IFBC requires the coordination of multiple markets, the available resources, and a long planning phase to work out. This is certainly something that is expected to happen again but the timing isn't right just now.
Feedback Speedevent - March(ing)!
- Thread starter Lily of the Valley
- Start date
roland jacobs
Well-Known Member
.netFBC would've been better.
enjoy the event, not for me.
enjoy the event, not for me.
Last edited:
You are welcome to submit an event proposal here: https://forum.the-west.net/index.php?forums/speed-event-suggestions.188/
The more detailed the better, but keep in mind that with rare exception the event needs to be run in the same version as primary worlds with leveled shop gear,upgrading enabled and in game events active, while We will general incorporate rules (such as trading restrictions) deemed appropriate to mitigate known exploits.
I will go a step further and note that the number of players in each side's battle chat at the start of each battle will be noted and taken into account. Increasing the caps for future medium battles will also be considered (any adjustments will be announced before battles are declared and each side will always defend a battle with the sames settings as the other side defended).
If you (or anyone else who registered) are not going to participate, please submit a support ticket requesting to be removed from the event so that the balance of numbers can be properly considered.
roland jacobs
Well-Known Member
You lost me at 'speed events' 
non-stop click events should be banned for events and for the real game.
any event that goes against the core suggestion is also poor planning. for example, when dueling is a better option than fort battles, for a supposed to be fort event, there's something wrong. spending more time farming than fort fighting is also annoying. easy enough to put in duel protection for 2 weeks. it seems every event that has been made in the past year or so have been filled with mod interventions and rule changes during the event. too much mod interference when they should be protecting the core game from inno's poor development decisions. (like requiring an adventure win for a timed event)
and the reward: "i spent two weeks farming materials for 10 battles and all i got was this t-shirt"
non-stop click events should be banned for events and for the real game.any event that goes against the core suggestion is also poor planning. for example, when dueling is a better option than fort battles, for a supposed to be fort event, there's something wrong. spending more time farming than fort fighting is also annoying. easy enough to put in duel protection for 2 weeks. it seems every event that has been made in the past year or so have been filled with mod interventions and rule changes during the event. too much mod interference when they should be protecting the core game from inno's poor development decisions. (like requiring an adventure win for a timed event)
and the reward: "i spent two weeks farming materials for 10 battles and all i got was this t-shirt"
roland jacobs
Well-Known Member
Town settings:
- Towns can be left: Inactive
If it was supposed to be inactive, why could I still leave town (and then deleted my char)?
That appears to have been a configuration error (since corrected)
Vagabonden
Well-Known Member
Now your saying someone decides who to leave out? But in the rules also states that you have to be online for at least 8 battles?
What if I am left out of those small and medium battles but I am online? Or do you only have to be online ingame and not inside the fort battle? If so? Can people not join the fort battle but just be online?
This makes the leader able to pick who should be able to get the rewards ?
So first you let us not able for everyone to participate in the fort battles if small or medium forts are dug and you ask us to minimum attent 8 battles out of 10?
How does this make any sense?
You basically let the leaders being able to decide who can get rewards?
Note:
You need to attend 8 battles (doesn't have to be online) to receive rewards. You can not obtain prizes if you don't listen to battle-leaders.
I will confirm but I believe “left out” counts as “attend”
Vagabonden
Well-Known Member
I will be waiting for such confirmation but thank you
Annie-Bell
Well-Known Member
had quick convo with one of event peeps who indicated that inno put in efforts to expand who signs up for special event worlds so that they feel welcome in safe and fun environment. Lets face it, there are some groups of players that avoid others just to get away from issues so if some players known to be signing up, whack of others choose not to. I was happy to hear that a more welcoming environment for all players being looked at in event worlds, didnt sign up as heard about these efforts later on (giving inno due credit for their efforts in this, it is good signal for game overall). Kudos for this tho!
NikosGr1
Well-Known Member
Personal Conclusions after 1st Fort Battle :
1) Leaders should be chosen more carefully , and in future games they WILL HAVE TO analyze their plan on the strategy-choices-rules BEFORE the voting (and not change it after the voting of course)
2) There is a thin line between TEAM PLAY STRATEGY and ENJOYING THE GAME.
Even if a person is the Best Strategist in the World and with his plan all battles can be won, the enjoyment of the players must be respected as well. After all we PLAY to enjoy(and win if possible). Otherwise the game become a 2nd work and players are like robots(and can be replaced by bots, if only the victory is the purpose)
3) People who will participate in Fort Battles , shouldn't be chosen among friends & buddies as priority, but according to participation in the whole game and team effort + activity. I don't know how this can be guaranteed , as it is in human nature to help first his close ones and those who support him/her... so a fair leader needs to be chosen either way.
