Limit On Fort Holdings

[DeletedUser22575]

Your idea is more ESSENTIAL to prolonging this game than anything else. Socialist ??
Could have sworn these games were made to enhance peoples "SOCIAL" activities !??
Screaming "Socialist" sounds like something coming from an entitlement brat ! Think
they prefer playing with themselves anyway.

No, insisting that organized and competent towns when it comes to fort fighting be limited in the number of forts they can have, or that they have to rank someone irregardless of level when many of them are paying to play this game just so you can have a "social activity" at their expense sounds quite clearly like an "entitlement brat".

Now that is not to say there is not a problem with fort fighting.

But many of those lower level players do not get ranked because they do not make sure they have top equipment. They come to fort fight after fort fight with the same rusty, non precise weapons, wearing the same equipment they do for jobs that offers little to no benefit to them in a fort fight.

If players want to be ranked at fort fights the first thing they have to do is accept some responsibility for themselves and upgrade their equipment to the best for their level every time they progress in levels and better is available.

Instead they do not do this..then whine because they did not get ranked and they should be ranked no matter what because they have a "right" to be ranked.

They have no such right, and players who put the time, effort, and game money into building and trying to keep a fort are under no obligation to put themselves into a position where they might loose that fort so that someone else can have a "social activity".

The funniest part of your weak argument is that the people who actually have to work for a living and have real lives to support families are the SAME ones with your "inadequacies" ---you exclude them for the "Elite" unemployed, unemployable, students on Mom & Dad's dollar, and downright leeches off society who OBVIOUSLY have more time to devote to the game!!! They're the ones who can play 24/7, level and spend time getting golden guns !!!
Your logic is so flawed I almost envision you as the epitome of the aformentioned and first with your hand out begging in the bread line blaming corporations for YOUR failure ! Honestly that's the true nature of your beast :laugh:

You are quite obviously clueless. Many of those whom you refer to as "elite" are people whom work for a living. I myself make posts when I take breaks from working. Just as an example I have been building round pens for horses for five hours so far today and it is only 12:33 pm my time. The temperature is 90 degrees now and I will be doing so for about another five hours today. So before you start making generalizations about whom the "elite" in this game are stop and think about what you think you know versus what you actually know.

 

[DeletedUser9470]

imo this shows the limits of the game.
elite should be helping the new players.
advice on how to do things etc...
new players taken on in MC for example have access to all teh info they want, ad very quickly improve and become excellent players. im sure it is the same for newcomers in TP the enemy alliance on w10.
but this doesnt seem to happen on newer worlds.
and because theres too many people there but limits are the same, some are bound to lose out.

theres many solutions to resolve this:
make fort maps larger
call more fbs
deliberately call fbs for lower level players...

like ive said many times, the outcome of a fort battle isnt important, you lose some you win some.
the most important is that everyone enjoys.
if we succeed in making the game enjoyable for everyone, the player numbers will shoot through the roof.
the market is there, yet we as players do make a lot of newcomers quit early on in the game...
i believe inno already know this.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

imo this shows the limits of the game.
elite should be helping the new players.
advice on how to do things etc...
new players taken on in MC for example have access to all teh info they want, ad very quickly improve and become excellent players. im sure it is the same for newcomers in TP the enemy alliance on w10.
but this doesnt seem to happen on newer worlds.
and because theres too many people there but limits ae the same, some are bound to lose out.

theres many solutions to resolve this:
make fort maps larger
call more fbs
deliberately call fbs for lower level players...

like ive said many times, the outcome of a fort battle isnt important, you lose some you win some.
the most important is that everyone enjoys.
if we succeed in making the game enjoyable for everyone, the player numbers will shoot through the roof.
the market is there, yet we as players do make a lot of newcomers quit early on in the game...
i believe inno already know this.

I agree with what your saying to a large degree Neo, with one exception. Smaller towns and alliances who have limited forts and who have put the time, energy, and money into them do feel the out come of a fort battle is important. They may never have another if it is lost.

However, telling large and organized towns and alliances that there is a cap and you can't take any more forts removes the purpose of many of those towns and alliances from even existing. They will either leave the town/alliance they are in to continue fort fighting to their town/alliances detriment and standing in the rankings..or they will quit that world.

So their has to be a better solution than caps and mandatory ranking.

