Legendary Quests Cooldown

[gamevideo113]

Hello everyone. I'm making this long awaited thread with a poll attached to it, to gauge what the position of the community is on the 12 days cooldown issue.
As mentioned already by some players, the 12 days cooldown feels really long. Personally i think it makes you lose track of what quests you've played and what quests might be ready to play again. Also, i've been getting asked by lots of players to help them on some of the new 5-star roman quests but i wasn't able do it because often all of my roman 5-star quests were on cooldown.
I think it's really fun to test different strategies and approaches to a quest, but with the 12 days cooldown it takes 2 months, if not more, to fully explore the possibilities of a civ on a quest to their fullest extent, which is a really long time and can make people lose interest in the game.
As far as my understanding goes, the longer cooldown was initially implemented to prevent players living off of a "purely highly-rewarding-quest diet". This wasn't really solved with the longer cooldown though, as it is still possible to basically play nothing but 12 days quests if you have 7 civs to level 40. The most effective and impactful fix to this issue was the nerf to the coin values of legendary quests, which was quite substantial on its own.
As things stand, i think the cooldown cap at 12 days brings more nuisance than good and i'd like to see the cap be lowered back to 6 days at most. Rewards can be obviously adjusted as well.

Interested to hear what other people think about this.

 

[RekiemOne]

I understand the issue and I cant decide if I am with or against 12 days cooldowns.
I love some quest more than other 5* or not. Since the introduction of the star rating I didn't touch some quest that I like a lot just because I would rather spend my time on something more rewarding. And that'salso why i love the cooldown change it'sbecause where i was doing brennos fayum mileto all day coop i also was doing sais mileto holyman solo and never vok. Now i only do emic solo. And I only do the most rewarding quest time wise even if I like other quest more.. It's good because it made me change my routine and made me strat new quest. So I am balanced.
I love the star rating and what i came with in terms of rewards. Now I do vok where i saw no point back then.
I understand the frustration with the new 5* but long term it gives more 5* to rotate with and it might be enough. It really depends on availability and since I have a lot of time maybe other players with less time are completly fine with the curent system.
I have thought of adding an extra layer of ranking with time completion but it's not fair since it's subjective and takes a lot of time / work to implement.
The only way i see "everyone" happier is to make 12hours, 1 day, 5 days, 10 days max cooldown to reduce the time to wait between 2 tries, obviously nerfing the rewards. But I think it's a lot to do for too few players. I am super interested to see others pov on this.

 

[MsMuffins]

Interesting topic

I've yet to really dig in to doing all these new legendary quests, barely had time to level romans, but working on it , so I don't have too much say other than I'd agree that 12 days is very long, especially for very active members of the community who like to do them daily. 6 days in the past? I think was already a long wait to do quests I liked doing for reward, and this also leads to probably one of the major issues with the 5 star system, the low rewards quests are no longer worth the time?, additionally when people have finished the best rewarding quests they may not want to do or have time to do the less rewarding quests. They may consider it not well invested time and we all have lives outside of AoEO and may consider this time better invested elsewhere.

I really liked farming the old marion and especially mad medo which now feel not as worth it. Ofcourse I understand many more quests to do now, why do old ones?, but still some people just like certain quests I think.


Additionally a possible idea though might be a nightmare to implement, but could potentially let players tweak the rewards and cooldowns for themselves? Say for example 12 days would be max reward, 11 days would be a bit less reward, 10 days be a bit more less and so on. I guess gives people a choice of what cool down to reward they might want?, but would be a lot of work and may not even be worth it but just throwing the idea out there for discussion and when I actually get around to doing some 5 stars, I'll come back to this.

 

[Zawnius]

Like RekiemOne, I'm really divided on this one.

