Support Knowledge Base - Feedback
- Thread starter kuro90
- Start date
DeletedUser15368
Very nice, it's much better than the FAQ section of the Wiki, although I wish the button to actually send a ticket was larger or more obvious/prominent.
For Technical Issues > The game is broken, displays scrambled menus and inaccurate information - The first thing players should do is disable all their userscripts to identify a game problem vs a script problem. 9 times in 10 it's TWDB's fault.
In Rules and Issues with other players - Specifically the two sections about the market, even though it's always been the case that support won't do anything about scams or "thievery" (with a few exceptions like on beta where we actually used the policy I'm about to describe with telegram agreements for a time), there's absolutely no retribution for aggrieved players (I haven't been scammed since 2011 but i'm still salty about it and don't trade with strangers, which takes away a large part of the social aspect of the game). I believe no direct player-to-player trading system is the second worse game design decision in the history of the game, and I really wish that until such a system was developed, telegrams with a mutual agreement for a trade should be taken as a contract that the support can use all available tools to hold both parties to their agreement. Yes this is the Wild Wild West, but I should still be able give something directly to another person, without having to go through a 3rd-party market where anyone can buy the item I've agreed to trade to someone else, it's just a failure in logic with a dodgy policy to cover the lack of a mechanic. If someone pulled something like this in the real Wild West, they'd be shot, hung or run out of town, never to bother decent folk again. And so would the corrupt market worker.
It would be cool and consumer friendly if you published event item drop-rates in a table in the Events section.
Finally a little rant on Migrations (it's cute that there's actually a section for this and it's actually the most comprehensive), it says:
"Of course, we understand that some players would like to migrate after the fort battle activity decreases, but we need to remember that we have a lot of different types of players, such as RPG lovers, players who love quests and puzzles, duelers or adventurers. And please remember that we do not want to close a world when there are willing players to play."
I don't think you need to necessarily close a world to allow fort fighters to migrate to a better one. Fort fighters also want to participate in all those other activities, just on a world where those other activities contribute to a better performance during fort battles, as those are the main reason we play. If fort fighting isn't important to the health of a world as implied, then I don't see how holding players' accounts as hostages on a world they don't enjoy is helpful to anyone, including questers and puzzle solvers who would continue to play when the active fort fighters have gone inactive to wait for migrations. Again I see this policy as covering for bad decisions and letting tombolas and nugget sets destroy new worlds before they have a chance to build a sustainable player-base (think Union officer set or the appalling DotD event compared to shop clothing in the opening months of Idaho).
There's also the issue of bad character class spread on older worlds, as most players in the last 3 years picked dueller, and then all the soldiers stopped playing, because they only exist at the moment to enable duellers to do massive damage, leaving adventurers as the tanks, which is obviously not sustainable. Being able to "swap" old world advents for new world soldiers when the battle formulas get updated would be amazing for battle quality imo. It's not just all about "fort battle activity decreases", but also severe class imbalances on the functional worlds.
tl;dr I guess all I really had to say were disagreements with the actual policy, which admittedly wasn't exactly what you asked for, so in conclusion, someone did a good job with this.
For Technical Issues > The game is broken, displays scrambled menus and inaccurate information - The first thing players should do is disable all their userscripts to identify a game problem vs a script problem. 9 times in 10 it's TWDB's fault.
In Rules and Issues with other players - Specifically the two sections about the market, even though it's always been the case that support won't do anything about scams or "thievery" (with a few exceptions like on beta where we actually used the policy I'm about to describe with telegram agreements for a time), there's absolutely no retribution for aggrieved players (I haven't been scammed since 2011 but i'm still salty about it and don't trade with strangers, which takes away a large part of the social aspect of the game). I believe no direct player-to-player trading system is the second worse game design decision in the history of the game, and I really wish that until such a system was developed, telegrams with a mutual agreement for a trade should be taken as a contract that the support can use all available tools to hold both parties to their agreement. Yes this is the Wild Wild West, but I should still be able give something directly to another person, without having to go through a 3rd-party market where anyone can buy the item I've agreed to trade to someone else, it's just a failure in logic with a dodgy policy to cover the lack of a mechanic. If someone pulled something like this in the real Wild West, they'd be shot, hung or run out of town, never to bother decent folk again. And so would the corrupt market worker.
