Obviously, Owlent has the ultimate control over what happens in the game. Believe me, I've been here long enough to be *painfully* aware of that. My point being that no one wants to play a game where you can pour years of time and money into an account only for it to be taken away because you're not playing exactly the way they want you to.

I very strongly doubt that co management is being misused enough to create any sort of imbalance in the game, truthfully. The only place it lends any advantage is teams, who by and large just use it to fill and rescue BLUPs- which is good for the game! It keeps comps running smoothly, BLUPs moving, money flowing. The math is pretty simple: if we lose co access to fill and save stuck BLUPs, we can't BLUP as quickly, and we don't need to purchase passes for resources as quickly. A slower GP race flat-out means less income for Owlient which I suspect they would prefer to avoid.

I still fail to see how co could be misused to gain resources unfairly. I suppose if you had a slew of inactive accounts being farmed all on the same team...? But cases like this must be in the extreme minority; I promise any team worth it's salt would prefer to have a fully active member supporting themselves rather than have to farm a dead account that's taking up a slot. And these cases wouldn't even be necessarily halted by co changes, if you can contact the member outside of Howrse all they would have to do was log on every so often and re-add co privileges.

The only other factor I can see them trying to cut down is paying people to manage your account for you (the most common example is paying an AP farmer) but these practices have been pretty severely minimized by the enforcement of sanctions for paying anyone to do tasks on your account. Everyone is too scared to advertise these services for fear of punishment, so the occurrence is dwindling-I don't see the point in changing co in such a destructive way just to weed out the last few people who still pay AP farmers under the table?

My last thoughts (and I do apologize if I'm starting to ramble, my insomnia is getting vicious of late): The only change listed here that I could accept is the 30-day immediate removal (the rest I plan to fight tooth and nail); but truly, I don't believe it will have the effect Howrse wants- anyone determined to use an inactive account to their unfair advantage will find a way to do so, even if it means the owner has to re-add co once a month. The only accounts this is really going to hurt are people like the cases we've seen above: people incapable of logging into their accounts, either because they are bound by health issues or their lives have ended. Their accounts are being kept around through co management by people who care for them and want this small piece of something they love to remain. That's who these changes will ultimately hurt.

trying to figure out that one myself. It has been mentioned long time ago ( maybe it was the April-cleaning forum?) that sometimes people keep their friends alive to have extra resources and that doesn't make sense to me... yes,extra resources yay...but they forget those resources take time, blood, sweat, tears and HOURS of gameplay to gain! To have AP on a friends account that stopped playing (here I will pretend this friend stopped playing completely) would mean you would have do this every day:
*Manage the economy without being able to sell horses
*AP farm hundreds of horses to keep AP up
*take part in events to gain certain BMI items like MA, breeding items


In other words, the same workload you do on your own ACC + 50% more hassle due to restrictions. Its hard enough to keep your resources on your acc at a reasonable level,I have hard to see anybody keep someone else's account alive just for that. People can barely farm 500 horses without getting tired and here they say people can maintain 2 accounts by using co falsely without breaking other rules?


I have had a friend who ended up in the hospital without any warning. If the co had been removed, the team would suffer. Not because we used it to "unfair advantage", we proceeded as we always had. Besides that small fact, we took care of her divines while she was away so she could gain those diamonds her divines are giving or other gifts that divines give only if you take care of them. How is that cheating? Is being nice on Howrse= cheater that must be punished and the rest of the server as well?

teams have always been hanging loosely on Howrse.In the old days when teams were not official, they used similar affixes to keep their team name. The foal


Team-sales solved a lot of issues, but I wonder how long it will take for Howrse to accuse team-members of cheating for passing around a foal and both blupping and breeding them to gain higher GP. If GP race is such a crime, why were GP rankings implanted in the game? My guess is because the players wanted them. Why did they think people wanted rankings in the first place. To see who logged on and petted a horse?

So let's say GP race slows down or is stopped. What reason do we have to stay on this game? It would be beyond BORING. Top horses gain barely 0.2 -0.3 GP gain at BEST days, sometimes its even LESS: If they start gaining 0.1 and below the race will be dead because the frustration will literally kill the competition, it won't be the competition that creates frustration. And without competition, their won't be a game where people log in every day. Events are not enough to keep everyone going.

If they want to solve a problem, this would help.
1) admin starts a topic. Let's say the issue is BMI scamming. They open the topic, present the issue and ask "what is your experience with this/ what do you think/how can we stop this"?

2) Players can leave their experience stories there, suggest solutions.

3) Most important: Admins and the players COMMUNICATE.

Are they saying co-blupping, co-filling, loaning and borrowing horses are cheating? those are ingame mechanics made by the developers.WHy did they think we wanted co? to log through co,pet a horse and leave? Is selling horses for a million also a crime because it causes us to gain a lot of equus? Have we been playing MAffia Bosses Online-game for years without realizing it?

There is a lot more I am thinking about right now but I will keep my reins tight for now :3

Note: Vaermina, your post sounds good and well thought to me Insomnia or not, you still keep track of what your fingers are typing! Also, I was just typing my thoughts on the subject, its not aimed at you or others :3

Would someone possibly link me to the page that was talking about the next promo (the one after the Wandering Horses), as I'm having trouble finding it? I think it was something about the Mines.
Thank you!!

