World closure

RaiderTr

Well-Known Member
Which is misleading.. wonder if that can be changed somehow.

I mean we have "Recommended Worlds" but you know :'P
 

Joe Kidd

Well-Known Member
You explained your view for #2 or #3...why not this one?

I thought NET was always considered to be a default international server by Innogames. I used to have BBJ's stance (his #1 item there) but after playing for 12 years I realize this ship has long since sailed. You can't stop people from playing across EU/NET servers and it's definitely not in the best interest of the game financially to do that.

I have started playing on DE the last 4 months and outside of the language barrier, the worlds I play on are pretty much exactly like the NET worlds but with perks. The DE Fort battles (FKs) are generally better and you even get rewards frequently just for regular ol' battles. The DE Forum is really active and there are so many great things they do I wish we did. For instance, they had a "speed server" recently but the only goal was to see who could complete the most quests individually and as a town. That was the main theme of the special server. I wish we had events like that.

@Hr.Nyborg There are some great best practices being used on DE that I hope you can bring over here. I want to reiterate the pitch I made about combining all servers into one set of international servers. What are the population numbers like comparatively between DE and NET for example? I'm very curious about that.
 
Last edited:

lulumcnoob

Well-Known Member
What are the population numbers like comparatively between DE and NET for example? I'm very curious about that

Hard to tell without making an account on 16 worlds, but it looks like we, at least, get a lot more people signing up to the game. DE probably have better player retention, but are even more spread out than we are.
Plus they still have a healthy historical W1 that you're allowed to join, so they have that over us.
 

Hr.Nyborg

Ex-Team Member
@Hr.Nyborg There are some great best practices being used on DE that I hope you can bring over here. I want to reiterate the pitch I made about combining all servers into one set of international servers. What are the population numbers like comparatively between DE and NET for example? I'm very curious about that.

I can try and ask the german Manager for those numbers :)
 

HelenBack

Well-Known Member
Galv and Houston are no longer options for migration? :blink::-(

Houston has daily battles... 30+ on each side... Someone was going to migrate to Houston and didn't have it as an option. So they have to choose another world? I'm stuck with going to Dakota and the possibility of that world closing... and having to do this all over again. :annoyed:
 

Joe Kidd

Well-Known Member
Houston and Galveston have the lowest populations and they both need to close or afford migrations for a big reason that has nothing to do with how many people participate in fort battles...

index.png
 

Nisa

Well-Known Member
I can't understand how is 30vs 30 daily battle anything good. It is like 2 towns having their own fun.

it is enough for them to have 2 small forts and dig. Which means the world is dead. It is not supposed to be open for small group of players.
 

Joe Kidd

Well-Known Member
I can't understand how is 30vs 30 daily battle anything good. It is like 2 towns having their own fun.

it is enough for them to have 2 small forts and dig. Which means the world is dead. It is not supposed to be open for small group of players.

Nisa, I promise you that it's way more specific in terms of who is having "the funs" on Houston, but who dictates the definition of "the funs".
 

Oddersfield

Well-Known Member
Depending on how you define 'good ffs', of all the worlds I play, Houston has the best ffs at the moment in my opinion - and that includes Colorado. Yes they are smaller but that means there is far less of this block grass north and south approach. In turn that makes for a far less static game and, therefore, a more enjoyable. one. I find Colorado ffs boring so don't do many - although many do like them.

Case in point: last night on Houston was 39 v 39 at 3 am server time. Attackers (which I led) all got killed by the last round (and should have too!), but it was fun for on-liners on both sides. Isn't that what it is really supposed to be about at the end of the day? Sure winning is a bonus but winning is also over-rated. If one side does it tall the time, it simply kills interest.

Certainly I don't what to be forced to migrate to a world where ff'g is either dead or plain dull. I understand that the ultimate decision is driven by finances, whatever else is said. Surely the way forward is to have worlds where there is more than berry picking to do? Bring people to Houston from worlds where there is no enjoyable ff'g, hope they don't all jump on one side and you may re-kindle their enthusiasm for the game. Let those that don't want to ff go somewhere else where 'berry picking' or dueling is king.
 

Hr.Nyborg

Ex-Team Member
Hey all. I think the question was asked in this topic, so i will write it here.

All players inventory from world 1 will be transferred to what ever world they migrate to. So no worries about what ever contraband you have in your inventory :-D
 

Nisa

Well-Known Member
Case in point: last night on Houston was 39 v 39 at 3 am server time. Attackers (which I led) all got killed by the last round (and should have too!), but it was fun for on-liners on both sides. Isn't that what it is really supposed to be about at the end of the day? Sure winning is a bonus but winning is also over-rated. If one side does it tall the time, it simply kills interest.

It sounds great for second battle but not as only battle on the world.
 

asdf124

Well-Known Member
Houston and Galveston have the lowest populations and they both need to close or afford migrations for a big reason that has nothing to do with how many people participate in fort battles...

View attachment 2538
wow only 2.5% retaining for houston, Idaho is 2% of total registered. 2.7% for Juarez. How bad a world needs to be until its closed? Numbers wise, all new worlds are doing badly. And then you'll have people would be like "We NeEd MiGrAtIoN mOrE tHaN OlD wOrLdS" But the truth is, the game is just dying, no way migration will save it, it'll just be putting tape on a bigger problem. On the other hand, if a world is doing worse than older worlds by retaining numbers, it shouldn't be open to migration.

