Regarding DV, I know, as I was there. But you are comparing apples and oranges..that was an event that had a very limited time frame., and a massive FOMO aspect. We're talking about removing a daily limit – I honestly believe you're going to have more player burnout and disappointment from forcing themselves to max out a daily limit, compared to something like no limit, or even a weekly limit, which would allow people to grind at their leisure without stressing because they don't make their 2.5 moonstones every day.

I really don't understand why you feel that removing the limit on moonstone shards will cause players to ignore their health. Currently players can grind non stop for pebbles, which can then be traded for moonstones. Or they could max out credit cards on the store. There are a whole host of things Players can currently do on site that would affect their health negatively. I mean, I'm here writing this reply at 3am, lol. Don't get me wrong, it's admirable that you care so much about the player base, but I think your worry is misplaced in this instance and my point stands that the only true issue with removing the shard cap is that it'll affect the sites income from MS purchases in store.

I 100% agree that many of the ms sinks need to be changed to pebbles. Like I said originally, if they did that, I doubt anyone would care how many shards they got daily – FR only gives out one free gem day, and DVs are in the ad streak, I think ? (Haven't played for a few months) but both of those sites use the free currency to preform the vast majority of upgrades. DV also uses CAD, so it's a lot cheaper lmao – aussie dollar to usd hurts so bad.

Support for removing ms shard cap limit. they are rare enough as they are and sometime ppl don't even have enough time each day to hit the current cap. In fr you can get gem from open higher lv tier chests, sometime from release dragons why here we have cap on getting them ? not even a whole moonstone only shards we get.

The cap is only 25 shards?? Based off this thread I thought the cap would be more around 30-60 shards, so you could reach the supposed 3-6 moonstones per day. If it really is at 25 shards, then that's forcing free-to-play players to essentially grind for 20 weeks straight to work through upgrading Mining and Cooking alone. I support removing the cap, even if it does lower the rates to help balance. At least I'll know the moonstones I'm earning is relative to the amount of grinding I'm doing on any day, rather than a set limit I would hit.

support! f2p players and players who only bought the beginner bundle are at a MAJOR disadvantage.

on a related note, why do only players who bought the subscription get free MS each day? you could easily give all players one free MS each day (similar to FR's well-fed bonus giving 1 gem a day) and give 2 additional MS each day to players who have a subscription. that way the subscription is still an advantage (3 MS/day instead of 1) but the game is more rewarding to f2p players as well.

Support, and if removing it entirely is a problem, it could at least be raised a little bit.

Support, especially considering how moonstone reliant everything is currently.

I don't agree with removing the cap, but I do believe it could be raised somewhat. 25 feels quite low, whereas 50 feels more appropriate.

However, I also think a perfectly viable alternative would be to change upgrade methods for professions (cooking/mining expansions for example) to be pebbles initially and only scale to moonstones after an upgrade or two. I think, in general, that would be overall more user friendly to new players anyway, and that raising (or worse, eliminating) the ms shard cap can be potentially damaging to the economy. (It also can potentially reaaaallllyyyy mess over players that can't play all day, when there should really be some semblance of balance between people who do and don't have that much available time.)

@ThistleProse

Yeah it's a different scenario but it still relates to how gameplay can negatively affect a player and lead towards bad habits—that's my gripe in the current game market (pet sims, mobile games, traditional games, etc.) that has been pushing towards unhealthy gameplay habits for years now without any care to its players. Current MS imbalance and prioritization also plays into a lot of FOMO in regards to custom items, wolves listed in the FM with low IDs and enticing colors, etc. Yes, removing the cap will impact the economy as well, but like I said: I don't believe adding more moonstones into the system will solve the issue; there needs to be more incentive and priority across the site for the use of pebbles and pebble sinks. This would push more people with moonstones to trade for pebbles. And yes, you can endlessly grind for pebbles, but you can so easily, passively earn pebbles that it's easier to designate a stopping point.

I agree with others that have proposed raising the limit, but removing it entirely just doesn't seem like a good idea for a host of reasons, which yes, includes a negative impact on health and playing habits, but also overall enjoyment of the site experience. Is it so wrong to look at things from multiple facets beyond what affects the site?

I am reiterating that I am not against raising the limit: free-to-play players and those without the ability to sink money and time into a site shouldn't be punished, but restrictions in games do serve a purpose. Lorwolf would benefit from putting more prioritization on pebbles and scaling back the site's current heavy-leaning in favor of MS; I'd like to think the thriving Custom Apparel market rakes in a significant amount of money for the site after all, so would it really hurt them to shift more things restricted by moonstone costs (like profession expansions and perhaps offering x number of apparel slots) to pebbles? So less overall prioritization of moonstones, higher daily yield of moonstone shards, and more buying power of pebbles.

@pancake

I am one of those no-lifers because without getting into details I have a full-time job that leaves me with a LOT of downtime.

Capping shards does not help promote better gaming habits. It does the opposite, actually.

I'm f2p out of a challenge to myself, so when there are things locked behind premium currency, I save the standard currency and trade assets to get what I need. That, with a smidgen of lucky and ingenuity, is how I got an imp scroll and boolean on fr :)

What happens when premium currency becomes difficult to obtain? I just have to grind out more pebbles. If I spend all the moonshards I've made in four days on buying a den slot, that just means I have to grind through activities all day to get the pebbles I need to buy enough moonstones for whatever else I need. Hitting shard cap comes a LOT sooner than that, lol.

If you genuinely don't want game economy to develop a class stratus based on how long someone can play, then capping how much Ms you can BUY should be necessary! Between staying up and playing a game until 3am and dumping $3k irl money on ms, why is the former something that developers should be designing around and not the latter? Idk, I'd rather mess up my sleep schedule for a bit that go into debt. Both are issues with player-self regulation, and if a developer feels obliged to cater to one, in follows that they should cater to the other.

@Raik

Once again, I said a soft cap, which is a soft stopping point.

You're also completely ignoring the other parts I've brought up regarding the pebble and MS imbalance as well:

I am reiterating that I am not against raising the limit: free-to-play players and those without the ability to sink money and time into a site shouldn't be punished, but restrictions in games do serve a purpose. Lorwolf would benefit from putting more prioritization on pebbles and scaling back the site's current heavy-leaning in favor of MS; I'd like to think the thriving Custom Apparel market rakes in a significant amount of money for the site after all, so would it really hurt them to shift more things restricted by moonstone costs (like profession expansions and perhaps offering x number of apparel slots) to pebbles? So less overall prioritization of moonstones, higher daily yield of moonstone shards, and more buying power of pebbles.

Once again, I am not saying I disagree there is an imbalance: the decision to make all profession expansions fully MS reliant was a terrible idea. But fully removing the cap is an equally terrible idea for more reasons than bad gaming habits; throwing more moonstone shards, and by extension more moonstones, into the economy is not going to solve the current issue with moonstones.