They are all dug & rewards added.
No worries, I will make sure the post gets passed onto Goober.
Feedback 2024 Awesomia Battle Initiative - Feedback
- Thread starter Jordy
- Start date
WesternCalin
Well-Known Member
There was a survey literally a week or 2 weeks ago regarding fort rebalancing where we are asked a couple questions regarding attack/defence for all types of forts.{I still have never seen any survey at all regarding this topic of voting for/or against rules/limitations concerning any kind of 'team number balancing' for FF! How can a valid vote be held when players do NOT know about either the issues at hand, the survey&/or the vote itself!). I posed questions before and I have no idea how Goober's answer can even be considered as a thoughtful reply despite all that hard work I'm sure he somehow gets done in other worlds... Truly no offense implied here, Goober, BUT I would like an opportunity to see how the rules applied to much larger worlds could even work successfully in Briscoe. I'm engaged in a long-running telegram asking for Briscoe's FF suggestions while taking into account all alliances. Definitely NOT easy to do! Perhaps you could give us a few suggestions since you are our FF expert and I place zero faith in your words: "We MAY rerun the survey on an annual basis (Really? ONLY once a year and a maybe at that!, Goober??) & even that's a "maybe"!! I am fighting to keep FF alive and well in Briscoe along with it's "battle's" being actual battles and NOT just a slaughter that allows some players to up their k/o's while others simply lose interest! Or there are people like me who want to win by capturing the Flag when possible and best for alliance as a whole in big picture (I attack a lot in FFs!) but have been intimidated by other players saying that IF I I try to do so, they'll quit the FF and/or never FF with me again instead of stating their reasoning... I do know that I don't know everything about FFing for sure!! They seem to wanna rack up huge damage scores, etc. I understand that for players who've been FF here for 15 years or so (yet not all of us FFing have all that under our belt, so to speak., BUT NOT flagging every time even when appropriate in big picture because individuals want to k/o all the opposition is NOT always okay either!! And certainly threatening FFs (me for sure) who want to win by capturing the Flag should NEVER be chastised, put down or threatened by their own team mates! SO - ideas on any of my thoughts/feelings that I've expressed here? Especially you, Goober, as I do not appreciate being patronized like I feel you did last time I asked you most of these questions. Truly no offense, just want helpful suggestions, please! And thank y'all as always!
Clever Hans
Well-Known Member
That one was dug by a player last night.They are all dug & rewards added.
No worries, I will make sure the post gets passed onto Goober.
Hoss his battle will be cancelled and overwritten by the Awesomia which we have permission for. We are never allowed to add rewards to player-dug battles. I will make sure to remind the players of Las Vegas via saloon.
Battle in Las Vegas has been dug in the official way, please do remind players to re-sign for the battle. The 3x 650 Pretzels were added to the official battle. I set a Saloon topic to remind players too in Las Vegas, which will be removed when the battle starts (20:30 or 8:30PM ST).
Join restrictions survey is different from the fort rebalancing survey. The rebalancing survey was only done in Colorado since it is the only world that can fill small, medium and large forts.
The survey was run as a login poll. If you happened not to log in at all during the 7 days it was running then I'm sorry you missed it. If you did log in but missed it, then that should go a long way towards explaining why we do not run polls frequently: Polls are intrusive and when run frequently players become attenuated to just closing them rather than responding.{I still have never seen any survey at all regarding this topic of voting for/or against rules/limitations concerning any kind of 'team number balancing' for FF! How can a valid vote be held when players do NOT know about either the issues at hand, the survey&/or the vote itself!). I posed questions before and I have no idea how Goober's answer can even be considered as a thoughtful reply despite all that hard work I'm sure he somehow gets done in other worlds... Truly no offense implied here, Goober, BUT I would like an opportunity to see how the rules applied to much larger worlds could even work successfully in Briscoe. I'm engaged in a long-running telegram asking for Briscoe's FF suggestions while taking into account all alliances. Definitely NOT easy to do! Perhaps you could give us a few suggestions since you are our FF expert and I place zero faith in your words: "We MAY rerun the survey on an annual basis (Really? ONLY once a year and a maybe at that!, Goober??) & even that's a "maybe"!! I am fighting to keep FF alive and well in Briscoe along with it's "battle's" being actual battles and NOT just a slaughter that allows some players to up their k/o's while others simply lose interest! Or there are people like me who want to win by capturing the Flag when possible and best for alliance as a whole in big picture (I attack a lot in FFs!) but have been intimidated by other players saying that IF I I try to do so, they'll quit the FF and/or never FF with me again instead of stating their reasoning... I do know that I don't know everything about FFing for sure!! They seem to wanna rack up huge damage scores, etc. I understand that for players who've been FF here for 15 years or so (yet not all of us FFing have all that under our belt, so to speak., BUT NOT flagging every time even when appropriate in big picture because individuals want to k/o all the opposition is NOT always okay either!! And certainly threatening FFs (me for sure) who want to win by capturing the Flag should NEVER be chastised, put down or threatened by their own team mates! SO - ideas on any of my thoughts/feelings that I've expressed here? Especially you, Goober, as I do not appreciate being patronized like I feel you did last time I asked you most of these questions. Truly no offense, just want helpful suggestions, please! And thank y'all as always!
On worlds that can be expected to fill battles, we can help with balance by adjusting the caps in response to the meta. Generally speaking, when attack or defense is winning practically all of the battles, we can reduce the numbers on one side and increase them on the other to give each side closer to even odds.