It would be cool and consumer friendly if you published event item drop-rates in a table in the Events section.
Finally a little rant on Migrations (it's cute that there's actually a section for this and it's actually the most comprehensive), it says:
"Of course, we understand that some players would like to migrate after the fort battle activity decreases, but we need to remember that we have a lot of different types of players, such as RPG lovers, players who love quests and puzzles, duelers or adventurers. And please remember that we do not want to close a world when there are willing players to play."
I don't think you need to necessarily close a world to allow fort fighters to migrate to a better one. Fort fighters also want to participate in all those other activities, just on a world where those other activities contribute to a better performance during fort battles, as those are the main reason we play. If fort fighting isn't important to the health of a world as implied, then I don't see how holding players' accounts as hostages on a world they don't enjoy is helpful to anyone, including questers and puzzle solvers who would continue to play when the active fort fighters have gone inactive to wait for migrations. Again I see this policy as covering for bad decisions and letting tombolas and nugget sets destroy new worlds before they have a chance to build a sustainable player-base (think Union officer set or the appalling DotD event compared to shop clothing in the opening months of Idaho).
There's also the issue of bad character class spread on older worlds, as most players in the last 3 years picked dueller, and then all the soldiers stopped playing, because they only exist at the moment to enable duellers to do massive damage, leaving adventurers as the tanks, which is obviously not sustainable. Being able to "swap" old world advents for new world soldiers when the battle formulas get updated would be amazing for battle quality imo. It's not just all about "fort battle activity decreases", but also severe class imbalances on the functional worlds.
tl;dr I guess all I really had to say were disagreements with the actual policy, which admittedly wasn't exactly what you asked for, so in conclusion, someone did a good job with this.
Last edited by a moderator:
RaiderTr
Well-Known Member
If they really mean;
So that we don't suffer just because there are still some "berry-pickers" playing in every dead server (and not bringing any income).
Besides, when FF activity decreases, all activities decrease with it.
Because, as Lulu pointed out, FF'ers usually participate in all other activities as well, be it willingly or unwillingly, since you'd need; to buy items/sets from Market, Buffs to be crafted, Quests to give you Sp/Ap to have effect in the long run etc etc lots of things.
then they should make a PvE server or two, as well as PvP
So that we don't suffer just because there are still some "berry-pickers" playing in every dead server (and not bringing any income).
Besides, when FF activity decreases, all activities decrease with it.
Because, as Lulu pointed out, FF'ers usually participate in all other activities as well, be it willingly or unwillingly, since you'd need; to buy items/sets from Market, Buffs to be crafted, Quests to give you Sp/Ap to have effect in the long run etc etc lots of things.
Last edited:
DeletedUser15368
Totally not sorry for hijacking this thread to talk about migrations.
Also, we straight up don't have enough fighters on the "good" worlds which survived with medium battles, like Colorado anymore (a lot of that being down to battle victories being almost entirely based on who is attacking that day). Meanwhile potentially dozens of characters are trapped in limbo on dead worlds. The priority in my mind should be salvaging the PvP scene that's not only kept the game alive for all these years through incentive to buy tombola spins, not only the single most social activity in the game, it's also the cornerstone of all activity in the game - it drives everything else we do from the market and trade to crafting, from levelling up to completing the bad quests, to dueling rival towns to weaken them before a fight.
We are about 10 years too late to keep a world open because there are some duellers there. Duellers who would be delighted to have more targets on a better world. I know this because I used to be a dueller, until there were no more targets.
