DeletedUser
w2-w10, not w1.
w2-w10, not w1.
DeletedUser
I strongly suggest You fix the duel system before engaging time and effort on something like this.
The idea just sucks. Let people play from scratch like everyone already on that world
The idea just sucks. Let people play from scratch like everyone already on that world
DeletedUser14006
You cannot be serious West?
This is by far the most pressing concern to the game as a whole, even more so than the current dueling debacle.
I agree dueling needs to be looked at and improved but there is nothing wrong with this idea at all, it is excellent.
Olympos
Active Member
Well i play on all worlds here.
I would prefer to have all my characters inventory, holiday quest skills and attributes merge into one of my more active worlds i like.
Edit: without deleting my high level crafter in my active world.
Or better yet allow players like me that play on all worlds and don't wish for there hard work to be just delete. Move the characters into storage to be use or merge into new worlds.
I would prefer to have all my characters inventory, holiday quest skills and attributes merge into one of my more active worlds i like.
Edit: without deleting my high level crafter in my active world.
Or better yet allow players like me that play on all worlds and don't wish for there hard work to be just delete. Move the characters into storage to be use or merge into new worlds.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
As much as I admire You and, value Your oppinion Derek, I must say this would seriously unbalance any world that You migrate high level characters into. Not to talk about the injustice it will be to the people already there, who have put time and effort into their characters.
Give people free nuggets, bonds or what ever for deleting an old world character but, do not upset the game more than it already is.
It seems to me it's just one more "oops" solution to a problem that really should have been fixed a long time ago
Give people free nuggets, bonds or what ever for deleting an old world character but, do not upset the game more than it already is.
It seems to me it's just one more "oops" solution to a problem that really should have been fixed a long time ago
DeletedUser14006
I hear what you are saying West but cannot see how it will unbalance a world, and like the saying goes "better late than never" 
DeletedUser
Well yes RWest it will not be business as usual on the worlds that people merge into... Do you really want it to be? People will be coming from worlds where they lost all their towns and forts and they will stir things up by founding towns and alliances and trying to get a piece of the new world. I think it can be really cool if you think about it. There will be a lot of new energy, the kind of intense energy that comes in a new world, but with older characters - instant action! So maybe the established alliances will have some new challenges. I guess I can see how that would be annoying if you are one who already has everything all tied up neatly on a world. But if everything just stays the same then those worlds risk becoming stagnant. This will bring new challenges for everyone.
DeletedUser15641
Well make a specific number of max. players who can migrate from w15 to world 3.
Wait is it not that w3 is too dead to be active again?I see that it needs over 60 active players to re activate it.
Are you guys trying to save some cash with closing down dead worlds?Why did you guys make it in the first place??
Btw you guys are really bugging me with this coming to extension as i am really close on getting gg in w2.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser14006
Instead of thinking about all the negatives of migration leading to worlds closing, start thinking of the positives as Larastar has pointed out.
You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.
DeletedUser15641
Its not a good thing you guys will ruin all that hard work made by people and it will make them more sad then happy.
So how is that good?
Yes their is advantages but their are a lot more disadvantages for this plan.
So how is that good?
Yes their is advantages but their are a lot more disadvantages for this plan.
DeletedUser16008
+1 and time is running out, old worlds are of late deteriorating rapidly.......
I don't often say this but instead of continuing this circular discussion make it a simple poll with very few options and send it on a log in notice... A B or C
And please please please allow old worlds to have the option of going to w1 and bare in mind no old world has point buying options like 11 - 14... the only 2 worlds like 2 - 10 are W1 and W15 11- 14 are not the same... yes theres a difference as im on 13 and 14 already.
Then MAKE A DECISION & GET ON WITH IT ASAP
Hopefully ill see you on w1 del
footnote.... RWest is correct btw dueling lameness is killing the game faster than anything it needs sorting as much as a merger does if not more.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
As I currently understand what is being stated, players may move but don't have to move to a new world. Is this correct? This would leave many of the older worlds much less active if the players choose to do this. Something that may have already been done, but not discussed, is how many people are there in these so called dead worlds that aren't already playing in the more active worlds? I'm playing in all 15 of the .net worlds and I'm active on all of them on a daily basis ... this doesn't mean I'm an active fort fighter on each of the 15 but rather that I've chosen different character developments on different worlds so that I may enjoy different aspects of the game (I've noted that some other players do the same with an emphasis on crafting in one world and fort fighting in another and dueling in another and questing, etc. etc.).
