that older worlds did not receive the new patch regarding sub rules, including the 30 day resubmit. The fact that your sub timer was fixed is unrelated to the 19.1 'fix' and was in fact simply repairing a bug with the code.
  • Soixie wrote: »
    The devs have stated repeatedly in multiple threads, including this one, that older worlds did not receive the new patch regarding sub rules, including the 30 day resubmit. The fact that your sub timer was fixed is unrelated to the 19.1 'fix' and was in fact simply repairing a bug with the code.

    All worlds got the patch, the substitution and loot limits are not activated there.
    Envision Entertainment Community Liaison
  • Soixie
    392 posts Member
    edited February 15
    Soixie wrote: »
    The devs have stated repeatedly in multiple threads, including this one, that older worlds did not receive the new patch regarding sub rules, including the 30 day resubmit. The fact that your sub timer was fixed is unrelated to the 19.1 'fix' and was in fact simply repairing a bug with the code.

    All worlds got the patch, the substitution and loot limits are not activated there.

    we're stating the same thing ;)


    Post edited by Soixie on
  • So what is the rationale for not activating the new substitution and loot limit rules on older worlds? Seems that these are good rules and should be deployed universally.
  • gamerdruid
    2526 posts Moderator
    edited February 16
    I am not privy to the discussion about whether to include them on old worlds, but it is highly likely that old worlds would have died quicker if they had been.

    Consider some worlds have been around for 3-5yrs or maybe more. Only 100 or less accounts remain logging in on some old worlds out of 30 000. The substitution rules especially would have hit very hard on these worlds. Why, because out of the 100 accounts logging in it is maybe 30 or less players with substitutions that have been active for years. Even if the substitutions continued the original owners are often no longer playing the game on any world so aren't contactable for them to re-substitute every 30 days.

    Some would argue that these worlds should be closed, but for whatever reason, EA/Envision don't publicly support the closure of a world (that's why the Vet servers continue after the end of their season).

    The loot changes probably wouldn't have much effect on very old worlds where many are at level 65 for 30 or 31 bases and can kill any forgotten with one shot, probably even the fortress with one player if they could get the level down with the injections. On more recent worlds (the tib, firestorm and wrath series) where multi-accounting, pre-hitting etc was rife when the worlds started may have been adversely affected. However, as this is the purpose of the loot feature I don't understand why it wasn't included on all worlds.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • methuselah
    354 posts Senior Moderator
    I think they may apply it at some point going forward but to be honest it accomplishes very little in the older worlds so why bother. I can't imagine many people are using multiple accounts to farm, that seems an early server issue not a late server issue.

    As for the subs I think it was wise to not implement that. Think about it, if you've had a sub that you invested years in developing in one of those old worlds how angry are you going to be if it is taken away from you to solve a problem that doesn't exist really in those old worlds?
  • Well one reason to limit substitution is that clearly the game developers were not thinking that these "vacation substitutions" could last for years on end. In my world, which is 5.5 years old, I know subs that have been in control by one person for probably 4 of those years. He's actually got 5 alts and 15 subs, which he uses to go around and take POIs by influence. He thinks that it's great that you have to waste resources to go blast him off the POIs, which he doesn't care, because they are just subs so he just respawns and does it again. Not sure if that's what the game developers envisioned for this function.
  • gamerdruid
    2526 posts Moderator
    I'm pretty sure they didn't. The substitution message always said no more the 50% of the time on the world was allowed, but their coding was wrong and it was never implemented, until now on new worlds.

    30 days at time also seems reasonable.

    The problem many have is with the concept of changing the 'rules' (or implementing them) after such a long time. Where it is a bug fix then, I agree, it should be implemented on all worlds. Where it is a modification such as when they introduced malus and the forgotten attacks they rightly decided not to patch existing worlds with these changes. (It could have been done for technical reasons but it doesn't matter why they didn't implement the changes on old worlds.)

    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • gamerdruid wrote: »
    ...Some would argue that these worlds should be closed, but for whatever reason, EA/Envision don't publicly support the closure of a world (that's why the Vet servers continue after the end of their season)....

    Financial suicide, one would have to be the greatest moron in the business world for denying free cash flow. As a shareholder/stakeholder, I would be demanding the head of said moron on a platter. The server is being supported by "active worlds", all inactive worlds are pure gravy. One of my "inactive worlds" provides $500-$1000 USD / month.

  • gamerdruid
    2526 posts Moderator
    Maybe - but not many worlds are that 'inactive' - some of those I'm on can't must 50 in the overall roster anymore, let alone in one alliance.

    They obviously way up the cost of maintaining and managing old worlds (in general) versus their loss of income and at present the income wins.

    They're not pure gravy because there is a cost of developing patches that work on so many different variations of worlds and testing them for each type as fully as they can. We know from bitter experience that they don't manage to always get patches right, even for new worlds.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • methuselah
    354 posts Senior Moderator
    YulsEast wrote: »
    Well one reason to limit substitution is that clearly the game developers were not thinking that these "vacation substitutions" could last for years on end. In my world, which is 5.5 years old, I know subs that have been in control by one person for probably 4 of those years. He's actually got 5 alts and 15 subs, which he uses to go around and take POIs by influence. He thinks that it's great that you have to waste resources to go blast him off the POIs, which he doesn't care, because they are just subs so he just respawns and does it again. Not sure if that's what the game developers envisioned for this function.

    I think there is no question that they did not intend for this to work like that, the 30 day warning has been in place since the games very early days it just never worked.
  • Well, maybe someone from administration is reading this and would consider turning it on in older worlds. I don't buy the argument -- either here or in real life -- that it should stay screwed up because it's always been screwed up.
  • methuselah
    354 posts Senior Moderator
    Here is the argument for the way it is currently, I personally don't care either way. What if someone has invested years in taking care of an account only to have the rules changed on you to solve a problem that doesn't really exist much in the older worlds?

    You probably would not be happy. Also, as I mentioned, these changes are primarily designed to stop people from abusing multi's which is primarily an early server issue. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying you can't abuse it in an older server I'm simply saying the issue the development team is responding to is primarily coming out of newer servers not older ones hence not making this a backwards change.

    Anyway, we shall see where it goes, if people like it and if there is a clamor to turn it on for older worlds I'm sure they will consider it.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!