First, I feel like this change would cater exclusively to the extremely small percentage of players such as you and Geese who just play 5* quests all the time. Lowering the cooldown again means drastically reducing the rewards so that you guys don't gain ludicrous amounts of rewards from farming these quests all the time. Meanwhile, the reward reduction also means that other players who can't clear these quests as well or as often have even less incentive to do so because the rewards aren't that good anymore. They also will not gain as much as you will, simply because they won't be playing the quests that often. This would just further increase the inequalities between players even more. That tradeoff isn't really worth it for the general playerbase.
I'm also gonna go ahead and actually say this, but if you really want to explore different strategies in those quests, an option is to just reset the quest before it completes, since you can probably know if a strategy is good enough without clearing the whole quest with it. You guys did state after all that you play more for the fun and the challenge than the rewards , even though the rewards are still very important to keep players in the game.

That said, I do feel like 12 days is a bit too long indeed, especially in the prospect of keeping all players entertained and able to play the content they want.
Maybe a compromise can be found that makes everyone happier, like 12 hrs/5 days/10 days or 12 hrs/4 days/8 days which would allow to (eventually) play every 5* quest once a day on every civ, which will undoubtedly be more than enough since a lot more 5* quests will be released in the future as well.
I agree with you that increasing the cooldown on the hardest and most rewarding quests can be seen as a nuisance and a cheap and easy way to prevent farming, but it seems like one of the most logical options given what was said in the thread so far.

I'm also really interested in reading what others think of this!

 

[gamevideo113]

Like RekiemOne, I'm really divided on this one.

First, I feel like this change would cater exclusively to the extremely small percentage of players such as you and Geese who just play 5* quests all the time.

Not true, these cooldowns also hurt players that only have 1-2 civs leveled (or that only like to play a couple of civs) to 40 and forces them to spam 12h quests or pharaoh's challenge, which isn't ideal.

Lowering the cooldown again means drastically reducing the rewards so that you guys don't gain ludicrous amounts of rewards from farming these quests all the time. Meanwhile, the reward reduction also means that other players who can't clear these quests as well or as often have even less incentive to do so because the rewards aren't that good anymore. They also will not gain as much as you will, simply because they won't be playing the quests that often. This would just further increase the inequalities between players even more. That tradeoff isn't really worth it for the general playerbase.

You don't really have to drastically decrease the rewards, that's a fake implication. Decreasing the rewards in the name of the game's economy has been done already and the result is noticeable. With the release of Romans, the lottery and Moes' rework on the way i think we can stop worrying about the game's economy for a moment and try to improve the quality of life, so to say. Anyway i really don't see why should the players who are able to clear the hardest quests regularly be penalized. Pandering to low-mid skill players by putting a cap on what high level players can play/achieve is not a healthy way to balance things. Especially if you consider that the correlation between gameplay skill and wealth isn't intrinsically too strong in this game.

I'm also gonna go ahead and actually say this, but if you really want to explore different strategies in those quests, an option is to just reset the quest before it completes, since you can probably know if a strategy is good enough without clearing the whole quest with it. You guys did state after all that you play more for the fun and the challenge than the rewards , even though the rewards are still very important to keep players in the game.

The problem with this approach is that eventually i want to be able to afford good/new gear, so i could play for free for the fun of it, but then i wouldn't be able to afford anything. Especially now that the lottery is coming and i might have to spend 10M to get a SINGLE item. The amount of time it takes to hoard 10M is really long and it's only going to get worse from now on. So it's really not a good idea to just play for no rewards if you wanna have a slight chance of getting one of the new items in the future.

I agree with you that increasing the cooldown on the hardest and most rewarding quests can be seen as a nuisance and a cheap and easy way to prevent farming, but it seems like one of the most logical options given what was said in the thread so far.

I think there are already big diminishing returns for people who are very invested and dedicated to this game, so the less artificial barries we introduce, the better imo.

 

[RekiemOne]

Not true, these cooldowns also hurt players that only have 1-2 civs leveled (or that only like to play a couple of civs) to 40 and forces them to spam 12h quests or pharaoh's challenge, which isn't ideal.



