Author Plays Don't Count!

nimmanu · July 2013

So, it's extremely hard to get enough playthroughs on these quests. They aren't eligible for Foundry daily until 20 plays... and NO ONE wants to play quests that aren't foundry daily eligible!

So I've had my husband playing it (thank you, honey), but I keep hearing how "your plays count". But mine don't change the play count at all. I thought maybe I was doing it too many times in a row, so I was giving time between them... but the count simply doesn't change from my own plays through it.

I'm sorry, but that's just wrong. If you don't know 20 people in this game willing to give up their time to run a pointless quest, you can't even make it so that people will play it because it's ineligible for the ONLY reward for running them at all!

That's just not right, and it really needs to be corrected. I appreciate encouraging authors to run it multiple times themselves. That encourages working out bugs before subjecting others to it. But when your own plays don't count towards the total, you have now put the end goal of making it daily eligible out of range for newer or less extroverted players.

That is a problem and should be fixed, please.

(and I mean my character in-game isn't counting, not that foundry editing runs don't--I know those don't, but have been told using my reg char in game did count, but it doesn't!)

antonkyle · July 2013

I noticed this today also, has it been changed? I could have sworn they were counting last week.

xpurpleinsanityx · July 2013

I agree with this. Now, I have seen my runs count...but ONLY the very first time and then RARELY randomly after that. It IS ridiculous and it's very hard to push your quest if it is not at least daily eligible....especially if it is 40 mins +

zebular · July 2013

. . . . . Your own account's plays on that same account's foundry works have never counted towards anything, if they did - it was a fluke bug and has apparently been fixed. This is to keep authors from exploiting the system for their own foundry works. Have your husband make his own account. Wanting to run your own missions to fix them should be encouragement enough. I'd be weary of material which the author doesn't want to play their own missions, especially to find bugs and things to fix or change.

. . . . . I will never create something I don't enjoy myself. I've played my missions countless times now since Alpha. I've never seen my own plays count and I've never been able to rate my own plays since Alpha.

*the mage smiles and nods*

nimmanu · July 2013

My husband has his own account, and that's what I'm saying. Only his runs have been counting, mine have not.

And I'm sorry, and this is not towards you... but to claim they're trying to prevent exploits is disingenuous at best. This ONLY and exclusively cripples legitimate authors. It is beyond abundantly clear that it does nothing whatsoever to prevent exploitive quests, and as such, should be abolished in order to encourage legitimate authors and give them hope of their quests at least making the magic "foundry eligible" mark.

cipher9nemo · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . Your own account's plays on that same account's foundry works have never counted towards anything, if they did - it was a fluke bug and has apparently been fixed. This is to keep authors from exploiting the system for their own foundry works. Have your husband make his own account. Wanting to run your own missions to fix them should be encouragement enough. I'd be weary of material which the author doesn't want to play their own missions, especially to find bugs and things to fix or change.

Sort of difficult to exploit the system when my quest is 3-4 hours long and 44 minutes on a speed run. :rolleyes:

My plays counted before, but I only ran mine may be five times.

xpurpleinsanityx · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . Your own account's plays on that same account's foundry works have never counted towards anything, if they did - it was a fluke bug and has apparently been fixed. This is to keep authors from exploiting the system for their own foundry works. Have your husband make his own account. Wanting to run your own missions to fix them should be encouragement enough. I'd be weary of material which the author doesn't want to play their own missions, especially to find bugs and things to fix or change.

. . . . . I will never create something I don't enjoy myself. I've played my missions countless times now since Alpha. I've never seen my own plays count and I've never been able to rate my own plays since Alpha.

*the mage smiles and nods*

I DO find mine enjoyable to run..that isn't what's in question. The fact is, a lot of people will never find out if THEY find it enjoyable to run, because they want to choose ones that are ALREADY daily eligible...which is understandable considering that getting your dailies done is the only reward.

nimmanu · July 2013

I don't ask to be able to rate it. I only ask that my own runs of it count towards 20 runs.

I don't KNOW 20 people, and asking to trade reviews here (and having guildies run it) has only gotten me to about 18 runs (and half of those are my long-suffering husband, bless his heart).