The request for clarification is because it's a bit ambiguous at this time whether or not the characters can choose to move to another world or will be forced to move to another world ..... and what happens when you have too many characters and not enough vacant worlds to move into as well (mothballing or archiving a character is an interesting possibility but just erasing a character completely because he/she has no available world to move to is a bit sadistic, at least it will seem that way to those people who have placed their time in developing multiple characters). I currently play in all 15 of the .net and have GG's in 13 of the 15 (and Key 3 in the remaining worlds) so to say I'd be upset at having my characters vaporized would be a colossal understatement and I know that I'm not the only person who falls into this category, in fact many of the more active players are likely to encounter similar circumstances. There are also players who use different accounts to play on different worlds because that was their original understanding of how it had to be done (to not violate the multi-character rule which is pretty strictly enforced).
Depending on the response, I'm certain that I'll have some followup questions or comments.
Added : Consider the emotions (and future loyalty) of the players who have spent three or more years developing characters that they are now faced with the real possibility of being forced to delete (not migrate, because you can't migrate into a world where you already have characters) and before I hear responses of "there aren't that many people like that" I'd suggest that someone run the numbers to really find out how many people "like that" there are (simply have someone at innogames do a run on all the accounts and compare characters in dying worlds vs characters in newer worlds to see how many will fall under the equation of:
If (characters in W2-10) > (5 - characters in W11-W15) then TRUE
and this will show you how many active accounts will have characters "deleted" because there's no place for them to go.
And although this is a separate issue, it does pertain to the merging of worlds and that's putting a limitation on alliance size in the form of towns or total population. The strong get stronger and weak die off or quit. IMO, that's a major factor in worlds dying. When everyone belongs to one of the large alliances they can all just hold hands, sing kumbaya, fall asleep (due to boredom) and never wake up. There are other more complex ideas I've seen but this is one that is short (in the form of easy to manipulate/code) and relevant to the topic of merging worlds and world activity too. What good will merging do if you lose the same number of players in the active worlds that you are adding to those worlds (you can only put so much water into a cup before it overflows and is lost).
The request for clarification is because it's a bit ambiguous at this time whether or not the characters can choose to move to another world or will be forced to move to another world ..... and what happens when you have too many characters and not enough vacant worlds to move into as well (mothballing or archiving a character is an interesting possibility but just erasing a character completely because he/she has no available world to move to is a bit sadistic, at least it will seem that way to those people who have placed their time in developing multiple characters). I currently play in all 15 of the .net and have GG's in 13 of the 15 (and Key 3 in the remaining worlds) so to say I'd be upset at having my characters vaporized would be a colossal understatement and I know that I'm not the only person who falls into this category, in fact many of the more active players are likely to encounter similar circumstances. There are also players who use different accounts to play on different worlds because that was their original understanding of how it had to be done (to not violate the multi-character rule which is pretty strictly enforced).
Depending on the response, I'm certain that I'll have some followup questions or comments.
Added : Consider the emotions (and future loyalty) of the players who have spent three or more years developing characters that they are now faced with the real possibility of being forced to delete (not migrate, because you can't migrate into a world where you already have characters) and before I hear responses of "there aren't that many people like that" I'd suggest that someone run the numbers to really find out how many people "like that" there are (simply have someone at innogames do a run on all the accounts and compare characters in dying worlds vs characters in newer worlds to see how many will fall under the equation of:
If (characters in W2-10) > (5 - characters in W11-W15) then TRUE
and this will show you how many active accounts will have characters "deleted" because there's no place for them to go.
And although this is a separate issue, it does pertain to the merging of worlds and that's putting a limitation on alliance size in the form of towns or total population. The strong get stronger and weak die off or quit. IMO, that's a major factor in worlds dying. When everyone belongs to one of the large alliances they can all just hold hands, sing kumbaya, fall asleep (due to boredom) and never wake up. There are other more complex ideas I've seen but this is one that is short (in the form of easy to manipulate/code) and relevant to the topic of merging worlds and world activity too. What good will merging do if you lose the same number of players in the active worlds that you are adding to those worlds (you can only put so much water into a cup before it overflows and is lost).
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted User - 1278415
I would be for starting all worlds over. If you are going to make it hard on the people be uprooted from 2-10... then make it interesting for 11-15 too. Up root everyone.
Cleanse all towns and forts and have a free for all with experienced characters. Wipe the leader boards also.
Then again I've always been partial to Chaos.
Cleanse all towns and forts and have a free for all with experienced characters. Wipe the leader boards also.
Then again I've always been partial to Chaos.
DeletedUser
They still have an advantage over w1, like in getting GGs, but I could see another poll for that. It will be better for w1 to keep it going, esp. if w1 has the option to migrate themselves.