You don't really have to drastically decrease the rewards, that's a fake implication. Decreasing the rewards in the name of the game's economy has been done already and the result is noticeable. With the release of Romans, the lottery and Moes' rework on the way i think we can stop worrying about the game's economy for a moment and try to improve the quality of life, so to say. Anyway i really don't see why should the players who are able to clear the hardest quests regularly be penalized. Pandering to low-mid skill players by putting a cap on what high level players can play/achieve is not a healthy way to balance things. Especially if you consider that the correlation between gameplay skill and wealth isn't intrinsically too strong in this game.


The problem with this approach is that eventually i want to be able to afford good/new gear, so i could play for free for the fun of it, but then i wouldn't be able to afford anything. Especially now that the lottery is coming and i might have to spend 10M to get a SINGLE item. The amount of time it takes to hoard 10M is really long and it's only going to get worse from now on. So it's really not a good idea to just play for no rewards if you wanna have a slight chance of getting one of the new items in the future.


I think there are already big diminishing returns for people who are very invested and dedicated to this game, so the less artificial barries we introduce, the better imo.

Really fair points considering everything. It's true that some rewards got lowered with the rating while others got boosted. And that fact makes the rich richer since it ask to play way more to reach their lvl of coins and ep.
Rewards can be untouched if cooldowns are decreased but i would say 10 days if i had to decide.

 

[Aryzel]

I think its mainly a factor for the few players that are both skilled and play a lot, but despite that been a small number of players they are very active group so some attention to the issue is reasonable.

I've a few questions for the people who have a problem with 12days, to better understand the viewpoint.

Q1 - There are 14x12day quests and 25x6day quests, seems like enough to not need to left with nothing to do in a 12day period. What is it that makes you want to do the 12 day quests more? Is it that they are more interesting/fun/challenging quests? Is it the reward to completion time is really nice so other quests feel inefficient for you? Or other reasons? Basically when you log in and go "I really to play Quest X but can't!", what is it that makes you want to play Quest X?

Q2 - Do you do the quests with just one main civ, or a couple of civs, or do you do them with 5-7 civs? As doing with multiple civs seems like it opens lots of extra play options?

Q3 - With all optionals:

• The 14x12day quests reward, 192,500 coin and 146 chests, roughly giving 13,750c and 10 chests on average. Average difficulty 3.5 stars
• The 25x6day quests reward 152,000 coin and 208 chests, roughly giving 6000c and 8 chests on average. Average difficulty is 2.6 stars

If the time was reduced to 6days and rewards brought roughly inline with other 6 day quests, there would some differences due to star rating, how would that impact how much you want to play these 12day quests more?

Q4 - If the 12day quests were reduced to 6 days and rewards brought down to match, how do you feel about how this impacts players that play less and like doing 2-4 12 day quests (per 12day period) for the quests extra reward? For those players the 12 day quests are seriously hard and will always be a bit intimidating and hard, so the big rewards are nice incentive to occasionally challenge themselves.

Q5 - If there were more 12 day quests, or if Featured Quests incentives were in the game, would that cover your need? If more quests are needed, how many more?

 

[RekiemOne]

Q1 - There are 14x12day quests and 25x6day quests, seems like enough to not need to left with nothing to do in a 12day period. What is it that makes you want to do the 12 day quests more? Is it that they are more interesting/fun/challenging quests? Is it the reward to completion time is really nice so other quests feel inefficient for you? Or other reasons? Basically when you log in and go "I really to play Quest X but can't!", what is it that makes you want to play Quest X?

For me, it's a ratio of fun / difficulty / rewards. i have more fun doing harder quests in short times to get great rewards. The cooldown doesn't matter i want my game time to be efficient. So I get why some would do only 12 days. Some quest I don't like, like Thebes or Beorix have been boosted granting a leg each time, I don't do them at all so the fun part still important, more than rewards, but I won't do quest for nothing too, it's a really hard balance to find, where the rating cover most of my needs, I know some are covered yet.

Q2 - Do you do the quests with just one main civ, or a couple of civs, or do you do them with 5-7 civs? As doing with multiple civs seems like it opens lots of extra play options?

