100 limit - complaints and discussion

[Jostein]

Since many of the threads in the forum is turning into complaints about the 100 limit do i suggest a dedicated 100 limit discussion here.

Good idea?

The most inportant ting about making this long lasting thread is to be able to ignore the topic for those of us who see it as a lost case ..

 

[LjGibbs]

Since many of the threads in the forum is turning into complaints about the 100 limit do i suggest a dedicated 100 limit discussion here.

Good idea?

Yes, very good. Although it isn't something that bothers me really, it does others, so this is the best way to keep things separate and in order - keep everyone happy

 

[Navigata07]

I think at this point we've gotten a lot out of the previous discussions, so I'm not expecting a lot out of it. Besides, one of the benefits was to at least have Ivan see the discussion, even though there wasn't anything he can do about the limit. It seems like they did it for their own economic benefit, and if it wasn't beneficial to them, they would discontinue it. It's unfortunate, but unless it becomes pointless for their benefit, I dont see it changing.

 

[Madge59230]

Given the frank message and way that Ivan spoke yesterday, i think this thread is pointless and will only get you more frustrated. It's here to stay. You can't change it. It's above Ivan's head. It will be another long-winded continuing thread which should die a death. Get on with your game and finding ways to play your game with the limits you have, not looking at other people's game, and say 'its not fair' . It's life get on with it.

The majority of players have the limit. Get on with playing your own game. If it winds you up so much you have to keep moaning, go and find an easier game.

End of moan.

 

[LjGibbs]

I think at this point we've gotten a lot out of the previous discussions, so I'm not expecting a lot out of it. Besides, one of the benefits was to at least have Ivan see the discussion, even though there wasn't anything he can do about the limit. It seems like they did it for their own economic benefit, and if it wasn't beneficial to them, they would discontinue it. It's unfortunate, but unless it becomes pointless for their benefit, I dont see it changing.

Lol. Yep, It definitely won't change anything re the 100 limit that's been made very clear, LOTS but that won't/doesn't stop others talking about it and venting, to no avail may I add but at least it's done on a separate thread to the 6.10 thread.

Laughing @Madge59230 post 'die a death'

 

[Madge59230]

Lol. Yep, It definitely won't change anything re the 100 limit that's been made very clear, LOTS but that won't/doesn't stop others talking about it and venting, to no avail may I add but at least it's done on a separate thread to the 6.10 thread.

Laughing @Madge59230 post 'die a death'

It gets so BORING!!!!

 

[Navigata07]

Lol. Yep, It definitely won't change anything re the 100 limit that's been made very clear, LOTS but that won't/doesn't stop others talking about it and venting, to no avail may I add but at least it's done on a separate thread to the 6.10 thread.

Laughing @Madge59230 post 'die a death'

Agreed. It's the week limit that was the trigger. Fortunately for me, I only need it for a couple of days. It was useful to keep it more than a week for items that are ahead of your growth (showed up as F3 until you were ready), but most of my buildings are near the end of their growth anyway.
Interesting enough, there is a potential rift in terms of veteran players as well: CBM. With the limit in place for economic reasons, I suspect the CBM sale is also discontinued. That means those who already have it can generate greenies without purchasing, which of course permits exponential growth of their cities. Those who dont have it will have to be extra careful with spending.

 

[Aardvark]

I'm kind of with @Madge59230 on this one. I just can't see it changing. I don't have the limit, but I still think it's the single biggest unbalancing issue in the game, and aside from being unfair, it's completely demotivating to newer players.

Then again, I don't have CBM, so will always be at a similar disadvantage to those that can have more land, make their factories work harder, and have more hangar spaces for a fleet too. A similar argument could be made for that I guess.

 

[Arggers]

Think what was most telling was the admittance of the "Hey experienced players? Screw you and your useful feedback, just give us your money" attitude.

Now....if EVER there was anything that was less likely to make me give them money




My main doesn't have the limit, my support does. Which is no good when you get Madlen's dad (forget the name) sending you F20 every day - the support can't use them that quickly!

 

[LjGibbs]

Agreed. It's the week limit that was the trigger. Fortunately for me, I only need it for a couple of days. It was useful to keep it more than a week for items that are ahead of your growth (showed up as F3 until you were ready), but most of my buildings are near the end of their growth anyway.
Interesting enough, there is a potential rift in terms of veteran players as well: CBM. With the limit in place for economic reasons, I suspect the CBM sale is also discontinued. That means those who already have it can generate greenies without purchasing, which of course permits exponential growth of their cities. Those who dont have it will have to be extra careful with spending.

Yeah if I remember correctly that was my trigger too...as I don't have the limit.

Hm, interesting. I didn't know about the CBM issue, I don't have one either yet sad to hear about the possible discontinuation.

 

[Navigata07]

I'm kind of with @Madge59230 on this one. I just can't see it changing. I don't have the limit, but I still think it's the single biggest unbalancing issue in the game, and aside from being unfair, it's completely demotivating to newer players.