DeletedUser
Since you can buy reskill potions through the shop in W1, the difficulty in not placating the Shaman has been largely eliminated for the participants of W1. It's still not that easy to reskill but you can do a complete reskill in a few months now where it could take the better part of a year to do it before (and you'd be broke afterwards too). Potions of weakening and forgetfulness are available at 600 bonds while the potion of forgetfulness is available at 1000 bonds and an aggressively active player should come close to 100 bonds per week (31 per week from the daily, 21 from the bonuses, 5 for the weekly bonus and the remainder from fort fighting ... 100 per week shouldn't be a problem and 150 per week isn't out of the question either so that would make 4-6 weeks for a partial reskill and 6-10 weeks for a full reskill there). And people might want to migrate out of W1 to an easier world but I'm with Elmyr about not allowing an easier world to migrate into W1.
DeletedUser30307
I would advocate a merger instead of a migration. i'll probably never be affected by the merger (hopefully) but there would be others who would be & if it was a merger then it 'ought' to be better than the migration.
eg. a person playing on both 3 & 15 actively, he is 'indirectly' asked to give up one world....in my opinion that is not fair, hence i would recommend a merger instead of a migration.
the above is keeping in mind the handful players (which on the face of it does not including me) who will suffer....else i am all for this
DeletedUser6752
Well, there's definitely no complete "Happy Ending" to this situation - everybody's going to lose something (the players, at least) - and the more you have invested in the game, the more you'll end up losing. There's no way around it, and since it's not possible to go back in time to correct any past mistakes, there's no use pointing fingers at Inno and saying what they should have done. Too late. The only thing they might come away with from this that might be helpful in the future - is that if there is a next time, maybe they won't crank out worlds faster than a rabbit cranks out babies.
Someone who plays in all worlds will lose 9 characters, it looks like - since they play in 11-15 as well, there would be no place for them to migrate 2-10. So that would be that much time and however much in the way of nuggets across 9 worlds - they would have essentially nothing to show for. Granted, a computer game is always like that - once you're done, there is nothing concrete to show for the time you invested. If you completed the game, you can have that satisfaction knowing you finished it - but in an ongoing game such as this, there's no 'finish' for you to reach. You just play until you're tired of playing, and then you just leave off. It isn't easy, since you have that guy on the screen with all that gear and all those EXP and Health points you worked so hard to get - but those are, after all, just numbers on a screen. To throw them away seems like such a waste, but what do you stand to gain by not deleting them? if you're no longer having fun - if for some reason the enjoyment you used to get from a game is just no longer there - what point is there to keep playing? All you get is frustration and aggravation, and certainly no more enjoyment - so there's no point to keep playing if the game is no longer enjoyable.
The fact of the matter seems to be that player characters on certain worlds will either be migrated to other worlds or eventually deleted along with the world. No consideration can be made for the preference of individuals for keeping one world over another - and by now it's clear that there is no way to inject more life into the older worlds, so they're eventually doomed. Towns, alliances, forts - everything you're familiar with on world 2, for example - will be scattered to the newer worlds somehow, but not in full. If you're part of an alliance in w2 with 75 forts available to them, there's no guarantee there will even be such an alliance in your new world, let alone that you will be a member of it. And will all the same people be in your new town, your new alliance, your new world? Maybe, but again maybe not. That can't be predicted yet until they know how characters will be moved. But don't count on anything like the situation your character is in now - there's no way it can possibly be the same on another world where things have been established for a long time already. You will be the newcomers and you will have to find a place for yourself. If you still have, or can come up with, enough enthusiasm to essentially start over again, you can build a town or an alliance that can bring change to your new world, but it's going to take considerable effort, which a lot of old-timers may no longer have. You spend 3 or more years in the same town or alliance with the same friends, it gets pretty hard to change things - especially if the change isn't your own doing, but is being forced on you. That's where many older players will drop off. Their comfort level will just vanish when they are moved, and many of them will vanish themselves once that happens.
So there's no point in arguing for keeping the older worlds - the best you can hope for is that you get used to the idea and when the time comes, that you can adjust yourself to your new world(s). If you can't, sadly the only other option is to stop playing. But seriously, you weren't planning on playing this game for the next 10 years, were you? Eventually you were going to end up dropping it. It's just that that day could get here sooner than you had expected.
Someone who plays in all worlds will lose 9 characters, it looks like - since they play in 11-15 as well, there would be no place for them to migrate 2-10. So that would be that much time and however much in the way of nuggets across 9 worlds - they would have essentially nothing to show for. Granted, a computer game is always like that - once you're done, there is nothing concrete to show for the time you invested. If you completed the game, you can have that satisfaction knowing you finished it - but in an ongoing game such as this, there's no 'finish' for you to reach. You just play until you're tired of playing, and then you just leave off. It isn't easy, since you have that guy on the screen with all that gear and all those EXP and Health points you worked so hard to get - but those are, after all, just numbers on a screen. To throw them away seems like such a waste, but what do you stand to gain by not deleting them? if you're no longer having fun - if for some reason the enjoyment you used to get from a game is just no longer there - what point is there to keep playing? All you get is frustration and aggravation, and certainly no more enjoyment - so there's no point to keep playing if the game is no longer enjoyable.