I change civ pretty much every 2 3 quests, so i play them all, I do some quests on all ( EMIC, VOK, Brennos, Rome and Clusium and then pick and chose what quest is more efficient with what civ etc...

Q3 - With all optionals:

• The 14x12day quests reward, 192,500 coin and 146 chests, roughly giving 13,750c and 10 chests on average. Average difficulty 3.5 stars
• The 25x6day quests reward 152,000 coin and 208 chests, roughly giving 6000c and 8 chests on average. Average difficulty is 2.6 stars

If the time was reduced to 6days and rewards brought roughly inline with other 6 day quests, there would some differences due to star rating, how would that impact how much you want to play these 12day quests more?

For me higher rating needs to give more rewards, the completion time is not a factor neither is the cooldown, it's just my opinion tho.

Q4 - If the 12day quests were reduced to 6 days and rewards brought down to match, how do you feel about how this impacts players that play less and like doing 2-4 12 day quests (per 12day period) for the quests extra reward? For those players the 12 day quests are seriously hard and will always be a bit intimidating and hard, so the big rewards are nice incentive to occasionally challenge themselves.

I think rewards don't need to be changed if the cooldowns are reduced to 10 days. If it's 6 days they also should be changed. I think i'm more in favor of a little decrease not a hugge one.

Q5 - If there were more 12 day quests, or if Featured Quests incentives were in the game, would that cover your need? If more quests are needed, how many more?

Yes because I would have less time doing my routine quests. No when it's one of my routine quest that would be featured.

 

[Geese]

I agree with gamevideo but I also agree with the point Zawnius made about the rewards not being appropriate for the difficulty for a majority of players.

I would say 6 day cool down and keep the rewards. My reasoning is that no one is playing them that much anyways so it wouldn't really cause some crazy influx of coin or gear. Using consumables on coop Clusium/Vok/Invasion of Rome still doesn't guarantee a win because the mid-late game can be extremely hard, so it's not like the entire community magically starts farming 5 star legendaries.

I think the higher rewards with higher cooldowns makes sense in general but the 5 stars should be an exception to this rule. Even some 4 stars are kinda ridiculous but don't want to ask for too much.

 

[gamevideo113]

I think its mainly a factor for the few players that are both skilled and play a lot, but despite that been a small number of players they are very active group so some attention to the issue is reasonable.

I've a few questions for the people who have a problem with 12days, to better understand the viewpoint.

Q1 - There are 14x12day quests and 25x6day quests, seems like enough to not need to left with nothing to do in a 12day period. What is it that makes you want to do the 12 day quests more? Is it that they are more interesting/fun/challenging quests? Is it the reward to completion time is really nice so other quests feel inefficient for you? Or other reasons? Basically when you log in and go "I really to play Quest X but can't!", what is it that makes you want to play Quest X?

The challenge makes the quest more fun, and also some quests are instrinsically more fun than others. For example vok is fun for me because once you setup your base you have lots of fighting and base destroying to do.

Q2 - Do you do the quests with just one main civ, or a couple of civs, or do you do them with 5-7 civs? As doing with multiple civs seems like it opens lots of extra play options?

I use all 7 civs (probably i just play too much lol). The thing is, for example this week i wanted to try Siege of Clusium with cataphracts/bowmen/immortals with bdp/immortals with crit/warwagons (clusium specifically because it is the hardest quest right now, and i'm using it as a benchmark) but obviously i can only play it once every 12 days which means two months of waiting to finally explore a civ's options on a specific quest.

Q3 - With all optionals:

• The 14x12day quests reward, 192,500 coin and 146 chests, roughly giving 13,750c and 10 chests on average. Average difficulty 3.5 stars
• The 25x6day quests reward 152,000 coin and 208 chests, roughly giving 6000c and 8 chests on average. Average difficulty is 2.6 stars

If the time was reduced to 6days and rewards brought roughly inline with other 6 day quests, there would some differences due to star rating, how would that impact how much you want to play these 12day quests more?