Simple performance issue, you never bet on a bad performing horse or car. You guys just have too many worlds open, just flush down the bad performing ones and simply let the ones performing well to be the ones migratable to.
 

Clever Hans

Well-Known Member
If you have an account in W1 I think you should be able to see them following this guide

I am asking this coz there is an issue no one mentioned so far. Besides potential issues with level increase (millions of exp collected over the years that will translate automatically to extra levels soon), there is also a problem with the premium gear. As far as I know, some of the new worlds don´t have Union set so that will place the players on new worlds to disadvantage once players from old worlds with premium gear move there.
 

Bad Billy Jack

Well-Known Member
I thought NET was always considered to be a default international server by Innogames. I used to have BBJ's stance (his #1 item there) but after playing for 12 years I realize this ship has long since sailed. You can't stop people from playing across EU/NET servers and it's definitely not in the best interest of the game financially to do that.

I have started playing on DE the last 4 months and outside of the language barrier, the worlds I play on are pretty much exactly like the NET worlds but with perks. The DE Fort battles (FKs) are generally better and you even get rewards frequently just for regular ol' battles. The DE Forum is really active and there are so many great things they do I wish we did. For instance, they had a "speed server" recently but the only goal was to see who could complete the most quests individually and as a town. That was the main theme of the special server. I wish we had events like that.

@Hr.Nyborg There are some great best practices being used on DE that I hope you can bring over here. I want to reiterate the pitch I made about combining all servers into one set of international servers. What are the population numbers like comparatively between DE and NET for example? I'm very curious about that.
Whoa, hold on thar cowboy, check please! I did not say not to allow international servers to join NET. I said do not allow them to migrate to our two already best population worlds colorado & kansas. Migrate them to our less populated worlds that need the help!

As a matter of fact, the non-NET players have already come to NET! Kansas is full of them LOL! It's all good and I welcome them to NET!
 
Last edited:

Annie-Bell

Member
In response to comments about 40v40 battles and request for CM to reconsider Houston as option for migrating W1 players (some have asked wanted houston)

Think that informing of daily fort fights is kinda important and numbers within as paints a clearer picture of each server. The active numbers count on spreadsheet is what inno goes by, but in players mind definition of active usually involved some element of frequency and size of battles or market activity
and chatter in chat and does impact peoples desire to come or go to various worlds. Over the years, heard endlessly, "i like this game for ff's" so having clear, transparent, full picture of the situation on each server is only fair to those players migrating. I know if i was in W1 would be bit annoyed going to
option of "yep more numbers world by few dozen" but because other better options were eliminated, ended up in worlds where ff is rare, markets are non
existent and spending month to find someone to craft usually leads to forgetting about completing quests as too much of a chore


Many people do care about ff's, and many believe that ff's are the backbone to a server in addition to overall player base (as seen in AZ or FB), so YES even
40vs40 battles to many players IS better than no battles at all. I, like many, assumed that if there were world closures after W1, assumed el dor, dakota,
galv and even briscoe (tho would miss) would be reviewed first, and came as quite a shock, tho recognize all servers have lost huge amount of player base (for varitety of reasons, because of players, because of game not updated, or not advertised no new players, or issues with op gear or ff's themselves). But would luv to see the worlds that are strong worlds (colo/kans) or have the potential (ie large player base, ie AZ,FB with hope that will return to regular battles), or the constant guarantees of daily battle every single day (ie houston, juarez, idaho) are the ones that people are directed to rather then basically tryig to shove ff'ers into non ff worlds. This game is unique because of the ff element. We know game is decreasing and we see the CM trying to re-energize, which is appreciated by those that came to luv this game.

Again would like to request reconsideration of houston being not available as option for migration. as rationale... Houston was known as "Hostile Houston' "Drama Houston" "Houston we got a problem". And it was drama server. But over time, the drama and yeah bullying and mean has diminished, thanks to players and more help from inno by promoting more positive environment. Now, (believe it or not) we are NOT Drama Houston after years of holding the title ... there is occasional moment, but in general there is good environment between alliances and common desire to keep houston going.. even if deemed houston up to close we will be ff'ing to the very last day. The fact is houston numbers of active players was low. players encouraging others to leave world, and was temporary.. already seeing them come back, seeing players returning to game on both sides over last couple weeks. Houston has gone thru alot, and players are pretty close knit probably because of that. Our side, we have players that stuck together for years and friends returning to support. The face of the opposition has changed probably about 3 or 4 times over last 4 years .. the difference now is the new opposition .. specifically one town that is stepping up and ensuring daily battles and good battles on their alternative day, as we have on ours. We encourage people that, if allowed to migrate to join both sides, as recognize that probably the one side (and kudos to him for taking on, is tougher task then our already established group). Houston was in downturn. It was under renovations. Hear leaders on both sides talking about working together, kinda using colorado as guide to work together to try to reach that ever moving balance, and ensure daily battles, and to make it FUN so peeps want to be there. The 40v40 battles, yeah not ideal but better then other worlds, we hope to move up by the time of houston review and ofc overall active players. We are open for business!!
 
Top