The fact of the matter seems to be that player characters on certain worlds will either be migrated to other worlds or eventually deleted along with the world. No consideration can be made for the preference of individuals for keeping one world over another - and by now it's clear that there is no way to inject more life into the older worlds, so they're eventually doomed. Towns, alliances, forts - everything you're familiar with on world 2, for example - will be scattered to the newer worlds somehow, but not in full. If you're part of an alliance in w2 with 75 forts available to them, there's no guarantee there will even be such an alliance in your new world, let alone that you will be a member of it. And will all the same people be in your new town, your new alliance, your new world? Maybe, but again maybe not. That can't be predicted yet until they know how characters will be moved. But don't count on anything like the situation your character is in now - there's no way it can possibly be the same on another world where things have been established for a long time already. You will be the newcomers and you will have to find a place for yourself. If you still have, or can come up with, enough enthusiasm to essentially start over again, you can build a town or an alliance that can bring change to your new world, but it's going to take considerable effort, which a lot of old-timers may no longer have. You spend 3 or more years in the same town or alliance with the same friends, it gets pretty hard to change things - especially if the change isn't your own doing, but is being forced on you. That's where many older players will drop off. Their comfort level will just vanish when they are moved, and many of them will vanish themselves once that happens.
So there's no point in arguing for keeping the older worlds - the best you can hope for is that you get used to the idea and when the time comes, that you can adjust yourself to your new world(s). If you can't, sadly the only other option is to stop playing. But seriously, you weren't planning on playing this game for the next 10 years, were you? Eventually you were going to end up dropping it. It's just that that day could get here sooner than you had expected.
DeletedUser25892
Although I am not in these other worlds, I am quite excited to see this option roll out as it may even make other new worlds even more active .
MM2099
.MM2099
DeletedUser
I am thrilled by this migration. In W5, we can only make small fort battles interesting anymore. Good move devs
DeletedUser
Substitute "playing the game" with "living your life" and you have an interesting parallel there don't you. We know we're all going to die, that doesn't mean we're anxious to speed it up now does it. Yes, the end of the game is inevitable as is our lives too but I'm still enjoying both and not in a hurry to end either prematurely.
What I was initially trying to determine is a clarification on how this merger is being planned. These pathways of migration are being created so that a character may merge from an older world to a newer world and I was seeking clarification on the word "may" (versus the word "must" or "will"). I know there is a difference in the way languages are interpreted and translated so I was wondering if there is anyone who is reading this that can clarify.
"may" merge : players that wish to leave an older world for a newer world can do so if they wish to do so but the old worlds will still remain, although probably with even further reduction in their activity.
"must" or "will" merge : players must make a choice on which world to move to or players will be forced to move to a newer world because the old worlds are being "whacked" (OK, Mafia Wars meet "The West" and I guess Guido Corleone with a Tommy Gun just beat John Wayne with a six shooter there ... let's just see if we're being made an offer we can't refuse).
For those players who are "blocked out" from migration because we have too many characters, I hope there is some sort of compensation for the deleted character (and I'm not talking nuggets here, but some value that might be reasonably placed on that character, their accomplishments, their possessions, etc. that can be transferred to another world or worlds .... For example, I have a Nat's Machete in W3 and an Al's Belt in W4 and those items can be translated into a fair market value of what those items could be purchased for on an open market and those characters could be given a value that could be transferred to a new world or spread across the new worlds. Some will scream that it's "not fair" but it's no less fair to inject the fair market value for those goods to an existing character than it is to "pop in" a complete new character .... unless the developers want to give us a chance to do this ourselves by allowing us to import a terminally ill character. This is bit of a "wild idea" but bear with me here. If you don't have the ability to transfer your character to an open world, your character can be imported as a "dying character" who is bed ridden and unable to move. This would give you time to sell or transfer all of your assets before your death ... not unlike a will would do in real life. Make all items on this "dying character" sellable or transferable so their assets would go to their "next of kin" (ie, your new character or a character or characters of your choosing) and just as it is in real life, there might even be a "death or estate tax" when this occurs too). If I have a choice on how to end my own characters existence then it is much more palatable then being told, "Last Ferry off the island is full and you're doomed ... BTW, you can't swim either so you're just gonna die, so sorry about your luck!"