 

[DeletedUser]

I've mentioned something here and here, but it hasn't been discussed at all yet......

 

[DeletedUser]

You're 100% correct about the problem, but I don't know if a hard cap on forts is the solution, even though I care more about the battle than the fort. I don't think it would be good for activity if an alliance is forced to stop attacking when they get to 20 forts. That wouldn't happen though, because there are at least a couple workarounds I can think of: alliances would either split into multiple alliances, or family towns outside of the alliance would be used to dig, win, and own the fort, while allies take up the other slots in the fort so the alliance still has full access.

That is the part that needs to be addressed and looked into !! The full access for everyone in the alliance and any other alliance the fort owner decides to put in there ! There is no reason they should all have full access to every fort for being friends of friends. That's where the capping has to take place. Heck even relatives don't get a free ride free room and free meals for life just because they are related. Nor should every town from every alliance get full access to forts just for being listed ! That's where the unbalance is driving people away. It's radically detrimental to newcomers and young alliances ESPECIALLY as some megas include dueling towns in their forts-- who never participated in a fort battle but can stay for free and recharge with 0 motivation and just destroy all individual gaming by keeping them KO'd or threatening them till they join one of the "premier" alliances. Talk about driving a new customer base away !??
It's bad enough anyone can sign in from across the map now and just go there to be safe for 24 hours minus their ride time till the actual battle begins even if they aren't chosen. That took all the dueling chances out of
that equation, so not only do all the towns have full free access, they ALSO have 24 hour safe zones as soon as a battle is called. Might as well just give all the fort owners and alliance towns premium !!
And people actually wonder why the mega alliances don't want anyone else sharing or touching this disaster concept ? Basically free premium and reign over the server and destroying each one in the process.
A Concept for future failure at it's finest as we are now witnessing.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

That is the part that needs to be addressed and looked into !! The full access for everyone in the alliance and any other alliance the fort owner decides to put in there ! There is no reason they should all have full access to every fort for being friends of friends. That's where the capping has to take place. Heck even relatives don't get a free ride free room and free meals for life just because they are related. Nor should every town from every alliance get full access to forts just for being listed ! That's where the unbalance is driving people away. It's radically detrimental to newcomers and young alliances ESPECIALLY as some megas include dueling towns in their forts-- who never participated in a fort battle but can stay for free and recharge with 0 motivation and just destroy all individual gaming by keeping them KO'd or threatening them till they join one of the "premier" alliances. Talk about driving a new customer base away !??
It's bad enough anyone can sign in from across the map now and just go there to be safe for 24 hours minus their ride time till the actual battle begins even if they aren't chosen. That took all the dueling chances out of
that equation, so not only do all the towns have full free access, they ALSO have 24 hour safe zones as soon as a battle is called. Might as well just give all the fort owners and alliance towns premium !!
And people actually wonder why the mega alliances don't want anyone else sharing or touching this disaster concept ? Basically free premium and reign over the server and destroying each one in the process.
A Concept for future failure at it's finest as we are now witnessing.

Before there was forts in this game their was dueling. To a large degree this game was in fact built on dueling. Dueling is not going to go away no matter how much anyone complains about it. Dueling does not destroy all "individual gaming" no matter how much anyone whines about it, it was what this game was based one, what made it what it is and the success this game is today to a large degree. It was in fact what created the customer base for this game originally.

One of the advantages of being a dueler in a town that no matter if it is a small town that owns a fort or a large town belonging to a mega alliance is the fort barracks, and the recovery time for healing there. This is in all reality not going to change. Duelers belonging to towns that own forts are going to continue to be able to use them to heal at and to duel from no matter if they fort fight or not.

There are several different aspects to this game, workers, duelers, fort fighters, etc, and restricting duelers from using forts is just not going to happen. You going to restrict others who don't fort fight from using them also?

So what are you proposing here, that we have second class alliance members? That while they are members of an alliance they don't get the full privileges of being an alliance member?

"Oh yes, please join our alliance ..but by the way you can't use our forts."

Because it does not sound like you are proposing a fort limit or alliance cap limit here..but a limit on how many get full access.

 

[DeletedUser]

Tuttle what are you rambling about ? You just spam everyones posts with your negative garbage. I said NOTHING about restricting duelers from using forts !!???
This was addressed to Elmyr and you just spam every thread with your NO's offering nothing.

