Jump to content
The Official QONQR Community Forums
Sign in to follow this  
sethowar

Sustained Excessive Qubing

Recommended Posts

A few suggested ideas so far:

1- Limit the amount of refreshes allowed per/hour. Could possibly be a limit per zone rather then an overall limit. Could have your limit "refreshed" if someone else refreshes and attacks that particular zone. Two versions of this.

Version 1: You're attacking zone A. You have used your limit of refreshes and deployed in that zone. You can carry on refreshing but if you try and deploy into zone A you would get a message similar to what you get in the bottom three Atlantis zones. You can still deploy into other zones. Possible addition: If someone who recently refreshed attacks zone A that would allow you to carry on refreshing again. Numbers to be discussed and tested.

Version 2: Once you have used your allocated amount of refreshes per hour you can not refresh at all. Would work in the same way the scope overheat cools down. So 1 hour after your first refresh. My least favourite of the two versions.

2- Diminishing returns. Im not sure i like this but worth looking into. The more you refresh the fewer bots you regain. EG: first 10 refreshes at 500 bots, the next 10 at 400, the next at 300, all the way down to 100. Again would work as per scope overheat.

3- Refreshes should effect your scoop overheat.

A few things to consider: Are bot and energy refresh packs on the same limit/timer or considered separate. The amount of packs we can use an hour and still allow for a good revenue stream for the company. If another player uses a refresh and attacks the zone, should that reset your limit?

QONQR needs more things to do and it also needs more things to buy.

I have to say that these ideas are going to encourage multiscoping.

Lastly i apologise for the excessive use of the word "refresh".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main problem with all the suggestions I've seen so far (and I suspect also the reason they are not so viable for the devs) is that alot of them are trying to 'limit' the paying customer... **** refreshes per hour limit automatically limits income as they can no longer spend how they used to... I would just like to bring the following topic to the devs attention... Gadgerson, saw U were watching this topic, maybe you have some thoughts on it:

So far it's the most viable and easily implemented solution I have seen, and it would work SOOOO well without compromising the income of devs and also allowing the cubers the freedom (without restricting their ability to deploy) to spend till their wallet burns.

Trustar has said it has been suggested before and argued to the point of boredom but I fail to see any downsides to it other than that those who spend either spend more or just spend n play differently :) Worth a look, and full credit to Zymurge for the idea. I have been racking my brain for ages on a solution to this whole debate for some time now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumad. I read the OP and not sure how this is related. He is talking about bots having a lifespan. We are talking about excessive use of cubes.

I do agree that the ideas so far might lessen the revenue for QONQR but if several proposed ideas and a few tweaks were implemented at the same time (see feedback page) it might encourage others to buy cubes.

On side note, i like the idea that your bots would deteriorate if you have not logged into the game in say 3 or 4 months. Not an instant deletion of your bots but that they would slowly "die" out after a specific period of inactivity. I do not however like the idea of the bots we currently have (ZA, DEF, etc) having a shelf life.

Either way i dont see how they are related to the overuse of cubes and how they can give you such an imbalanced advantage over several players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you read my post in that topic where I further explored the logic behind Zymurge's idea, you would see exactly how it would apply to the topic of excessive cubing, and also to the post above mine in this topic where you spoke about 'limiting refreshes' and how it would also present an alternative to cubers who currently ONLY use refreshes for the purpose of attacking(excessively so...)

You would also see that the point of the bots deteriorating would be twofold:

It would not only help to balance the inequality between new players (less scope usage to maintain, more for attack and progression) and those that have a massive advantage against them by having massive fully-defended towers and deterring the new players from playing or taking the underdog position, as mentioned multiple times.

It also would have the same effect, for much the same reasons between players within the two extremes of free-play, middle range play and the 'excessive cubers' everyone keeps going on about...

Have a PROPER read of it all and give me a proper logical reason why it would not work please? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right. I read the OP and did not bother reading the replies. Sorry about that.

Ok i think the main complaint is that some people are able to tear down a zone fast while other players are defending said zone. Im not sure people are as upset about someone building towers. New players often contact other players from their side (or we contact them) and back them up. Most new players are noticed and im sure all three sides (in the UK at least) make a concious effort to help them establish themselves. Not every player is a "lonely rebel". It all depends where they play from.

I dont see a problem with new players and their current inability to take down a big zone. That's how it should be. If a new players starts he/she is low level with a low level scope. The option is there for them to buy cubes if they really feel the need to power through a zone, level up fast and buy their upgrades straight away. Otherwise they have to do it like most other players have had to. Its up to us to make it easier on them and help them through their training levels. Its not up to the game to make it easy. They will get bored and quit.

The only new players i feel need some help from the game are those that are truly alone in an area surrounded by enemies. Something like an "outnumbered" bonus. That could be discussed in another thread as it is unrelated to this subject.

Not everyone who has towers spends money on this game. All of a sudden they have to maintain their bots. Your giving more power to the people who spend money here not the other way round. Players would have to maintain their bots (bit dull gameplay wise i would think, to have to "rebot" your zone over and over) and sacrifice attacking or defending (im not sure on time-scale here. Every week? Every month? It makes a difference). Of the top ten players in the UK or in England only 1 to my knowledge spends money. And he is not number 1. Your going to upset a lot of people with a change like this. I repeat: Not all towers are a product of cubes.

Eventually everyone will have to constantly be redeploying to keep their zones or get bored and stop playing. Actually the other option is just go full attack and not care about defence. The game is already repetitive with lack of new features and things to do. This will kill the playerbase in my opinion making it a game of nothing but sending def into the same zones every xx days/weeks because your bots are running out of power. Or a game where all you do is attack with no actual objective as no one will want to defend a zone with bots that are slowly dying AND there would be no point building a zone up high.

I do like what Roosterman said though: If you could fire a maintenance bot into the zone to "recharge" your faction bots then i guess it might be something else for us to do. But the current bots (ZA, Def etc) with a lifespan? No.

In my opinion it is a very bad idea and would not work. Most of the people who will want this are those who just focus on attack and don't want to defend. They will love this feature. I prefer the game to give you several options of gameplay (attack, defend, build, a mix) rather then a game where attacking is the only efficient way to play.

The idea might have worked had the game started off like this (i still dont think it would have worked to be honest). With a lifespan on your bots, we would have kept are zones low on numbers. Say maybe a few hundred k. That would then lead to zones being taken far too easily.

Also, this wont stop "excessive use of cubes" to murder a zone. We are trying to discuss ways of balancing cubes so they are not so "YOUR DEAD" and a little more "i've stabbed you and your bleeding....to death".

Either way, its not really about the idea not working. Its more about the idea not effecting the issue in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is impressive cubing though. I find it quite funny how it makes all the other ops in the zone look as if they barely did anything. Lol

But I still don't think the devs will do anything to "limit" a heavy cuber, the money is just too good, especially after skinting yerself just to get the game going in the first place. Maybe reduce the strength of the bots that are deployed from a cooking scope? This still gives cubers that" your my ******* now" feel yet makes them easier to kill.

There isn't going to be an easy solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree Leigh, but at some point all the zones will be his, once this happens there's no need for him to cube and the money stream dries up.

The next video will show it better with cubing running over a few days, destroying a 1 million plus zone with ease whilst sync locked too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally (no money spent) see cubing as a legit way of playing the game, like using the API. If you have the money to spare, great! Support the developers and make your gameplay better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×