• You don't like snow? Turn it off here:

Why not make the new world non-prem?

sanidh

Well-Known Member
Meet us in the middle inno, we don't want a new world, you want a new world.

Let's find middle ground and make the new world non Prem? It will reduce the burden on Colorado which has kinda turned a safe haven for active refugees from all worlds atm, becoming oversaturated in the process.

I think it's a no brainer.
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
the problem is not the server structure, it's the community and how they treat the new servers

If the new world has some things that set it apart from j/k/l it MIGHT have some hope of fairing better. Specifically if it has things that promise to keep it's fort fighting culture strong for longer then it might be a nice second world for people to come to in preparation for if the "secret project" turns out to even make Colorado irredeemably imbalanced...

There are a couple possibilities: If the rules are established in advance, then there is less need for permission/consensus to enact things like "fort damage" or "dynamic battle caps" or even "prime time multi-rules" or "fort ownership taxes" or other ideas that can possibly mitigate some of the things known to result in ~"Fort Fight Collapse Syndrome"
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
If the new world has some things that set it apart from j/k/l it MIGHT have some hope of fairing better. Specifically if it has things that promise to keep it's fort fighting culture strong for longer then it might be a nice second world for people to come to in preparation for if the "secret project" turns out to even make Colorado irredeemably imbalanced...

There are a couple possibilities: If the rules are established in advance, then there is less need for permission/consensus to enact things like "fort damage" or "dynamic battle caps" or even "prime time multi-rules" or "fort ownership taxes" or other ideas that can possibly mitigate some of the things known to result in ~"Fort Fight Collapse Syndrome"
e.g.
If, after 6 months, or dozens of consecutive battles, it is clear that attacks or defenses simply cannot prevail, at the discretion of The West International Team any or all of the following policies may be enacted:
"fort damage": Failed attacks may result in a forts structures being downgraded in proportion to the damage dealt by the attackers.
"dynamic battle caps": The fort balancing strategist may adjust battle caps on a per battle basis until caps are identified that result in more competitive battles
"prime time multi-rules": Multi rules may be imposed regulating digging to alternating sides during a fixed window of time and requiring the return of medium or large forts captured outside of that window of time.
"fort ownership taxes": forts held by the same faction for more than 6 months will require a monthly deduction from the fort owner town's treasury (amounts to be determined) if insufficient funds the fort will be transferred to a GM town
 

Beefmeister

Well-Known Member
i mean new servers are fun and stuff and i been saying that the next one needs to be a non-prem since kansas but the only way it would work is if you make players non-organically get along...if they can't do it by themselves, indeed you have to set some rules and control em. what can i say :lol:

solutions exist but i don't know if that's possible to do, goober

first, my advice is to wait and see how many players are actually gonna play this new world...community got a bit reduced in the last year so it might not be worth the fuss
 

panos-the-best

Active Member
In my point of view ,this new world has the potential to last longer for 2 reasons.

1) It is the first to open after the merge with the .DK servers, so I am expecting to see some new people from the danish market. I don't know if they are enough though.

2) If until Christmas (or lets say until February) the level extension (to 200? 250?) has taken place, and in older worlds, like Colorado for instance, big level differences occur, that will lead in "inequality" in pvp (mainly in FF), maybe players will focus in the new world as it will be the only one that 150 lvl will not have already been reached.


However I agree with Beef, community is being reduced every year, not many chances of a world to last longer than 1-2 years... ( Or actually it will last for ever... as a prison, because migration policy doesn't really exist)
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
Between all worlds there are 2248 unique players who participated in one or more FFs between June 1 and September 13
Note: that counts people who play distinct account names on different worlds as 2 (or more) “unique players”
 

sanidh

Well-Known Member
In my point of view ,this new world has the potential to last longer for 2 reasons.

1) It is the first to open after the merge with the .DK servers, so I am expecting to see some new people from the danish market. I don't know if they are enough though.