Then again, I don't have CBM, so will always be at a similar disadvantage to those that can have more land, make their factories work harder, and have more hangar spaces for a fleet too. A similar argument could be made for that I guess.

Exactly

 

[Navigata07]

Yeah if I remember correctly that was my trigger too...as I don't have the limit.

Hm, interesting. I didn't know about the CBM issue, I don't have one either yet sad to hear about the possible discontinuation.

Yup, but I always thought of it as a "nice to have" anyway, so not having it will mean that I need to spend more for expansion. I will soon be reaching my limit anyway, and will only spend on land expansion if the pax I have truly isnt enough. The pax requirement is higher if you plan on doing map runs, such as with Giants and Condors. Jumbos are big pax eaters too, but the former two are way worse. I dont plan on doing that with giants, so my city has the potential to reach its max size earlier

 

[SS1]

The 100 item limit at it's core is a bait and switch. When you first start playing the game you are exposed right away to Madlen's city and a popup explaining that you too can have a city like this. And then of course you see the longtime players cities with all the awesome structures, buildings and the expansive land. So you begin playing away,, thinking about how you want to build your city. Then somewhere after about a month or two depending how much you play, you learn of the 100 item limit. Than at some point find this forum or other info on the web explaining that this is something relativity new and that all of the awesome cities you were exposed to when you first started playing do NOT have the 100 limit. It's at this point you feel duped and know the game at its core isn't fair.
Anytime I read any posts with terms like "game balance" "fair play" and such it's laughable. It's all hot air and bunch of bologna. The 100 item limit is proof positive that this game and the entity that operates it cares nothing about "fair".

Now don't get me wrong,, I believe the powers have every right to change whatever in the game they choose,, but with something as drastic as a 100 item warehouse limit they should have branched the player base with and without the limit. That would have created an equal playing field no matter which game group you were in. Since no new games would ever be added to the without-the-limit-group over time that base would dwindle. And from an IT infrastructure standpoint, provisioning wouldn't be too difficult since the without-the-limit-group would be static/declining but never growing.

 

[ArGi1981]

it's completely demotivating to newer players.

No it isn't. It's only demotivating to the very small percentage of new players who visit this forum and happen to notice the threads in which players are complaining about it. And of that part only a part will actually be demotivated.

The limit only affects you when you want to play a specific strategy. And you won't even consider such a strategy until you're at level, I dunno, fifty or so. And at that time you'll have plenty of time to reconsider the strategy you were planning.

The limit really only affects the long-term players that are used to playing in a specific strategy. You really can get around without that particular strategy. You only have to get your hands on more maps, but that is actually quite easy nowadays. Ofcourse, if you're used to some strategy that you can't use anymore because of this limit, every workaround will sound silly and not worth your effort. But most players don't know any other way and most definitely won't be demotivated.

The only thing that really should be looked into is the unfair advantage of long-term players, but that goes beyond the 100-limit. The cmb's are part of it as well, as are probably some other things I currently forgot. But hey, that's just life.

 

[thenamescarter]

Personally i feel if the limit was ever going to be modified again it would be best handled through the subscription service (which will hopefully come out to android soon).

Silver $9.99 month:
+100% profit from flights
+50% experience from flights
+1 fuel per minute
+15% max fuel supply

Gold: (i think $30 month?)
+200% profit from flights
+100% experience from flights
+2 Fuel per minute
+30% max fuel supply
+50% item drop from flight
-15% flight duration
perfect weather
0 break down

Platinum i'd propose like 44.99 month
+200% profit from everything (not just flights)
+100% experience from everything (not just flights)
+3 fuel per minute
+50% max fuel supply
-25% flight duration
perfect weather
0 break down
and like a 500 limit on inventory items instead of the standard 100
(And if they wanted to a gift of like 30 airport cash or something once a month)

This would be mutual beneficial as the players that want it badly enough have an option to acquire it. It would also increase the profits for GI. As Ivan has said many time over, this is a business and they must do what they must do to keep the company above water or the game will die.. just my two cents anyway.

 

[Arggers]

45 of what currency ?!?!

A month?!?!

 

[thenamescarter]

45 of what currency ?!?!

A month?!?!

Yep lol just a suggestion.. I mean let's be honest.. it's not coming back unless it's beneficial to GI.. might be too expensive for some but the option will be there.. so if ya want a higher inventory limit pay up or shut up lol

 

[Davescharf]

I was thinking a couple weeks ago it would be great to put it in the gold package. I think you’d see a number of people have interest in that

 

[Winitall63]

One work around I use for my 100 limit account is to immediately “open” all fuel barrels I receive. It allows me to “store” as many drops as I want actively in the game without being restricted by the limit. Of course the drop per minute is negated, but once I have 6-8,000 drops open I can run whatever flights I choose while still accruing barrels infinitely.

 

[LjGibbs]

Maybe some adults may pay into this but I defo don't see that working with the kids who want to play this game and to be fair I'm sure most parents wouldn't mind paying for a few greenies now and then but to ask for a subscription fee every month just wouldn't wash with me.