We really need to close down the older worlds and allow migration

Lyrinx.

Well-Known Member
1) make dueling an OPTIONAL choice, that you can opt out of, and not be dueled to death daily by players 50 levels higher than you, just because they want to be an A$$... so duelers can duel themselves if they feel like it, but those that hate the dueling aspect don't have to worry about it... and quit making ALL the events to where you have to duel and defeat someone in order to finish...
Just imagine, theese type of players don't even know what happend at early 2009, when ff wasn't a thing, and the playerbase made mostly 3 different things: quests without town, building a town, or making fun in the game with "dueler towns", where were 50 people in one place with full of dueler gear, from level 15 to level 99, and they had only job: Kill everyone in the server. And I tell you a little secret: Nobody whinged for duels for some reason.

So if you buddy complaining about dueling, then this game really not the best choice. Duels are part of the game, no matter you like it or not, and EVERYONE should accept this. Can he make it optional? Of course he can, just do what @roland jacobs wrote 2 comments before. Simple as death.

Btw maybe your friend doing something wrong if he got denied from forum, or he just banned himself at the past.
 

Pankreas PorFavor

Well-Known Member
1) make dueling an OPTIONAL choice, that you can opt out of, and not be dueled to death daily by players 50 levels higher than you, just because they want to be an A$$... so duelers can duel themselves if they feel like it, but those that hate the dueling aspect don't have to worry about it... and quit making ALL the events to where you have to duel and defeat someone in order to finish...

2) Give players the right to be a "Jack of all trades" so we don't have to rely on someone else who's charging 100X more than the product is worth in order to advance our skills...

sounds like your friend still didn't learn the basics of this game.
1. "dueled to death daily by players 50 levels higher than you, just because they want to be an A$$" = if you can get dueled by players 50 levels higher means you have a high duel level. and you get your duel level up by dueling other players - and wining. the statement above is a sign of hypocrisy. "it's great when I hit someone, but not when someone else hits me." oh yeah, many people don't like the taste of their own medicine.

2. "so we don't have to rely on someone else who's charging 100X more than the product is worth" = this looks like a consequence of the first issue. if he had friends, he could collect products and they would craft stuff for him at cost. but it's hard to make friends when you duel so much that you get in the duel range of people 50 levels above you ;) does he really think that all other players are paying that much? the way crafting is set up is supposed to increase collaboration and interaction between players. he should try it some time :)
 

Poker Alice

Well-Known Member
I am posting this for a team mate. I am not sure EXACTLY which thread this might belong in but seems it may fit in here... and I'm also extremely puzzled why his forum access might be denied, as he seems a decent sort of guy, BUT...here it is:

"i don't have 2 cents to spare, and my forum access is denied... but i'll add my thoughts here, for anyone that wants to know, and re-post in the forums...

Deleting servers isn't going to help the problem... people that fort fight are going to fort fight, and those that don't aren't... so forcing closures of other servers because fort fights aren't full is just going to ruin things further... I play on different servers with different types of characters, so I can enjoy more aspects of the game...

There are 2 things i would really like to see, tho INNO will never approve of them... 1) make dueling an OPTIONAL choice, that you can opt out of, and not be dueled to death daily by players 50 levels higher than you, just because they want to be an A$$... so duelers can duel themselves if they feel like it, but those that hate the dueling aspect don't have to worry about it... and quit making ALL the events to where you have to duel and defeat someone in order to finish...

2) Give players the right to be a "Jack of all trades" so we don't have to rely on someone else who's charging 100X more than the product is worth in order to advance our skills...

I don't Fort fight on most of the worlds I play on... but I enjoy ALL aspects of the game.. Field cook here, different trades on other servers, different builds, etc... so if they end up closing worlds just because a few are whining about fort fights, i may decide to just stop playing... again.. my opinion... "
Hi Nova, please tell your team mate that he had reasonable suggestions and thank him for making them. I'm not sure what happened to him. Perhaps he lost his temper and perhaps he exaggerated the levels, like writing I got dueled by someone 50,000 levels higher than me, a sarcastic exaggeration or maybe he became upset and dueled back at players out of anger. I have no way of knowing. Whatever the case there are just as roland jacobs pointed out in the thread "Go townless, self-ko, skill specifically for defense. There are choices."