Allow him or someone with knowledge to respond.
(for someone who has basically negated all his characters on many worlds and from fort fighting you obviously are not participating
except as a negative aspect to everyone who decides to post here--you quit then still just repeat NO to everyone)

 

[DeletedUser22575]

Tuttle what are you rambling about ? You just spam everyones posts with your negative garbage. I said NOTHING about restricting duelers from using forts !!??? This was addressed to Elmyr and you just spam every thread with your NO's offering nothing.

Allow him or someone with knowledge to respond.

I spammed nothing. I asked specific questions about your posts and comments. If you are not prepared to answer questions about your suggestions don't post them.

It is time for you to knock off your insults to anyone who you think disagrees with your ideas or who does disagree with them.

This is a general forum everyone is allowed to participate in, not just those you agree with.

 

[DeletedUser9470]

i do believe that giving a player the ability to ko another player every 48 hours at his whim is a flaw. this certainly makes people quit, without a doubt.
but that is the way of the west, the good the bad, and the inconsiderately, brutally ugly.

as forforts, i dont think limiting amount of forts a town can posess is a good idea.
the issu is keeping lower levels who want to fort fight more interested.
this can already be done, by arranging ffs between sides specifically for lower levels.
but this requires ahuge amount of trust between enemies, which is a rare thing.

devs could make forts or battle fields, that are again specific to lower levels...

devs could also make FB skills count more.
a level 30 pure fort fighter who can take point because he is good is in my team any day.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

i do believe that giving a player the ability to ko another player every 48 hours at his whim is a flaw. this certainly makes people quit, without a doubt.
but that is the way of the west, the good the bad, and the inconsiderately, brutally ugly.

as forforts, i dont think limiting amount of forts a town can posess is a good idea.
the issu is keeping lower levels who want to fort fight more interested.
this can already be done, by arranging ffs between sides specifically for lower levels.
but this requires ahuge amount of trust between enemies, which is a rare thing.

devs could make forts or battle fields, that are again specific to lower levels...

devs could also make FB skills count more.
a level 30 pure fort fighter who can take point because he is good is in my team any day.

I agree Neo. I think the solution is to make fort fighting skills actually count for something. Then lower level fort fighters who were pure fort fighters would be ranked over those who were not in most cases. That would alleviate the ranking problems as well as make the skills supposedly important for fort fighting actually mean something instead of HP being the all that matters factor.

Its such a common sense approach I can't understand the delay in the devs considering or implementing it.

 

[DeletedUser]

Its such a common sense approach I can't understand the delay in the devs considering or implementing it.

Maybe someone should suggest it instead of waiting for the devs or discussing it in unrelated threads as so many people are doing.

As to the original idea, I stand by my first criticism: any limitation to fort holdings will be exploitable. If it's a limit of ownership for towns, then forts will be transferred to family towns that so many towns with large fort holdings have, or to allied towns if they don't have family towns. If the limitation is to alliances, then large alliances will split into smaller allied alliances.

I have been somewhat swayed by the elitism arguments in this and other threads, but I don't really see any fair or enforceable way to really change things.

 

[DeletedUser]

I have been somewhat swayed by the elitism arguments in this and other threads, but I don't really see any fair or enforceable way to really change things.

It has to be done by force, since no one is going to voluntarily give up a fort to lower-levels which would just be easy picking for the other side.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

It has to be done by force, since no one is going to voluntarily give up a fort to lower-levels which would just be easy picking for the other side.

How are you going to accomplish this by force.

Maybe someone should suggest it instead of waiting for the devs or discussing it in unrelated threads as so many people are doing.

As to the original idea, I stand by my first criticism: any limitation to fort holdings will be exploitable. If it's a limit of ownership for towns, then forts will be transferred to family towns that so many towns with large fort holdings have, or to allied towns if they don't have family towns. If the limitation is to alliances, then large alliances will split into smaller allied alliances.

I have been somewhat swayed by the elitism arguments in this and other threads, but I don't really see any fair or enforceable way to really change things.

Neo has proposed this in several different threads with mainly positive feedback from many players and helpful input and suggestions from Kaypaddler. Since he has this all pretty much calculated out it would be nice if he opened a thread on it and we could get it to a vote.

 

[DeletedUser]

How are you going to accomplish this by force.

http://forum.the-west.net/showpost.php?p=577412&postcount=55