4) About people who will comment negatively on my post, I can say that you can support your buddy/buddies who is/are leading, and this is natural as I described above. However, the facts are facts and can't be changed.
5) Lastly, the strategy of the 1st battle from the South , which left many people who wanted to participate as damagers(duelers) out of battle or forced them to choose equipment according to the forced orders, was actually a failure, as it deprived the South Team of the "3" points reward (by killing the whole enemy team)
I hope my post will help for future improvements , choices and game style , as all people who participate in such events want to enjoy the game (that's why we play after all)
1) Leaders should be chosen more carefully , and in future games they WILL HAVE TO analyze their plan on the strategy-choices-rules BEFORE the voting (and not change it after the voting of course)
2) There is a thin line between TEAM PLAY STRATEGY and ENJOYING THE GAME.
Even if a person is the Best Strategist in the World and with his plan all battles can be won, the enjoyment of the players must be respected as well. After all we PLAY to enjoy(and win if possible). Otherwise the game become a 2nd work and players are like robots(and can be replaced by bots, if only the victory is the purpose)
3) People who will participate in Fort Battles , shouldn't be chosen among friends & buddies as priority, but according to participation in the whole game and team effort + activity. I don't know how this can be guaranteed , as it is in human nature to help first his close ones and those who support him/her... so a fair leader needs to be chosen either way.
4) About people who will comment negatively on my post, I can say that you can support your buddy/buddies who is/are leading, and this is natural as I described above. However, the facts are facts and can't be changed.
5) Lastly, the strategy of the 1st battle from the South , which left many people who wanted to participate as damagers(duelers) out of battle or forced them to choose equipment according to the forced orders, was actually a failure, as it deprived the South Team of the "3" points reward (by killing the whole enemy team)
I hope my post will help for future improvements , choices and game style , as all people who participate in such events want to enjoy the game (that's why we play after all)
Darkuletzz
Well-Known Member
I really really want to answer with very bad words here, but i will try to be calm and patient and answer very diplomatic for each thing:
1. Leaders should be choosed more carrefully, i think you voted me too , i didn t want to tell the people my acolades there because is bad, but i will say just this, I leaded more battles in Colorado than any player starting with 2018. I tell everyone how we will play, i didnt change my strategy.
2. Team strategy and how people will help the team it's more important than 2-3 people wanted to ruin the game for everybody. Everyone is free to play whateever in their world, in an event world you need to play how the leaders tell you because they want to win. And we won yesterday because of team play.
3. Agree, talked with Nehe today about a new event with some changing of the rules of how the team should be choosed.
4. Well no answer...
5.Do you think winning 2 points its not enough? Its a win, and if you see a lot of IFBC, or FF events, people are playing to win the battle, they don t play for dodges, damage( you don t receive rewards for that) . The event is team play and not individual play. And I repeat one more time : THIS IS A TEAM EVENT.
Thank you, and hope you will answer the whispers everybody sent to you today to be back and play.
1. Leaders should be choosed more carrefully, i think you voted me too
, i didn t want to tell the people my acolades there because is bad, but i will say just this, I leaded more battles in Colorado than any player starting with 2018. I tell everyone how we will play, i didnt change my strategy.2. Team strategy and how people will help the team it's more important than 2-3 people wanted to ruin the game for everybody. Everyone is free to play whateever in their world, in an event world you need to play how the leaders tell you because they want to win. And we won yesterday because of team play.
3. Agree, talked with Nehe today about a new event with some changing of the rules of how the team should be choosed.
4. Well no answer...
5.Do you think winning 2 points its not enough? Its a win, and if you see a lot of IFBC, or FF events, people are playing to win the battle, they don t play for dodges, damage( you don t receive rewards for that) . The event is team play and not individual play. And I repeat one more time : THIS IS A TEAM EVENT.
Thank you, and hope you will answer the whispers everybody sent to you today to be back and play.
Thank you for your feedback, the opinion of the players matters a lot to us, at any event there is always room for improvement. You can always come up with proposals about how you want the event settings to be, we will analyze them and we will bring, if necessary, the appropriate changes.
ElMarlow
Member
Nikos also quit? In no time you will be leading an empty ship
lulumcnoob
Well-Known Member
At least Nikos made some kind of misguided point about not wanting to do the whole team-strategy thing during a team event.
In the end they switched sides, you're probably welcome too, the south is for winners anyway.
This event has been great, minus the balance issues between the teams, but the North does have 20 workers, so... they should definitely be allowed to change class if they want.
Last edited: