1. Howdy partner! You seem new here. Why don't you make an account and join the discussion? You can register here.
    Already have one? Then you login here!
Login button here

Resetting the Forts

Discussion in 'World 1 (Alamogordo)' started by The-Iceman, Apr 9, 2017.

Share This Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The-Iceman

    The-Iceman Staff Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    76
    Main Server:
    So according to my calculations one would have to be in 100 Battles that run for at least 50 rounds to get 1 set part based on 5000 points
    If we were fortunate enough to have 2 good battles a day, it would take 50 days to obtain 1 set part
    So if a set comprises of 10 parts, it would take over 18 months to complete a set
    Maybe 10 Battles X 50 rounds to obtain a set part, would possibly make more sense
    It would still take 100 battles to complete the set,which would still be 7 weeks of consistent battles at 2 per day
    No disrespect but that still seems like a bit of a tall order to me
    I also think your proposal severely complicates the process of re-igniting fort battles
     
  2. PaPa PoPCoRN

    PaPa PoPCoRN Lance Corporal

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    26
    Jaro, agree with your assessment other than the fort ownership, the only benefit that you have outlined that can't be accessed for current testing without having a fort are maneuvers and with a community struggling to attend any battles at all are maneuvers really a/the issue? InnoGames have created the current environment with their focus on providing sets that keep evolving every tombola encouraging players to keep getting stronger and stronger (I understand they need to make money somehow) so its seems a little contradictory that the focus now becomes penalizing players because they are too strong, just like sets have evolved the game needs to evolve too which means further development (In the past several years the only significant changes have been gear upgrades, evolving tombola items and a slight adjustment to the fort and dueling formula) otherwise it's just a band aid on a leaking ship but with all that said, if changes went ahead as outlined in this thread I would be supportive for the sake of trying something different even though I believe it wont solve the issue of player attendances.
     
  3. jarograv

    jarograv Reservist

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    14
    Maneuvers are a huge benefit to be accessed for testing purposes. The goal of my post isn't to say maneuvers should be the new way to do battle and I certainly don't think that it will encourage more participation, more battle participants come from other suggestions such as individual rewards and/or establishing an alliance or group willing to battle against the team that owns all the forts. The goal is to facilitate testing new fort related features. Instead of digging and waiting 24hrs for the battle to start, players are able to call a maneuver and within 5 minutes they can get the information they are looking for and can therefor provide feedback and find issues which are the main purpose of the beta server.

    As for penalizing strong players/towns, I think that's a worthy trade-off. This is a test server that is intended for testing, not for stroking egos and growing a fort empire. That's what the main servers are for.
     
  4. Angel Elite

    Angel Elite Private

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2014
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    7
    Main Server:
    I actually think the reset and limit is a good idea BUT make the limit alliance founder bound (so only the town who found the alliance should be able to keep forts) so we can prevent that alliances like The Rebels spam out forts
    AE
     
  5. PaPa PoPCoRN

    PaPa PoPCoRN Lance Corporal

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    26
    Like I suspected, the real motives are becoming ever more present, it's beginning to look like a witch hunt on some selected players/alliances, the only issue that I have ascertained from reading opinions is the maneuver aspect of testing which you don't need to give towns of 15 members a large fort on the off chance they call a 8 vs 7 maneuver, you can do that with smalls.
     
  6. The-Iceman

    The-Iceman Staff Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    76
    Main Server:
    Just like I suspected, the real motives are becoming ever more present as It looks like your real motive here is that you are getting paid to torpedo this idea
    I'm sure that my reply sounds just as ludicrous and as far fetched as you last post :D
    You might want to stop with the conspiracy theories
     
    lulumcnoob likes this.
  7. xShteff

    xShteff Master Sergeant Former Team Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    180
    Alright Pops, I think we got your idea. If you have any actual suggestion that would lead to an increased forting then you are more than welcome to communicate it, otherwise please try to avoid turning this thread into an infinite conspiracy theory discussion.

    I personally don't mind the idea of resets (including full resets), as I always had the impression that the game had no actual goal and you would just play forever and collect pixels. Sadly it's too late for full resets, but we could run some fort resets (probably twice a year or so) in order to hopefully guarantee some more activity.

    However, I won't really make a poll until I have a chat with our current LCM, and see if any of the mentioned solutions are even do-able.
     
    boot, Miss Florida and The-Iceman like this.
  8. PaPa PoPCoRN

    PaPa PoPCoRN Lance Corporal

    Joined:
    May 8, 2013
    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    26
    How am I propagating "conspiracy theories" when my hypothesis is directly correlated to some evidence?

    This is more like a conspiracy theory (and maybe a case of sour grapes) as there is no supporting evidence.

     
  9. Colt Buntline

    Colt Buntline Reservist

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2011
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    4
    Man,bring some shiny chest (actual items gg.John Wesley,Cassidy's...) and everyone will join FF.
     
  10. Miss Florida

    Miss Florida Reservist

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2016
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    22
    Regarding Jaros post, would it be possible to have GM run FF events on Beta with some special rewards for the participants? This might help to increase FF attendance and bring some of the FFers that have quit back in action.
     
    jarograv and boot like this.
  11. asdf124

    asdf124 Private

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2014
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    95
    Main Server:
    EN
    I disagree completely due to fact that would make beta lose its original purpose even more(beta is for beta testers and those who play in non beta servers to give feedback on changes before it reaches such worlds.)