If they want to solve a problem, this would help.
1) admin starts a topic. Let's say the issue is BMI scamming. They open the topic, present the issue and ask "what is your experience with this/ what do you think/how can we stop this"?

2) Players can leave their experience stories there, suggest solutions.

3) Most important: Admins and the players COMMUNICATE.

I suppose the thing is, though, is that if a friend's account is dead and you're getting all these resources and such, it's more or less the same as having a second account, or multiple accounts. Unless they intend to come back. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if Howrse twists it around that doing so is having multiple accounts and gets rid of co-man altogther

What about my blind and bedridden friend who holds out hope she'll get her vision back? She should lose her account because howrse doesn't write a webpage that her reading software can recognize?

Like I said, it is only like having a multi-account if said friend has left the game for good and does not intend to come back. Your friend certainly has the intent to use her account as far as I can tell, so what I said about the multi-accounts doesn't apply

My point is that it is possible Howrse now considers the previous co-man system a cheat and have implemented this so that it's not possible to manage the same way we did. Not that I agree with that opinion or the way they're now managing it, but that's a possible reasoning I see in addition to other ones people have. My advice would be to in the meantime, try and adapt to the new co-man system, while still trying to advocate for change. And before anyone twists my words, no, I do not support either of the co-man or pass horse changes.

...It's not, though? If you're on co-management, there's no way to transfer those resources between accounts. You can't use sales or item trading. If you're on a team with that account, you can loan a limited amount of horses to that account, but you're restricted to what items you can put on those horses (for exactly this reason!) Like I said in my earlier point, even if you're spending all your time painstakingly farming these inactive accounts, the best you can hope to get is extra AP for your team. And why would you waste your time farming dead, restricted accounts when you could just look for real teammates who bring their own resources to the table? I really think this whole argument of "co management can be used to cheat!1!1!!" is being blown completely out of proportion- and the tiny, tiny percentage of players who are actually using it to bend the rules (really I can't imagine why anyone would do this, it sounds exhausting and ultimately fruitless, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt for the sake of argument) could easily get around these changes to continue doing it if they really wanted to. These changes would punish the masses of rule-following, pass-buying players to attempt to squash a demographic that very likely doesn't even exist, at least not on the scale we're being led to believe.

I said my point is that perhaps Howrse NOW SEES the current co-man as cheating. And that is why they are doing it, regardless of whether people are or how they are or whether they are not. Please direct your defense of the co-man system at the Howrse team, not at me. I do not believe that the way the majority of players use co-man is cheating. If I may, I'd compare this to Howrse suddenly claiming that giveaways are trafficking items and illegal. People have the right to give away their stuff. It is not cheating. Howrse decides to say so despite that anyway and make it illegal. Same idea here.

Some players go to an awful lot of extremes to work outside the bounds of fair play. They are the ones that force the game admin's hands at trying to get a handle on the game. Unfortunately they waited about five years too long.

People won't want to hear this but the game thrived best when

1) AP's were five for a pass, with no price breaks for bulk purchase.
2) There was no item exchange.
3) GP gain was capped to 20 points per month. For Arab, Irish, and TB's which were top breeds, this meant starting the month with gains of 0.25 for breeding a pair of 100 blupped horses and ending the month with gains of 0.02 to 0.05 for breeding a pair of 100 blupped horses.
4) Players had access to an ideas forum. This is how fifth element and cloud packs found their way into the game.
5) No one could buy extra hacks for their account (such as autofeed VIP) by spending a few passes. Everyone operated off the same playing field.
6) Under this system, howrses had resell value in passes and foals for top breeds routinely sold for 3 or 4 passes.

Just my two cents.

The only thing i want to see get stomped out, is bad sportsmanship, that should be a no brainer. Especially by top teams that dislike their Tier 2 rivals and want to get rid of them by handing out coverings to teams ranked 3rd and lower. Behaviour like that should absolutely be against the rules, including stomping. It happened to my team a day before we were supposed to get ranked. Its nasty, its spiteful and there should be no place for it.

I've just read the last few pages about the upcoming updates, and all I can see are changes that seem to make the game worse for teams, and those in need of accessible arrangements - but the average player likely won't be touched by the changes.

(With the exception of the pass horse change, of course: whilst it needs modifying, I can't see a reason for it to be completely overhauled like it seems it will be. Players who can keep a mortal horse alive to 30 deserve a reward - what if the pass was given at age 35 when the horse was still alive, but mortal??)

But, surely there's a happy medium for everything? Systems might be being misused, so to speak, but surely that just speaks volumes about what players *want* rather than suggesting they need to be put into their place or anything?

Who knows. Definitely not me - everyone else on this game seems like a professional in comparison to me .

I've just read the last few pages about the upcoming updates, and all I can see are changes that seem to make the game worse for teams, and those in need of accessible arrangements - but the average player likely won't be touched by the changes.

(With the exception of the pass horse change, of course: whilst it needs modifying, I can't see a reason for it to be completely overhauled like it appears that it will be. Players who can keep a mortal horse alive to 30 deserve a reward - what if the pass was given at age 35 when the horse was still alive, but mortal??)

But, surely there's a happy medium for everything? Systems might be being misused, so to speak, but surely that just speaks volumes about what players *want* rather than suggesting they need to be put into their place or anything?

Who knows. Definitely not me - everyone else on this game seems like a professional in comparison to me .