The fact that rewards would have to be reduced if the quest's cooldown was reduced is kind of a self-imposed implication. Up until last summer there was plenty of 6days quests with 20k coin each. I don't think having 6days quests with 13k gold reward on average would be such a bane. Especially now that proper coin sinks are going to be implemented. I'd still be playing 5-star legs even if the rewards were lower anyway.

Q4 - If the 12day quests were reduced to 6 days and rewards brought down to match, how do you feel about how this impacts players that play less and like doing 2-4 12 day quests (per 12day period) for the quests extra reward? For those players the 12 day quests are seriously hard and will always be a bit intimidating and hard, so the big rewards are nice incentive to occasionally challenge themselves.

Obviously the hardest quests still need to have the best rewards, taking the challenge should be rewarding regardless of the actual numbers. As mentioned earlier, i think cooldown and rewards can also be changed in a way that's not unnecessarily penalizing for the playerbase. All of the rewards and cooldowns are arbitrary numbers anyway.

Q5 - If there were more 12 day quests, or if Featured Quests incentives were in the game, would that cover your need? If more quests are needed, how many more?

Maybe yeah, hard to tell. In general it just feels off to have to wait 2 weeks to play the same quest again.
As i also said before, i can still live off of a almost exclusively 12days diet, so increasing the amount of 12days doesn't change things that much.

 

[Taz]

I agree with gamevideo but I also agree with the point Zawnius made about the rewards not being appropriate for the difficulty for a majority of players.

I would say 6 day cool down and keep the rewards. My reasoning is that no one is playing them that much anyways so it wouldn't really cause some crazy influx of coin or gear. Using consumables on coop Clusium/Vok/Invasion of Rome still doesn't guarantee a win because the mid-late game can be extremely hard, so it's not like the entire community magically starts farming 5 star legendaries.

I think the higher rewards with higher cooldowns makes sense in general but the 5 stars should be an exception to this rule. Even some 4 stars are kinda ridiculous but don't want to ask for too much.

This, I think that rewards (at least for 5* quests) should be more based on the difficulty than the CD since being a 5* quest on it's own already makes newer players not want to try it.

 

[Aryzel]

Good replies, I think I get the point of view better. Also you guys play a lot!

My feeling now is that its mainly having a fun/challenging quests for those really good players and rewards should feel like they reward fairly. So I'd say reduce the time to 6-8 days, bring rewards broadly in line with other 6 days quests, but then increase scale of rewards by difficulty a bit. So you end up with 5* quests giving roughly same reward, 4* maybe slightly reduced and 3* fits inline with the 6day 3* quests, if that makes sense. So basically what others have said above.

 

[Aman]

I agree the cooldown of 12 days is odd and strange to keep track. Maybe make it 14 days (aka 2 weeks) so you can schedule every other Saturday for example for a given quest?
Also works if you increase it to 30 days; for instance VoK on the 5th of every month.

As for rewards, they are enough - you can buy cheap chests at Moe's anyway!

 

[gamevideo113]

I agree the cooldown of 12 days is odd and strange to keep track. Maybe make it 14 days (aka 2 weeks) so you can schedule every other Saturday for example for a given quest?
Also works if you increase it to 30 days; for instance VoK on the 5th of every month.

As for rewards, they are enough - you can buy cheap chests at Moe's anyway!

 

[Andy P XIII]

My fingerprints are all over the quest reward system. I don’t particularly care what the cooldown is for VoK, but if we made it 12 hours, under our system that would nerf coins from 20k to 4k and leg chests from 13 to 8. Would that be better?

And if not, please tell me other ideas to keep players happy while also keeping coins from flooding the market. We are trying to develop the game to help players of all levels. Obviously the sample size of vocal players tends to favor experienced people. The names of people posting above me reads like the roster of an All-Star Team.

 

[Fraxure022]

My fingerprints are all over the quest reward system. I don’t particularly care what the cooldown is for VoK, but if we made it 12 hours, under our system that would nerf coins from 20k to 4k and leg chests from 13 to 8. Would that be better?