You don't see why that's a problem? All it does is encourage people to go make another account, level it to 15, run their quest 20 times, and then keep that account for nothing but actually getting 20 runs on their quests. That doesn't even make Cryptic more money, because that's a "use for only 1 thing" junk account.

It doesn't discourage exploits. What's the chief complaint here? That exploit quests all top the charts and are NEVER removed. So please don't try to convince us that it's to prevent exploits, because they're making a liar out of you (not your fault, but true none-the-less).

cipher9nemo · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

It doesn't discourage exploits. What's the chief complaint here? That exploit quests all top the charts and are NEVER removed. So please don't try to convince us that it's to prevent exploits, because they're making a liar out of you (not your fault, but true none-the-less).

Exactly. It encourages gray-area behavior. It encourages us to create a ton of throw-away accounts to run our quests.

redneckronin · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

My husband has his own account, and that's what I'm saying. Only his runs have been counting, mine have not.

And I'm sorry, and this is not towards you... but to claim they're trying to prevent exploits is disingenuous at best. This ONLY and exclusively cripples legitimate authors. It is beyond abundantly clear that it does nothing whatsoever to prevent exploitive quests, and as such, should be abolished in order to encourage legitimate authors and give them hope of their quests at least making the magic "foundry eligible" mark.

^ This.

The two "exploit maps" I reported yesterday are still there in the play list.

Maybe if the Devs want to do something about preventing exploits they should remove those quests and ban the Author, it shouldn't be too hard to spot him, he has four or five quest with the exact same name.

All The Best

chai23 · July 2013

the D&D name on this game did not attract enough people who want to play the game the D&D way, playing through a quest for the challenge and seeing if they can make it through. It attracted too large of a percentage of MMO players who race to the end as quickly as possible > rinse > repeat, in order to get another chance at desired rewards.

Due to this, there needs to be a better reward system for playing through Foundry quests - something that will attract players to play through quests they havent played yet, like a one time random blue item for the same class of toon, with a chance of a purple, for a first time play through. Quest has to be at least 15 min long etc....

yipykaye · July 2013

I have always thought my runs did count. In fact with my new quest they are the only three runs it shows but I did notice today that my run on my middle quest did not count. I do agree that it is hard enough to get anyone to play outside authors doing review swaps.

zebular · July 2013

. . . . . Let me give just one, actually the only example I feel properly elaborates, of why this is so extremely exploitable for something to ask for, to try and clarify what I meant by my post above:

. . . . . John Doe UGC Man creates a super simple 15 minute mission. They publish it and then proceed to replay it over and over bumping it's plays/ratings to no end. They then go and do some edits to it and change all around to whatever agenda. Soon the foundry will fill with missions with apparently proper plays/ratings yet totally skewed by the author to give them more "lime-light" or other sinister workings.

. . . . . This alone, can lead to a myriad of things I can imagine being abused and is my understanding of why this has never been allowed. It even specifically states you cannot rate or review your own Foundry in the pop-up when completing one of your own foundry missions, so really all that is missing is the note about play counts.

. . . . . One just needs to advertise their works, word of mouth, friends and family. We have a sticky to advertise foundry works, as well as one can put it in their signatures as well as fansites, twitter, facebook, and so on and so forth. Then there's even the spotlight that Cryptic does, which anyone can submit their missions to as long as they meed the criteria.

nimmanu · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . Let me give just one, actually the only example I feel properly elaborates, of why this is so extremely exploitable for something to ask for, to try and clarify what I meant by my post above:

. . . . . John Doe UGC Man creates a super simple mission. They publish it and then proceed to replay it over and over bumping it's plays/ratings to no end. They then go and do some edits to it and change all around to whatever agenda. Soon the foundry will fill with missions with apparently proper plays/ratings yet totally skewed by the author to give them more "lime-light" or other sinister workings.

. . . . . This alone, can lead to a myriad of things I can imagine being abused.

With gentle respect, how is that different to what's happening now? There are only exploit maps at the top of the list right now, anyway.

So clearly it is doing nothing to deter people from this. But it is harming legitimate authors tremendously.

People can do what you're saying right now. They just get onto another account they made and do it... and if they have several accounts, they can even give themselves multiple 5 stars.

