Server performance and desyncs

Again, as I said, I believe a full lock of one's account was too extreme a measure. Locking just someone's interactions for some seconds or minutes would have been completely different from locking the person from doing anything for hours, such as hatching and adopting eggs and doing scours. I'm fine with waiting a couple of seconds or even minutes if I know it's because the servers are struggling to process all the requests. I mean, I still end up waiting when the whole site lags and I can't do anything, right? But it's another thing to get your account banned. I never said I didn't realize what the problem was. I just didn't agree with the measures taken to resolve it, that's all. At the top of your first post you said the code is old and it's the main reason behind the lag at reset. Later you said it's the custom CSS people use. Like I said, I'm not a web developer so I don't know the details. I was just saying users shouldn't be punished when you can't prove they are breaking the rules. And if QoL was the actual problem, why is it something you can just enable from the settings? If it is an approved site modification, then it's not just some random CSS distributed among the users and people shouldn't be punished for using it.

Just saying as someone who does work in web development - injected CSS doesn't mean QoL/something available easily onsite? It means custom CSS that someone made externally and is using to play in an unintended way. Looking like a DDOS attack is absolutely absurd, lol. I know it doesn't help without actually understanding how the stuff works but using modifications that trigger that kind of flag would absolutely be considered bannable on most games. I think an appealable lock is honestly pretty generous all things considered.

Does such a limited locking feature exist? I thought the lock levels were like trade, forum, site. It wasn't forseeable imo to be able to arbitrarily lock site features vs disabling an entire account that was causing significant collateral effects. Niet explicitly said he didn't even have enough access at that point to do a full root cause analysis due to the outage, let alone make new tools to perfectly solve it. That being said, I'm very glad that efforts will be made for the lock wording to be more explicit in the steps to take for resolution in case of error. The initial post was made two days ago. It's likely additional analysis has happened since. In particular, this quote seems informative: I don't agree that people are getting punished for using the QoL and similar features. I don't even really agree that a temporary lock after knocking over a server is "punishment". Managing the edge cases that arise because of the interaction between the intended way to do something and how people actually do it, especially after years of min/maxxing, is challenging, and sometimes unintended things will happen as a result from any party involved. I agree that there were mistakes made here, largely in messaging (what to say, when, why). But I don't think some of your characterization of the events is fair.

Hold on, I got lost reading about this. I don't use QOL, but I see multiple people that do..like what was said before me if those are appropriate and welcomed site changes (/modifications) why would users be punished for them? I'm just confused in that regard. I understand how some behaviors via. clicking habits or site refreshes looks like bots or like an attack, but how would qol be punishable if its welcomed?

? I'm afraid you've lost me, why do you think people will be punished specifically for using the QoL? I don't think that was said by staff at any point? "welcomed" is likely a too strong word for what the QoL and one-click fields are. I would personally use "permitted" - not disallowed, but not fully integrated/supported. Even so, Niet made a change to allow people to keep using certain QoL features with (hopefully) fewer negative effects - mashing the stacked get more button by drumming your fingers on mobile should no longer send dozens of requests if you're not paying attention. (People might disagree with this view since the QoL is accessible in site settings - I understand the point but just don't fully agree) [Edit: uhh I'm already kind of regretting posting this since I'm not staff... I'm mostly just following this thread in case there's something I need to do to the QoL in the future but if I go too far I'll try to back off]

I wasn't the only one who believed people got punished for it, but Id word it as having too many clicks in general in a short amount of time due to using the qol. it got brought up and I was wondering why someone would be punished by clicking more, (whilst using it). I believe some of the locked accounts used the click methods instead of the page refreshing examples. I guess it just confused me if it's something players are allowed to use that would cause them to be locked for it? (if this instance were to ever happen again)

Im pretty sure kts cause in qol scripts u can choose to have the “get more” button under the buttons woth the berries, and so if u arent paying attention and are just click click clixking away, then it tries to open/refresh like a bajillion times and nothing actually ends up loading but it puts a lot of strain on the server im assuming One click fields has a part of the code that lets you go straight to click online players’ parties, so if you are mindlessly clicking fields and u click that button repeatedly, the same thing happens. Luckily niet removed the ability to spam click the “get more” button, and you can remove the part of the one click fields script so it doesnt open to online players’ parties. And then theres less issue. Im pretty sure its less interactions and more kust those pages trying to open but never being able to or something

makes more sense, thank you!! :)

I am working nights twice a week and have a lot of time to click then, usually im out of online users after 2 or 3 hrs. I use 2 fingers on mobile. Is that too fast? Or when im on the laptop and use the QOL to stack pokemon in the middle and then do two mousebuttons at once, is that too fast? I dont want to do anything wrong and put strain on the server if i can just... do slower? :)

One individual's gameplay isn't going to affect the server too much. The biggest thing is "if the server is lagging, let it cook." Give it a moment to catch up, then continue. Continuing to pile more pressure on will only make things worse, just wait a second. Meanwhile, I've inspected the Shelter performance and I've shifted the "opening time" back to 00:05. It should be fine now.