What I do know is he is not here to reply to comments but might want to read the forum. As players when we decide to join a ruthless town who's main desire is to kill other players for no other reason than to up the notches and steal some fast cash its close to being a character like Billy the Kidd western legend. He was depicted by some as a renowned gunfighter but in reality murdered 3 men one of which was defenseless though it was claimed they struggled for the same gun and when Billy got hold of it, a witness said "he had no choice but had to use it".

If you let your children play the game you could ask them if they think it is fair game to shot a nun or steal a horse for gain. Sure, certainly it is part of the game but are you sure that is how you want your play to be. Pointing out how the game works is one thing but making character references on a player who can't post a reply is another. Making a determination that your mate is a hypocrite or just doesn't know how to play the game properly is a decent play?


 

NovaStar

Well-Known Member
Another one said this, so I am not sure really...

" For some reason my old account on the forum is gone, and it seems i cant create a new one. "
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
This might be why they are gone.. Everyone got this last year.
Not sure about not being able to make a new.
Screenshot_20210728-150120.jpg
 

NovaStar

Well-Known Member
@Hr.Nyborg thank you. I have found many players with this problem and have told them to do that. It appears maybe a few have, as I see a couple of them showing up lately.

I forget what thread it was though...it was mentioned by someone else that several people do not like to post here due to the "negative responses" that follow what they say (putting it lightly). One in particular, says that they are so unliked in their world that to even show up here and say "hi" they feel they will be "attacked". I know that may be a little of exaggeration, at least imo but I do also know that sometimes there is not a very respectful response to people's input. I, myself followed these forums for years, but hesitated to comment in them, as well due to some of the reactions to some of them in times past.

This forum is for all the player base that wishes to be a part of it (or should be, anyway) and yet I see people facing intimidation at times (which in turn, gets the same back in some cases...neither are right).

Anyway, just thought I'd throw this out there fwiw.
 

Harsha..

Well-Known Member
Reviving this thread

The best case for allowing migration can be seen in this thread itself. Many players who posted here have long quit the game.

I understand that there's a commercial incentive to open new worlds. But innogames is losing much more revenue not allowing the players who want to leave to migrate as they just quit out of boredom.

There's not much for a FFer or dueler to do in an inactive world. For berry pickers, it makes no difference if they play on a dead or active world as the game interface is basically the same, except maybe, it's much easier to complete that skeleton set in a world like colorado when compared to Briscoe (where trading is non existent). So, i hope migration is given serious consideration.
 

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Not seeing any feedback topic about the current migration.. decided to write here.

Houston huh. I believe no one saw that coming :roll:

I believe the options one can choose to migrate are quite limited.
Most people already have accounts in those Worlds anyway.

I believe all worlds up to Juarez, or Kansas, should be allowed.
And that includes Colorado.
 

sheep1

Member
Thanks for the feedback. I will see if we can add more worlds to the potential routes.
Hi Syntex,

I am really glad that finally after many attempts you make it happen to open mirgations from some dead worlds to more active worlds. However I have to remind you that there are still pleny '' dead worlds'' that needs to be closed as well. Kansas used to be a very active world however many players left the world and we basically dont play like we used to... (I am sure that there are more worlds which are worst in active situation) Please try to open more mirgations in order for us to moove to an active world and make the game more interest. Plenty of players including me we sent a ticket to inno and we are requesting to moove from Kansas to another world. Try to support us because we want to play also...
 

Harsha..

Well-Known Member
Great initiative. I appreciate the effort on your part @Syntex

However, I'm against putting a dead world like Dakota in the list because it perpetuates the problem of dead worlds. For example, let's say you have 100 people from Houston who decide to leave, 10 choose to go to Dakota. Just 10 more people in Dakota would not drastically change the nature of the world and those 10 players essentially would be trapped in *another* dead world with no way out.

In my view these worlds need to allow outward migration and ultimately closed down - Briscoe, Dakota, El Dorado, Galv, Houston and Idaho. Also, I don't think most people in Colorado would mind having people from these enhanced premium worlds migrate there. You can have a poll there just to confirm this and then open a migration route into Colorado as well.