As for Role-Players, well it seems the most common role people play in this game is "just generally being toxic to everyone". I do love the occasional good RP-er, but again I can't see any scenario more suited to those people than allowing them to move to a more active world, with more players to socialise with.
Adventures are cross-world and that is a complete irrelevance to even mention them.
That leaves us with Questers and "puzzlers", what's the puzzle? figuring out obscure low drop-rates for quest or event items? If there was an actual puzzle where the solution wasn't leaked on either TWDB, TW-Calc or even on another language version's official wiki, the "puzzle" community would have a meltdown.
Obviously we need some battle mechanic changes sooner rather than later, but a West world with no fort fighting is a world with no soul. No reason to be. Free us from the avoidable pain of watching the game we love dying before our eyes, by giving Questers their own special world and letting everyone else play again.
Also no hate towards the questers and berry pickers from me anymore, you guys aren't holding fort fighting back, you didn't make the decisions to detrimentally effect fort fighters by accidentally keeping a world open just by existing. I hope both types of players can be happy with a world specifically for their preferred play-style <3
Also, we straight up don't have enough fighters on the "good" worlds which survived with medium battles, like Colorado anymore (a lot of that being down to battle victories being almost entirely based on who is attacking that day). Meanwhile potentially dozens of characters are trapped in limbo on dead worlds. The priority in my mind should be salvaging the PvP scene that's not only kept the game alive for all these years through incentive to buy tombola spins, not only the single most social activity in the game, it's also the cornerstone of all activity in the game - it drives everything else we do from the market and trade to crafting, from levelling up to completing the bad quests, to dueling rival towns to weaken them before a fight.
We are about 10 years too late to keep a world open because there are some duellers there. Duellers who would be delighted to have more targets on a better world. I know this because I used to be a dueller, until there were no more targets.
As for Role-Players, well it seems the most common role people play in this game is "just generally being toxic to everyone". I do love the occasional good RP-er, but again I can't see any scenario more suited to those people than allowing them to move to a more active world, with more players to socialise with.
Adventures are cross-world and that is a complete irrelevance to even mention them.
That leaves us with Questers and "puzzlers", what's the puzzle? figuring out obscure low drop-rates for quest or event items? If there was an actual puzzle where the solution wasn't leaked on either TWDB, TW-Calc or even on another language version's official wiki, the "puzzle" community would have a meltdown.
Obviously we need some battle mechanic changes sooner rather than later, but a West world with no fort fighting is a world with no soul. No reason to be. Free us from the avoidable pain of watching the game we love dying before our eyes, by giving Questers their own special world and letting everyone else play again.
Also no hate towards the questers and berry pickers from me anymore, you guys aren't holding fort fighting back, you didn't make the decisions to detrimentally effect fort fighters by accidentally keeping a world open just by existing. I hope both types of players can be happy with a world specifically for their preferred play-style <3
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser15368
It was never going to be fast and easy, but it was making great progress, then suddenly we're increasing the level cap and it's back to the drawing board. If structures become viable in the meantime, that's good enough to start with - at least leading will be exciting again for a while.
RaiderTr
Well-Known Member
So far, Stats/Skills based Structures give just about the same we get on Static-bonuses we get them from in Normal servers. (Except Damagers get even more Attack, and Tanks get a bit more Dodge chance than Damagers, being based on related Skills)
But being combined with Updated Distance penalty*, they are decent enough..
Of course with the cheesy-Damage formula its still meh-ish but at least we can stay mounted on some Towers & Walls with a decent lead..
*That Distance penalty should be bound by Stats/Skills too though methinks. To not overcome it with some (current/future) OP Attack set lets say. One comes to mind already..
But being combined with Updated Distance penalty*, they are decent enough..
Of course with the cheesy-Damage formula its still meh-ish but at least we can stay mounted on some Towers & Walls with a decent lead..
*That Distance penalty should be bound by Stats/Skills too though methinks. To not overcome it with some (current/future) OP Attack set lets say. One comes to mind already..