I'm asking a legitimate, honest question... how would it be any different than it is right now? You're NOT preventing what you're saying, because it's the current NORM. If it's the current NORM with this prohibition in place, then my friend... the prohibition isn't working and is harming good authors terribly.

You're cutting of your nose to spite your face, and people are still spitting in your face in spite of your attempts to curb it... You just as well keep your nose, since the face-spitters aren't stopped by this in the least. They are carrying on apace while decent authors are being crippled severely by this.

It isn't a sensible solution and is an obvious failure if that's really the intent of it. All it does is encourage exploitation, in fact. Those who won't exploit will continue to be lost in the sea of exploits. Those who will exploit are not even mildly discouraged or stopped by this.

It's illogical to continue this when it has not remotely assisted in deterring this behavior... especially in light of its deleterious effects upon those that you DO want to keep and encourage.

xpurpleinsanityx · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . Let me give just one, actually the only example I feel properly elaborates, of why this is so extremely exploitable for something to ask for, to try and clarify what I meant by my post above:

. . . . . John Doe UGC Man creates a super simple 15 minute mission. They publish it and then proceed to replay it over and over bumping it's plays/ratings to no end. They then go and do some edits to it and change all around to whatever agenda. Soon the foundry will fill with missions with apparently proper plays/ratings yet totally skewed by the author to give them more "lime-light" or other sinister workings.

. . . . . This alone, can lead to a myriad of things I can imagine being abused and is my understanding of why this has never been allowed. It even specifically states you cannot rate or review your own Foundry in the pop-up when completing one of your own foundry missions, so really all that is missing is the note about play counts.

. . . . . One just needs to advertise their works, word of mouth, friends and family. We have a sticky to advertise foundry works, as well as one can put it in their signatures as well as fansites, witter, facebook, and so on and so forth.

We're talking about PLAYS, though, not RATINGS.

zebular · July 2013

xpurpleinsanityx wrote: »

We're talking about PLAYS, though, not RATINGS.

No need to yell. I was too. Please do re-read what you quoted.

xpurpleinsanityx · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

No need to yell. I was too. Please do re-read what you quoted.

Aww, I didn't mean it as yelling.

Just emphasis XD

Edit: Also, you kept saying "plays/ratings", and I believe there's a big difference between "plays/ratings" and "plays".

zebular · July 2013

xpurpleinsanityx wrote: »

Aww, I didn't mean it as yelling. Just emphasis XD

. . . . .It's all good. In my post you quoted, I was considering them all, plays, ratings and reviews. All are equally abusable if authors are allowed to adjust their own work's statistics by playing them.

cipher9nemo · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

With gentle respect, how is that different to what's happening now? There are only exploit maps at the top of the list right now, anyway.

So clearly it is doing nothing to deter people from this. But it is harming legitimate authors tremendously.

Bingo.

While I'm not too much up in arms about it, the situation does reapply that bad taste in the back of my mouth in how Cryptic/PWE is treating the Neverwinter community. They publicly denounce exploits, gold farming, etc., but those sort of people are still here, still profiting, still exploiting. Every day the honest players and authors here are getting more encouragement to go gray and play the system like all of the exploiters. Not that we are, but it's certainly poking us over and over again, egging us on.

So amidst this environment Cryptic decides to stop counting author's plays. Brilliant. /sarcasm

zebular · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

With gentle respect, how is that different to what's happening now? There are only exploit maps at the top of the list right now, anyway.

So clearly it is doing nothing to deter people from this. But it is harming legitimate authors tremendously.

People can do what you're saying right now. They just get onto another account they made and do it... and if they have several accounts, they can even give themselves multiple 5 stars.

I'm asking a legitimate, honest question... how would it be any different than it is right now? You're NOT preventing what you're saying, because it's the current NORM. If it's the current NORM with this prohibition in place, then my friend... the prohibition isn't working and is harming good authors terribly.

You're cutting of your nose to spite your face, and people are still spitting in your face in spite of your attempts to curb it... You just as well keep your nose, since the face-spitters aren't stopped by this in the least. They are carrying on apace while decent authors are being crippled severely by this.

It isn't a sensible solution and is an obvious failure if that's really the intent of it. All it does is encourage exploitation, in fact. Those who won't exploit will continue to be lost in the sea of exploits. Those who will exploit are not even mildly discouraged or stopped by this.

It's illogical to continue this when it has not remotely assisted in deterring this behavior... especially in light of its deleterious effects upon those that you DO want to keep and encourage.

. . . . . Yes, they could but that in itself is, in my opinion, an exploit and one that should be reported as using throw away accounts would be trace-able, and would be circumventing game mechanics. Just because people are abusing something doesn't mean it should then be allowed in some other form or fashion. With all due respect, that would be illogical to do otherwise.

nimmanu · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . Yes, they could but that in itself is, in my opinion, an exploit and one that should be reported as using throw away accounts would be trace-able, and would be circumventing game mechanics. Just because people are abusing something doesn't mean it should then be allowed in some other form or fashion.

Yes, but my friend, you're dealing in 'should' and not in the reality of what's occurring in the game. These exploits are NOT being dealt with. So author count has been nerfed in a way that harms legitimate authors, because of other exploits that should be stopped, but aren't being stopped.

I feel frustrated that you (by 'you', I mean Cryptic) don't seem to see this from the player point of view. You're putting a shackle around my neck as a legitimate player, to stop players who are pillaging villages... and saying they shouldn't be pillaging villages... so I'm the only one shackled when I'd never dream of pillaging a village.

The only ones punished here are those of us who wouldn't exploit. The people who ARE actively exploiting are NOT being punished because it takes too much manpower and resources... but this is an easy thing to do. But this easy thing to do harms only us non-pillagers.

The wrong people are being harmed in an attempt to stop something that is going to happen no matter what. Killing the good authors isn't stopping the exploiters. It might be a logical fix if Cryptic had time and resources and desire to remove exploit quests or to police what shouldn't be happening.

I'm not bagging on them for not being able to stop the exploiting. What I'm saying is that they must surrender to the realities of a limited budget and limited capability for policing the 'shoulds'. By protecting and promoting legitimate authors, instead of killing their work, they can help slowly nudge out these exploitive quests.

How are good quests going to nudge out exploitive ones when good quests are the ONLY ones being crippled by the "fixes"?

zahinder · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

[/COLOR]. . . . . One just needs to advertise their works, word of mouth, friends and family. We have a sticky to advertise foundry works, as well as one can put it in their signatures as well as fansites, twitter, facebook, and so on and so forth. Then there's even the spotlight that Cryptic does, which anyone can submit their missions to as long as they meed the criteria.

... Does that actually sound viable to you? That I happen to have 20 friends and family that play this game?

So Foundry requires us to go use alternate social media to make it work, but Dungeons and Skirmishes have LFG and matching.

There is a very deep disconnect on Cryptic's part about what Foundry means and how to make it work, and it is horribly disappointing. Again, they've had 3 years of STO to see these problems. And haven't learned anything.

Where's the in-game promotion? Where's the ability to do matching, like 'you've reviewed X and Y very highly, you might also like Z mission!'?

As for exploits, it takes maybe an hour to set up an alternate account capable of running missions (maybe less, I haven't tried it). There you go, exploiter has a free reviewer to give canned 5 stars.

And nothing currently stops authors from replacing highly rated grind missions with other stuff already. I'm not sure why it was even brought up.

To recap:
You can either try to have a system that is designed to run pretty much by itself with minimal oversight, where there are no handles for griefing. Either there are no ratings, or people can attach themselves to networks of reviews they value, or whatever.

Or you can rely on manpower to identify exploiters and take action to keep the waters clean of abuse.

Or some mixture.

Cryptic has opted with 'easily abused system and unwillingness to take action on anything other than really blatant TOS violations.' (IE: <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>, racism, etc)

zebular · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

Yes, but my friend, you're dealing in 'should' and not in the reality of what's occurring in the game. These exploits are NOT being dealt with. So author count has been nerfed in a way that harms legitimate authors, because of other exploits that should be stopped, but aren't being stopped.

I feel frustrated that you (by 'you', I mean Cryptic) don't seem to see this from the player point of view. You're putting a shackle around my neck as a legitimate player, to stop players who are pillaging villages... and saying they shouldn't be pillaging villages... so I'm the only one shackled when I'd never dream of pillaging a village.

The only ones punished here are those of us who wouldn't exploit. The people who ARE actively exploiting are NOT being punished because it takes too much manpower and resources... but this is an easy thing to do. But this easy thing to do harms only us non-pillagers.

The wrong people are being harmed in an attempt to stop something that is going to happen no matter what. Killing the good authors isn't stopping the exploiters. It might be a logical fix if Cryptic had time and resources and desire to remove exploit quests or to police what shouldn't be happening.

I'm not bagging on them for not being able to stop the exploiting. What I'm saying is that they must surrender to the realities of a limited budget and limited capability for policing the 'shoulds'. By protecting and promoting legitimate authors, instead of killing their work, they can help slowly nudge out these exploitive quests.

How are good quests going to nudge out exploitive ones when good quests are the ONLY ones being crippled by the "fixes"?

. . . . . . I'm pretty sure that they do indeed care. Besides, how do you know they do not? Just because certain quests aren't disappearing? Report them, that is all I can say. Report, report, report. If it truly was just a matter of needing enough out-cry from players, then if masses of people were reporting these missions, change would happen, so that logic is not something I can understand either in your statements.

. . . . . . So really, all I can say is Report it (and I mean by the proper methods, the forums are not the proper method) and trust me that things to make the foundry better for legitimate authors and players are being done behind the scenes, whether you can see or believe it or not - it is. The game has only been alive for one month now. Let's let this baby grow up some and mature. *the mage nods and pats his Neverwinter icon*

zahinder · July 2013

Zebular, except apparently folks have been told that Cryptic is unwilling to look at exploits and griefing of any complexity.

And, again, this game may be one month old but you'll excuse me if that doesn't fly high when Cryptic has a previous, almost identical Foundry system that's faced ALL OF THESE EXACT SAME ISSUES for three years now.

nimmanu · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . . I'm pretty sure that they do indeed care. Besides, how do you know they do not? Just because certain quests aren't disappearing? Report them, that is all I can say. Report, report, report. If it truly was just a matter of needing enough out-cry from players, then if masses of people were reporting these missions, change would happen, so that logic is not something I can understand either in your statements.

. . . . . . So really, all I can say is Report it (and I mean by the proper methods, the forums are not the proper method) and trust me that things to make the foundry better for legitimate authors and players are being done behind the scenes, whether you can see or believe it or not - it is. The game has only been alive for one month now. Let's let this baby grow up some and mature. *the mage nods and pats his Neverwinter icon*

Now, just a second here, please. I definitely did not say they don't care! Please re-read what I said, which was never once that they don't care. In point of fact, if I felt they didn't care, I would not take my time to use my voice; for I would believe it would go unheard. I do think that at least someone there definitely cares; and I don't think a lack of caring is the issue. I think it's a budget and manpower issue.

And realistically speaking, it's necessary to take things as they stand, not how they should be. This 'fix' is horribly harmful to legitimate authors. It must be said, or it will go unnoticed in the drive to find a less manpower-intensive way to stop exploiting. Which, by the way, does not show uncaring, it shows wisdom--using less manpower when you're low on manpower is a good thing... unless it cripples the authors you WANT to have indirectly working for you.

EDIT: Additionally, the majority won't report exploit quests... they will use them! So relying on the majority of players to report exploit quests, and ignoring the ones that only get a few reports, is a bad choice.

The kind of person who will report an exploit quest is also the kind that will not play said exploit quest to completion. Something to think about.

zebular · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

Now, just a second here, please. I definitely did not say they don't care! Please re-read what I said, which was never once that they don't care. In point of fact, if I felt they didn't care, I would not take my time to use my voice; for I would believe it would go unheard. I do think that at least someone there definitely cares; and I don't think a lack of caring is the issue. I think it's a budget and manpower issue.

And realistically speaking, it's necessary to take things as they stand, not how they should be. This 'fix' is horribly harmful to legitimate authors. It must be said, or it will go unnoticed in the drive to find a less manpower-intensive way to stop exploiting. Which, by the way, does not show uncaring, it shows wisdom--using less manpower when you're low on manpower is a good thing... unless it cripples the authors you WANT to have indirectly working for you.

. . . . . This wasn't a fix though, this is how it has always been. It is not this which is crippling, it is the problem players. To open the door of a barrier that blocks problem players from doing even more harm, is not something I can wrap my head around as to being acceptable to do, just because problem players have found another way to do bad things.

. . . . . I'm sorry but your first two paragraphs I quoted come off as though you're "pointing out" that they are not doing anything, despite player reports, meaning they do not care. I just wanted to emphasize that they do indeed care. So now that that is understood by both of us, I don't see why this issue needs to be argued in this manner when nothing will be done by you and I going back and forth on what is acceptable and what is not. Anyway, I have said my peace about this so please take my thoughts, opinions, and conveyances as is.

. . . . . I cannot stress enough; Report it, report it, report it. That may have to be my new mantra! *the mage nods and begins formulating a ritual spell*

zebular · July 2013

zahinder wrote: »

Zebular, except apparently folks have been told that Cryptic is unwilling to look at exploits and griefing of any complexity.

And, again, this game may be one month old but you'll excuse me if that doesn't fly high when Cryptic has a previous, almost identical Foundry system that's faced ALL OF THESE EXACT SAME ISSUES for three years now.

. . . . . I'm sorry but who is telling who? I highly doubt Cryptic is telling anyone that. It's more likely someone got a canned response or got a misunderstood response and didn't follow through and reopen the ticket for clarification and further discussion. A Closed Ticket doesn't mean that's it, all done, case dismissed. It just means they replied and do not need the ticket Open as a new ticket waiting response. If it needs a response, re-open it by replying to it and choose "Open" on the drop down menu.

. . . . . Bug reports will not get a response, as they go straight to the Devs. If you need a response, make an in-game GM Ticket (not Bug Report) or file a Support Ticket on the website: https://support.perfectworld.com/app/ask

nimmanu · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . I cannot stress enough; Report it, report it, report it. That may have to be my new mantra! *the mage nods and begins formulating a ritual spell*

You have to use the exploit to report the exploit. Do you think that someone like me is going to exploit and then excuse it with, "well, I only cheated so that I could report that it's a cheat"?

If nothing can be accomplished by a discussion such as this, then are you saying that no one who has input on it reads or will read this? Because you disagree, you won't point it out to anyone who could address this and recognize that a compromise of some kind needs to be found?

zebular · July 2013

nimmanu wrote: »

You have to use the exploit to report the exploit. Do you think that someone like me is going to exploit and then excuse it with, "well, I only cheated so that I could report that it's a cheat"?

If nothing can be accomplished by a discussion such as this, then are you saying that no one who has input on it reads or will read this? Because you disagree, you won't point it out to anyone who could address this and recognize that a compromise of some kind needs to be found?

. . . . .Thankfully that is flat out wrong, no offense. Open Help, press GM Ticket, choose Behavior and then input the Author's handle and in the body give the details on why it is an exploit mission. Include the Short-code.

. . . . Again, no you are misunderstanding. Nothing will be done by us arguing what is right and what is wrong. I have given you the facts yet there is always a but this or that. Where does this argument end? That is what I meant. There's no need to argue the facts. Exploiting is wrong. Exploiting to overcome exploiters is wrong. That is the bottom line in my point.

runebane · July 2013

zebular wrote: »

. . . . . Your own account's plays on that same account's foundry works have never counted towards anything, if they did - it was a fluke bug and has apparently been fixed. This is to keep authors from exploiting the system for their own foundry works. Have your husband make his own account. Wanting to run your own missions to fix them should be encouragement enough. I'd be weary of material which the author doesn't want to play their own missions, especially to find bugs and things to fix or change.

. . . . . I will never create something I don't enjoy myself. I've played my missions countless times now since Alpha. I've never seen my own plays count and I've never been able to rate my own plays since Alpha.

*the mage smiles and nods*

When was this fix put in? Because this isn't the way it works. I just got my latest (Diversion) quest daily eligible last-night with my own plays. 6 reviews/plays were from others. The rest was me.

*Just ran it one more time with a character that hadn't run it before. The play count jumped up to 21 about 30 seconds after I ran it. I think its either 1/play a day per character or you have to run some other foundries in between.*

karitr · July 2013

Guys, replays do not count towards total plays, so being unable to get a credit on your author account loses you 1 play.

Author Plays Don't Count!

Comments