2) If until Christmas (or lets say until February) the level extension (to 200? 250?) has taken place, and in older worlds, like Colorado for instance, big level differences occur, that will lead in "inequality" in pvp (mainly in FF), maybe players will focus in the new world as it will be the only one that 150 lvl will not have already been reached.


However I agree with Beef, community is being reduced every year, not many chances of a world to last longer than 1-2 years... ( Or actually it will last for ever... as a prison, because migration policy doesn't really exist)
If you ask me, its not that the community is being reduced every year, the community is just being stretched over multiple worlds, the same community that was spread over world 10, 11 and 12 before is now spread over 13 different worlds
 

Darkuletzz

Well-Known Member
Meet us in the middle inno, we don't want a new world, you want a new world.

Let's find middle ground and make the new world non Prem? It will reduce the burden on Colorado which has kinda turned a safe haven for active refugees from all worlds atm, becoming oversaturated in the process.

I think it's a no brainer.
Non premium? They have the most nugget event of the year after they release the world like 1-2 week after, stupid people like myself( just 1 time, but i did it), i spend 13K nuggets there , and after i deleted because it was dead before xmas.
 

Bob Baumeister

Active Member
If you ask me, its not that the community is being reduced every year, the community is just being stretched over multiple worlds, the same community that was spread over world 10, 11 and 12 before is now spread over 13 different worlds
That stretching is to a bigger degree multi accounts. What helped and still helps is that there are people from other shrinking regions pouring into this one.
 

Goober Pyle

The West Team
Fort Balancing Strategist
Between all worlds there are 2248 unique players who participated in one or more FFs between June 1 and September 13
btw, amongst multiple-world fort fight participants these are the 10 most common pairs of worlds observed:

Arizona+Colorado: 136
Kansas+Las Vegas: 111
Colorado+Las Vegas: 111
Colorado+Kansas: 101
Colorado+Fairbank: 89
Arizona+Fairbank: 84
Colorado+Juárez: 73
Juárez+Kansas: 71
Arizona+Briscoe: 67
Arizona+Dakota: 61

El Dorado first appears at rank 18 (53 players on El Dorado and Colorado)
Galveston first appears at rank 28 (44 players on Galveston and Fairbank)
Houston first appears at rank 16 (55 players on Houston and Colorado)
Idaho first appears at rank 12 (58 players on Idaho and Juarez)

If you exclude Colorado and Arizona the top 10 pairings are:
Kansas+Las Vegas: 111
Juárez+Kansas: 71
Idaho+Juárez: 58
Juárez+Las Vegas: 57
Briscoe+Fairbank: 57
El Dorado+Fairbank: 51
Dakota+Fairbank: 51
Fairbank+Idaho: 47
Fairbank+Houston: 46
Idaho+Kansas: 45
 

panos-the-best

Active Member
btw, amongst multiple-world fort fight participants these are the 10 most common pairs of worlds observed:

Arizona+Colorado: 136
Kansas+Las Vegas: 111
Colorado+Las Vegas: 111
Colorado+Kansas: 101
Colorado+Fairbank: 89
Arizona+Fairbank: 84
Colorado+Juárez: 73
Juárez+Kansas: 71
Arizona+Briscoe: 67
Arizona+Dakota: 61

El Dorado first appears at rank 18 (53 players on El Dorado and Colorado)
Galveston first appears at rank 28 (44 players on Galveston and Fairbank)
Houston first appears at rank 16 (55 players on Houston and Colorado)
Idaho first appears at rank 12 (58 players on Idaho and Juarez)

If you exclude Colorado and Arizona the top 10 pairings are:
Kansas+Las Vegas: 111
Juárez+Kansas: 71
Idaho+Juárez: 58
Juárez+Las Vegas: 57
Briscoe+Fairbank: 57
El Dorado+Fairbank: 51
Dakota+Fairbank: 51
Fairbank+Idaho: 47
Fairbank+Houston: 46
Idaho+Kansas: 45

Interesting stats, the moderators should look at those and similar ones to see what routes of migration would be the most appropriate. IF they ever open them...
 
Top