    Another reason would be that beta should be for testing, not really playing the game.

    Testing new features, prototype features and more. Where it hasn't been done in a long time.

    A complete reset seems the only way to make sure peeps actually understand that instead of being drawn into beta to simply enjoy the free bonuses with complete disregard to the real purpose of beta.

    No need to survey or do a petition, that is insanely silly.

    Shteff, you got your scapegoat right here ;).
     
  12. xShteff

    xShteff Master Sergeant Former Team Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    180
    [​IMG]
    I only gave rewards to people attending forts once (when I randomly popped in with some overpowered gear), without telling anyone that there will be rewards. I want people to help testing from their own initiative :p. If there's gonna be any reward there won't be any announcement for it.

    It could help, but it's the same like giving a young child rewards for anything he does. He'll just start expecting you give him rewards for literally anything he'd do and he'll grow up with that principle in his head... which apparently is a bad thing.

    And no, a petition won't help with anything :p.
     
    Krisztoph and lulumcnoob like this.
  13. champ45

    champ45 Reservist

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2011
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    16
    I agree that the battle system should be corrected, but I do not know how. But to increase the participation of players we could set up a new series of sets or other "gifts" that can only be achieved by participating in the battles.
    As for the issue of spies, I think is part of the spirit of the "life of the west" But if you fail to spot up a heavy penalty that discourages the act of espionage as inhibition for a month in the battles, or penalty in scoring or other.
    Greetings, and thanks to The Iceman for the initiative of the fort discussion.
     
    The-Iceman likes this.
  14. The-Iceman

    The-Iceman Staff Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    76
    Main Server:
    It would be nice to get some news on the progress of considering resetting the Forts
     
  15. xShteff

    xShteff Master Sergeant Former Team Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    180
    Idea's been communicated to our LCM and she liked it. Will have to see how much it'll take for the required tools to be implemented.
     
    The-Iceman and lulumcnoob like this.
  16. Snr Sarg

    Snr Sarg Lance Corporal

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2012
    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    31
    Main Server:
    Exactly this, I pretty much quit fort fighting when the chest and what not were discontinued.

    The problem is not who owns the forts or spies, it is lack of attendance, so motivate the players to attend with some incentives, hey presto, InnoGames will get a healthy fort fighting server back to life, simples.

    As for the suggestion of using *.pl servers for testing large scale fort updates, well then why not use them for everything and scrap the Beta servers if that is the attitude? With my professional head on as a qualified Software Tester, I can't see any issues with this at all, using an open public server for large scale testing, LOL ;)
     
  17. shantam1

    shantam1 Reservist

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2014
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Main Server:
    This thing This is a test server, kinda irritates me each and everytime i am reminded about it specially by the community members..
    Its a clear message from these guys that they kinda dont need us to keep playing this server and they are bored with their jobs.
    Basically what they want from us is to keep playing this world, test their updates once in 3-4 months, and provide feedback asap..I would like to remind you guys that its you who are getting paid for these things, not us..
    So they want us to do sit idle doing nothing when there is nothing to test?
    What do you expect folks?
    If you want people to continue playing beta, you need to give them a reason to play and provide you effective feedback..Things will not go as you want it everytime..
    How is it helping you to see fort fights dead since months now, taking no actions? People have been decreasing on beta because their is no fun left...Fort fight is undoubtedly the best thing that people want to do irrespective of which server they are playing.
    I humbly request the community team to please stop making this statement again and again that its a test server everytime when you have nothing else to answer..and if you have decided that you cant stop it, then be ready to lose your jobs in a few months :)
    #PEACE #HARMONY #RESPECT
     
  18. xShteff

    xShteff Master Sergeant Former Team Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    180
    Because it's a fact. It's been written on the main page since the beginning of the server.

    Every 2 weeks*. And no, they are not getting paid. They are volunteers. And their job mostly involves dealing with player queries.

    I doubt there's nothing to test as we had a new quest released every 2nd week. If you can't do quests at least you can leave constructive feedback over the new items, which doesn't happen a lot either as most of the actual feedback comes from other servers. I've personally seen players in-game asking people not to report item bugs just so they get to use them on live worlds.

    What would you consider "a reason to play"? Free nuggets? Is that the price that needs to be paid in order to avoid game issues on live worlds? :p
    I've been open to any kind of suggestion even since I became a manager. If you have any feel free to leave it. Also, what is the "reason" you made an account here first of all?


    All I see here is complains with no actual solution to the problem.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2017
    lulumcnoob and jarograv like this.
  19. shantam1

    shantam1 Reservist

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2014
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    Main Server:
    what kind of feedback you referring to shtef?
    I wrote a ticket a year back that i cant get my night belt and that it seems to be bugged..
    I was told that we cant help it and i can hope that it works with the next update.
    So whats the point of even appealing a bug? I am definitely not helping anyone unless i can expect the same :)
    PS: I am still missing the night belt lol
     
  20. xShteff

    xShteff Master Sergeant Former Team Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,257
    Likes Received:
    180
    Every time a new item/set is released I'm giving you the chance to suggest changes in order to balance them. Most of the time I made sure whatever feedback I get on the forum will be communicated and applied, and most of the time it happened.
    A lot of things have changed around during the past year, believe it or not :p
    PS: I was not in charge a year ago.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2017
    Krisztoph likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.