The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
useless statistics )))Some statistics across all worlds for this opening Valentine's day no-bonus battle series:
Total signups: 912
total attendances: 704 (22.8% no shows)
Signed for attack: 486
Showed up for attack: 378 (22.2% no shows)
Signed for defense: 426
Showed up for defense: 326 (23.5% no shows)
Total KOs: 351 (49.9%)
Attackers KO'd: 115 (30.4%)
Defenders KO'd: 236 (55.4%)
Total Hearts Awarded: 470,304
Colorado hearts Awarded: Base: 660 Total: 126,060
Las Vegas hearts Awarded: Base: 594 Total: 98,010
Kansas hearts Awarded: Base: 534 Total: 80,634
Fairbank hearts Awarded: Base: 420 Total: 41,160
Arizona hearts Awarded: Base: 384 Total: 34,176
Juarez hearts Awarded: Base: 348 Total: 28,188
Houston hearts Awarded: Base: 246 Total: 14,268
Briscoe hearts Awarded: Base: 258 Total: 14,190
El Dorado hearts Awarded: Base: 222 Total: 12,432
Idaho hearts Awarded: Base: 234 Total: 10,530
Galveston hearts Awarded: Base: 156 Total: 5,616
Dakota hearts Awarded: Base: 168 Total: 5,040
Mostly, yes.useless statistics )))
Thanks for that.Though, I would argue that the base hearts and total hearts per world is illustrative of the relative health of the fort fighting communities on each world and might justify a deeper analysis into which worlds might reasonably be skipped over, or see reduced awards for fort fighting initiatives that require significant Team resources to benefit a limited number of players
<as player>Thanks for that.
I wish they would just follow such statistics and finally open some optional migration routes.
I agree; I would like to see Galveston and Dakota closed off to GM digs and offer migration to, say, Fairbank, to anyone who has participated in FF's.
Perhaps one the other or both could be declared a fort-free world (assign all forts to Henry and make them uncapturable) and players on any world seeking a fort-free existence could choose to migrate there.
I would like to see Galveston and Dakota closed off to GM digs and offer migration to, say, Fairbank, to anyone who has participated in FF's.
I don’t know much about the migration protocols, but, yes, for players who already have a developed toon on the primary migration path, secondary paths should be offered (within reason)I assume this is because Colorado is already FF heavy? Even in an optional migration, you're going to want more than one trail. Fairbanks, Arizona and Juarez look like your top three. Kansas and Las Vegas came after the change to the battle formulae, so they don't count.
It is an attempt to get people to sign up for the side that people think will lose in an effort to have better battles.Why are the bonds rewarded to a particular side before the battle? Doesn't that just encourage all chars to sign up for that side?
I will look into this. Thank you.I don't know where to write this but I think there's a problem in kansas battles : earlier there were a battle dug by a player for friday 10:30 pm and NPC awesomia for saturday at 8 pm (as mentionned above). But now the battle dug by the player is scheduled for 8 pm and awesomia for 11:30 pm (and this for friday for both) ... ?