On worlds that cannot be expected to fill battles our options are limited to massively reducing caps so that they will fill (this has never been expressed as desired by any significant number of players) or, in the case of team declared Awesomia battles we can employ "join restrictions" that, through active management, restrict players from joining one side or the other at various points in time while trying to achieve a battle that has a turn-out where both sides have similar odds of prevailing. (success has been hit-or-miss, but simply attempting to balance this way does tend to lead to a fair amount of self-balancing)
We introduced this concept in the 2022 St. Patricks event https://forum.the-west.net/index.php?threads/st-patricks-awesomia-battle-join-restrictions.60727/
We expanded it in the 2022 Easter Event https://forum.the-west.net/index.php?threads/easter-awesomia-battle-join-restrictions.60757/
We then surveyed about continuing it via a series of forum polls
https://forum.the-west.net/index.php?threads/summary-of-join-restriction-survey-results.60815/
where most worlds opted in
In Feb 2023 We ran the survey again via login poll https://forum.the-west.net/index.php?threads/join-restriction-survey-results.61288/
where most worlds opted in
In Feb 2024 We ran the survey again and that time all worlds rejected it.
I anticipate we will run it again in early 2025, if not sooner. This time around we will precede it with a "technology demonstration" (similar to the initial introduction in 2022), and I will work to improve the wording of the poll.
As for what other things we can offer worlds with less than full battles:
While some of these may no longer be permitted, if they are requested, we can see about reintroducing them
forum.the-west.net
On-Demand Fort Building reductions
(reducing the level of towers can be an effective way to reduce the advantage on defense which can lead to more balanced battles)
On-Demand NPC digs of owned forts
(having NPCs dig owned forts can lead to some fun battles)
Additionally we MAY be able to support gifting a fort to the NPCs whereupon battles there (particularly Medium and Small Forts) would face very different dynamics where more players are free to choose attack or defend.
[editing to add]
"on demand" setting of fort caps was formally discontinued. It may be reintroduced if there is significant demand.
While some of these may no longer be permitted, if they are requested, we can see about reintroducing them
Community Project: Fort Limit Rebalancing
Howdy Cowboys and Cowgirls, Our Mission The International market of The West has dedicated themselves to find the best attacker:defender ratio for Fort Battles. Thanks to all your cooperation in this matter we are very positive about trying out new combinations and finding the most balanced...
(reducing the level of towers can be an effective way to reduce the advantage on defense which can lead to more balanced battles)
On-Demand NPC digs of owned forts
(having NPCs dig owned forts can lead to some fun battles)
Additionally we MAY be able to support gifting a fort to the NPCs whereupon battles there (particularly Medium and Small Forts) would face very different dynamics where more players are free to choose attack or defend.
[editing to add]
"on demand" setting of fort caps was formally discontinued. It may be reintroduced if there is significant demand.
Lis Vallette
Active Member
Thank you for your response, Goober Pyle! The info is greatly appreciated! Well done!
chydovish4e
Well-Known Member
awesomia on colorado or too earlie on 18, or too late on 23
but dead worlds got good time
wots wrong with u?
but dead worlds got good time
wots wrong with u?
Due to many complaints that Awesomia battles lower the quality for Colorado battles we have decided to put them either early or late to respect Colorado's prime time dig. This way there can be a high quality prime time dig and an Awesomia battle the same day.
chydovish4e
Well-Known Member
and where is this great battle on prime before awesomia for 30.09?
who asked make awesomia late or earlie?
who asked make awesomia late or earlie?
PrancingPurplePony
Well-Known Member
latest round of Awesomias supposedly scheduled for 7 Oct, according to forum, but not yet set up on Arizona, Colorado or Dakota, and probably others that I don't play. And again Colorado has a late start time that will not finish before the day change
BigNoob
Well-Known Member
This is how a player tells a mod to set Awesomia at the time he wants to fit his personal agenda of double battles in Awesomia days. I won't give my personal opinion about this. But as a legitimate member of this game's community I would like to state that I believe it would have been better to ask the general opinion of all players before deciding something like this. A decision like this should be debated first. My personal opinion is that we should not have two battles during Awesomia days OR that any eventual extra battle should happen AFTER Awesomia. If everyone disagrees with chydovish4e and I then we will obviously submit ourselves to the will of the majority.
chydovish4e
Well-Known Member
agree, awesomia in colo should be 1 in prime and good time (not17 or 23)
White Wolf
Member
So a certain group of players not only control an entire server's fort fighting scene by moving towns between alliances to suit their agendas whenever battles don't go their way, now they also control when community events are organized. I don't know if this is supposed to be amusing or sad, but maybe its about time they start posting community polls for these sort of things
naveenstuns
Member
um why colo needs awesomia battles anyway? just give rewards to everyone who joins any FF on that particular day
I can tell you that this is not the case. I can say that as I plan & dig Awesomia battles too and am not part of a big alliance. The only truth here is that we did decide to do the fight either early or late as it would allow the players to also dig another battle themselves. This is because Awesomia battles in Colorado always fill & that would mean players get left out sometimes. A player dug battle allows those players to also get Pretzels that day. It is something done out of courtesy & not because a certain group controls the server. Nobody controls the server.
This is because we are under no circumstances allowed to add rewards to a player dug battle. This is forbidden by the rules & thus the team digs Awesomia battles as we are infact allowed to add rewards to Awesomia battles.