And if not, please tell me other ideas to keep players happy while also keeping coins from flooding the market. We are trying to develop the game to help players of all levels. Obviously the sample size of vocal players tends to favor experienced people. The names of people posting above me reads like the roster of an All-Star Team.

I’m not sure I’m feeling the positive impact of reducing coin flood on the market. The prices on the Global Market are still the same level of exorbitant, but now I can’t afford them, whereas before I could. What’s the goal on this?

Edit: Grammar

 

[NoteHermelin786]

I am OK with current cooldown, sooner than what we have means lots of things are not going to get done IRL.

 

[Andy P XIII]

I’m not sure I’m feeling the positive impact of reducing coin flood on the market. The prices on the Global Market are still the same level of exorbitant, but now I can’t afford them, whereas before I could. What’s the goal on this?

Edit: Grammar

Yes, I dont think we are making enough progress in removing coins from the game. However, reducing the coin rewards in quests was always only one small piece to the puzzle. I am optimistic that we will find some more ways to sink coins, such as Bahram's Lottery, and those will prove helpful.

 

[gamevideo113]

My fingerprints are all over the quest reward system. I don’t particularly care what the cooldown is for VoK, but if we made it 12 hours, under our system that would nerf coins from 20k to 4k and leg chests from 13 to 8. Would that be better?

And if not, please tell me other ideas to keep players happy while also keeping coins from flooding the market. We are trying to develop the game to help players of all levels. Obviously the sample size of vocal players tends to favor experienced people. The names of people posting above me reads like the roster of an All-Star Team.

I'm not sure it would be ideal to have any 5 stars with a 12 hours cooldown for a few reasons:
- The reward nerf would probably discourage any low level player from ever trying the hardest quests since they can rely on similar rewards from much easier quests
- The guaranteed legendary item (that seems to be still present even in the 12 hours version of a 5 stars quest) would probably make it too farmable, granted that it still takes approximatively 40-50 minutes to complete VoK or Clusium on average and a guaranteed legendary item might be considered warranted.
As i mentioned before I don't think a lower cooldown on 12 days quests would realistically impact the amount of coins entering circulation, because as of right now it's already possible to play mostly 12 days quests in a 2 week time span. E.g (really dumb example, but i'm trying to keep it simple):
Day 1 - VoK 7x
Day 2 - Clusium 7x
Day 3 - Invasion of Rome 7x
Day 4 - Brennos Attacks 7x
Day 5 - Invasion of Aegitna 7x
Day 6 - Liberating Dahshur 7x
Day 7 - Invasion of Dunum 7x
Day 8 - Susa in Strife 7x
Day 9 - Sardes 7x
Day 10 - Asgard 7x
Day 11 - Beorix Returns 7x
Day 12 - Svartalfheim 7x

So as you can see you can already have your hands full of quests from the most lucrative reward tier (C tier). Even if these were all on a 6days cooldown you wouldn't be able to play all of them 14x in a span of 2 weeks.
If what's worrying you is increasing the availability of the highest rewarding quests across all tiers (5 stars and 4 stars), then yeah, i can say that i would be more inclined to play a 4 or 5 stars quest over a 3 stars, regardless of the cooldown tier, and that could eventually slightly increase the amount of coin entering circulation (for the few players that like to play 5 star quests on a regular basis). It's still not entirely true though, because with the time it takes me to complete the valley of the kings (5 stars and 20k coin) i could play both invasion of dunum and liberating dahshur (each 3 stars and 13k coin - total 26k coin), which would yeld more coin and more chests. Right now the best rewards/time ratio falls in the C3 category more than C4 or C5.

Personally i'd remove the 12 days tier altogether and move all of the 12 days to 6 days, and eventually tweak the rewards from there. After all we should not forget that there has been a significant drop in coins earned from quests since the big quest difficulty update, and the situation would still be better than what it looked like in the beginning.

 

[Andy P XIII]

Nothing is sacred to me. I'm willing to be convinced, for sure.