Suggestions for World 70

[kamuiz]

Greetings!

I would like to make some suggestions for World 70. I'm not sure to what extent the server staff can change the settings that are passed as default, but I will still provide my small contribution.

It's evident that the US server worlds have few players, which makes the map extremely sparse. One solution to this issue could be adopting a high rate of barbarian villages and bonus villages. I believe it's a valid consideration for testing. In addition to increasing the map size, it will provide a larger source of farming, making the game more versatile.

Another point to consider is the speed, both of the game itself and the production factor. Having both values slightly above the usual level can contribute to the anticipation of war periods between tribes, once again making the game more dynamic.

Lastly, it might be interesting to establish a limit of around 10 players per tribe. I come from a server where tribes have a minimum of 40 players. Typically, this brings disadvantages that outweigh the advantages.

 

[Deleted User - 419875]

Thank you for those suggestions and feedback, I will pass them on again.

For the longest time we were capped at so many barbs, we could not have more then x and y (can not remember those numbers but they were like 10 and 5 or something). I started continually asking for the barbs and bonuses to be raised with help of the continuous suggestions from you the players. Finally late last year and early this year we achieved that goal for about 6 months to have it taken away from us and a cap put on us. So we are back to square one with asking all over again. We are just told our server is to small for the large amount of barbs. But, we will keep asking.

Thank you for also bringing the production factor into this feedback as above, We gained it but then had it capped. So we will continue to ask again.

We have the liberty to still set the tribe limits and we do our best to keep it between 5 and 15. 40 is to large for our smaller server.

We woul be happy to pass along any further suggestions or feedback. Thank you for your time...

 

[Bron]

If there are less players then the Tribe cap needs to be lower, and the map should be smaller to push players together. on the other hand more farms is always better, so more barbs couldn't be bad... I read above we cant get more barbarians because of server size. . . I'm still trying to figure out how end game works. lol.
Less worlds going at the same time would mean more server space? But more waiting for the next world to start...

 

[Endless Insomnia]

Greetings!

I would like to make some suggestions for World 70. I'm not sure to what extent the server staff can change the settings that are passed as default, but I will still provide my small contribution.

It's evident that the US server worlds have few players, which makes the map extremely sparse. One solution to this issue could be adopting a high rate of barbarian villages and bonus villages. I believe it's a valid consideration for testing. In addition to increasing the map size, it will provide a larger source of farming, making the game more versatile.

Another point to consider is the speed, both of the game itself and the production factor. Having both values slightly above the usual level can contribute to the anticipation of war periods between tribes, once again making the game more dynamic.

Lastly, it might be interesting to establish a limit of around 10 players per tribe. I come from a server where tribes have a minimum of 40 players. Typically, this brings disadvantages that outweigh the advantages.

This is always a touchy subject when you mention barbs. As you mentioned it will invite more farming making production faster and game speed "faster". However on the flip side to this. It will also help players who try to eat as many barbs as fast as possible early game (normally the Pay to win crowd that blows 100,000 PP a world). So when asking experienced players who try to stick to just bonus barbs for nobling purposes. Most would disagree with adding more barbs for this simply reason.

As a whole US server has asked for smaller tribes since W35. It doesn't work overall. There were a number of worlds the team members created a world with smaller tribes. Then all the tribes end up being families and having 20-25 members anyways. So in my opinion at the end of the day the member limit really doesn't matter.

These are just my opinions though, not saying you're wrong in anyway or the staff shouldn't mix in your ideas. I think every world should be different and unique to challenge older players and give newer players a world they like at least every 5 worlds or so.

 

[Dase]

Thank you for those suggestions and feedback, I will pass them on again.

For the longest time we were capped at so many barbs, we could not have more then x and y (can not remember those numbers but they were like 10 and 5 or something). I started continually asking for the barbs and bonuses to be raised with help of the continuous suggestions from you the players. Finally late last year and early this year we achieved that goal for about 6 months to have it taken away from us and a cap put on us. So we are back to square one with asking all over again. We are just told our server is to small for the large amount of barbs. But, we will keep asking.

Thank you for also bringing the production factor into this feedback as above, We gained it but then had it capped. So we will continue to ask again.

We have the liberty to still set the tribe limits and we do our best to keep it between 5 and 15. 40 is to large for our smaller server.

We woul be happy to pass along any further suggestions or feedback. Thank you for your time...

INNO's logic seems stupid, a smaller server needs the extra barbs more than the big servers.

It would be nice to see no outside support and no supporting new players for the first 48-72 hours. Is it possible to have that setting?

 

[Deleted User - 419875]

INNO's logic seems stupid, a smaller server needs the extra barbs more than the big servers.

It would be nice to see no outside support and no supporting new players for the first 48-72 hours. Is it possible to have that setting?

The Uber setting is no outside support?? Tribemates support only. We have also had several players asking for support to be to the outside players.

 

[Endless Insomnia]

The Uber setting is no outside support?? Tribemates support only. We have also had several players asking for support to be to the outside players.

Yeah but the point of the game is to have ONE tribe win the world/war. Using diplomacy strategically. In a perfect world, yes that would including defense. But unfortunately this invites large family tribes and makes the worlds go on forever.

I think If outside tribe support IS allowed INNO should come up with a rule that once you support an outside tribe it is no longer possible to attack that tribe for the rest of the world. Making it so you don't just support anyone and everyone you have to be very strategic with who you support otherwise it will land lock you.


Additionally, I think it should automatically draw you into whatever active war the tribe youre supporting is in. So that way there is no hiding and being shady about supporting a small tribe against a large tribe without the large tribe knowing where the defense is coming from.

 

[Dase]

Outside support opens the door for multi accounts. The current setting is somewhat lowering the reward for multiple accounts, but it's still not enough when people can switch tribes for fresh support. A time limit is needed, you can't be supported in the first x hours after joining a tribe.

Allowing support outside the tribe or to any new joiner is a hugger's perfect setting.

Any chance 70 can be a classic or that we'll see a classic in the next few months on .us?

 

[Deleted User - 419875]

Yeah but the point of the game is to have ONE tribe win the world/war. Using diplomacy strategically. In a perfect world, yes that would including defense. But unfortunately this invites large family tribes and makes the worlds go on forever.

I think If outside tribe support IS allowed INNO should come up with a rule that once you support an outside tribe it is no longer possible to attack that tribe for the rest of the world. Making it so you don't just support anyone and everyone you have to be very strategic with who you support otherwise it will land lock you.


Additionally, I think it should automatically draw you into whatever active war the tribe youre supporting is in. So that way there is no hiding and being shady about supporting a small tribe against a large tribe without the large tribe knowing where the defense is coming from.

Thank you for those suggestions and I will add them to the list for the Devs. We appreciate it.

 

[Deleted User - 419875]

Outside support opens the door for multi accounts. The current setting is somewhat lowering the reward for multiple accounts, but it's still not enough when people can switch tribes for fresh support. A time limit is needed, you can't be supported in the first x hours after joining a tribe.

Allowing support outside the tribe or to any new joiner is a hugger's perfect setting.

Any chance 70 can be a classic or that we'll see a classic in the next few months on .us?

Thank you for the feedback. We will also add them to the Devs information.
I am hoping to get a classic world soon. I am trying for W70 but we shall wait and see.

 

[Bron]

Ps I also liked speed servers...

 

[Bron]

Thank you for the feedback. We will also add them to the Devs information.
I am hoping to get a classic world soon. I am trying for W70 but we shall wait and see.

After playing a lil bit more. I was wrong smaller tribes is not the answer. Lol