A few people who have toons on all worlds will complain. But these are in the extreme minority. Realistically speaking, most players have the time and inclination to handle perhaps 3-4 characters. Best case scenario would be to have only 4-5 running worlds. That would concentrate activity and also generate good revenue for the game.
 

Vagabonden

Well-Known Member
Not seeing any feedback topic about the current migration.. decided to write here.

Houston huh. I believe no one saw that coming :roll:

I believe the options one can choose to migrate are quite limited.
Most people already have accounts in those Worlds anyway.

I believe all worlds up to Juarez, or Kansas, should be allowed.
And that includes Colorado.

Hope Colorado gets included...
Even if i have to trade all my gear to someone to store it so i can delete my current character. -.-
 
Last edited:

Annie-Bell

Well-Known Member
said during discussion: actually its unclear why galv which has had about 30 battles (50-60 players) plus awesomia battles in last 2 months vs some other worlds (briscoe, el dor, or drama idaho) where only few battles other then Awesomia, seems they were getting more activity and ones named. In Houston, there was recent discussion of reorganizing whole world and redistributing forts but apparently no input or survey from either galv or houston of this info. It appears those pushing to close worlds for own reasons was inno input? - if was 4 or 5 worlds (b,d,e,g,h,i) would make better sense but meh .. its inno. Its too bad but hopefully will have some silver linings (some will leave, some will remain and can see what can be done after. For life of me moving toon to less active world seems odd. So guess left wih why galv houston, and not others? and couldnt we have bit more heads up if this was in works? If it is about numbers and money .. then that is good thing to communicate as stops questioning inno as people get that. but then leads to why keep open with associated costs but encourage players to leave? talk to us :)

I admit bit eye opening with timing as kinda squashes other players recent efforts and ultimately their future efforts (not so much me, i was one saying watch it sky falling sky falling that there are some that will try to stop efforts to bring back ff's .. it falled afterall!!) and at same time as announcement some stupid stuff in idaho that some feel is mismanaged by inno - ofc cant speak to it but know players begging for legit reasons to move toons that if you can migrate players about, perhaps consider being proactive about that too. Know would be much appreciated. People want to just play game AND have least impact on thier fellow players.

Also recalling decisions about migrations years ago - migrating 14 year toons from W1 who were rallied up and pitted against team in 4 year old worlds did impact batles, (10yrs more skill points is big, in small worlds) and players left to tough out. Ofc thought great many w1 players went to older worlds where levels were bit close (AZ, etc)r.. Seems better move to older, not newer and would like to see more then 3 options for galv and houson for players

Having said that, i agree with above post (hasha post)l. we really should only have about 5 or so running worlds and formally close others. Yes, those in multiple worlds will have to chose and give up some toons but combining all to one new word (even replacing the new world in oct) will bring life. but end of day ALL players expect fairness, safe, fun to be informed gaming experience and want active worlds.
 
Last edited:

panos-the-best

Well-Known Member
Even if my character is not concerned (still in Juarez jail), there is finally some hope in the air and I am excited!!

Some quick thoughts:
1)why El Dorado and Briscoe are not also included. I don't count Idaho and Juarez yet because it is rational that older (dead) worlds have a priority.
2) Newer worlds could be considered as migration routes also. Especially Kansas, that still has an activity and is easier to bring back to life than Dakota for example. G and H worlds are not that much older than I,J,K worlds, not imbalances will occure.
3) Colorado should be considered as a possible migration route also. Premium and non premium worlds nowadays bring no difference. Especially with 10+ year old servers.
4) With those actions, and if a 3rd market join .NET also (I know that .gr is dead and I guess there are also other dead markets) there is a good chance than we can have a 3rd or 4th "playable" world after Colorado and Arizona. Will it be Dakota? Fairbanks? Kansas? We'll find out.

Please don't be too late for the next actions, so we can preserve this player base.


PS. Sorry, my feedback might be too long to read
 

Lyrinx.

Well-Known Member
Migrating from galveston to fairbank is like migrating from poland to hungary. Probably noone besides me and lyrinx is capable of doing that.
Just you. No way in the 7th layers of hell that I'm going back to .hu. It was enough.
 
Top