Situation of the Game

[RaiderTr]

Thanks for the honest answer and some insight info.

You weren't very clear on that part but from what I can tell, you "acknowledge" at least some of the "issues" I mentioned.

The game is currently in a state where we consider it mostly done and feature-complete. (...)

I don't think anyone, or at least majority, objects to that.
Issue is the imbalance in current features thanks to the things I listed.

though the game should currently run reasonably well on most modern phones

So I was told. But how many people actually knows about this? No advertisement or anything in patch notes.

Talking of Advertisement, I wish there was a more fitting, recent advertisement video including all parts of the game (at least all PvP, or Forts) rather than only Dueling.

As the game evolved, player numbers started dropping even before the development team was scaled down

I mean, I can't really comment on that but we could definitely use some merges/closure of servers..

Minor changes like tweaking fort battle formulae

If that counts as "Minor" then there is still some hope

God forbid another upgradable, 'coming from future' Union officer kinda stuff until then at least ey?


#makeresistancepercentagebased

 

[JustAMoment]

So any character rebalance changes in future are out of chance along with server merges are out of idea too? I mean atleast on CZ(not sure how other localizations are doing) we have some servers with 300~ people and we havent seen fort battle if you dont count 5v5 in many many months. Same goes for active dueling option nor chat.. You could give us (those playing on rip servers) option to enjoy the game once again untill its "active" atleast at some point on other servers, yea great you are opening new ones, but doesnt mean you can't merge old dead ones or something so the game can become actually "competetive" again. This game has already kinda small playerbase, thats why you should try to keep us ingame as long as possible imho.

 

[DeletedUser4692]

I saw the quote "No more major changes or improvements will be implemented." appear above and, well, that's true. The game is currently in a state where we consider it mostly done and feature-complete. That won't mean that there won't be any changes, but that they'll mostly be minor in scope. A major interface update or a new feature like adventures are unlikely at best.

So you are satisfied with where this game is headed?
Low playing rate, items at shop,tailor, gunsmith are totally useless due to overpowerd items from events and shop..

I dont know about you guys, but there are 10 worlds on my server.
The world i play in, has 300 players, i repeat 300 players and still no migration. The other servers are similar. Cant duel anyone, there are no proper fort battles, noone is writing in the saloon, basically nothing. Oh i forgot about the "amazing" adventures (i dont play it) but according to what ive heard average waiting time for 1 game is 30 minutes.

ok....., you can continue opening new worlds and adding more new ovepowered items untill noone will be playing it.
Thanks, im done with this game.

Could you at least change the text at the home page? Its totally deceiving, cause ive never experienced any of those for the past 2 years.


+EDIT
Anyone who is contributting to this game by buying nuggets is for me a crazy man, because even a monkey can see that you are jsut draining money from the last remaing people before you shut it down permanently. "who would invest money into getting a fort, duel sets when there are no forts, duels, nothing?!"

 

[Leones]

Your concerns are valid, of course, imbalance can be an issue and if we can find a good way to address that, we will, but as with everything right now, that can take some time.

I can't comment about other worlds or world merges, but we do keep an eye on player numbers and provide an opportunity to migrate when possible.

So I was told. But how many people actually knows about this? No advertisement or anything in patch notes.

There was one update where we mentioned some improvements to mobile behaviour, I think. But players will mostly have to try it out.

 

[ayias]

Your concerns are valid, of course, imbalance can be an issue and if we can find a good way to address that, we will, but as with everything right now, that can take some time.

I can't comment about other worlds or world merges, but we do keep an eye on player numbers and provide an opportunity to migrate when possible.

There was one update where we mentioned some improvements to mobile behaviour, I think. But players will mostly have to try it out.

We need more creators and designers

 

[Leones]

Which is very unlikely, unfortunately.

 

[lulumcnoob]

We need more creators and designers

I'd be happy with just having someone who cared about the gameplay to be in charge of the gameplay.

I can't comment about other worlds or world merges, but we do keep an eye on player numbers and provide an opportunity to migrate when possible.

I wish we could also see the activity numbers to determine if there's a server/worlds where the "numbers" tell InnoGames that they can support at least a competitive medium fort battle. I'm struggling to find one and would love the opportunity to battle properly again.

What's the threshold anyway for deciding to open migration routes, clearly nothing to do with PvP, so is it purely number of accounts on a world? Shouldn't we try to preserve active accounts now by moving them to somewhere with a more active PvP environment, instead of waiting for people to quit and then open migration for the 200 people left for example? Offer the dead a chance to try to save the dying?

 

[RaiderTr]

Number(s) of nuggets bought and/or spent rather than active accounts or whatever, is what it feels like.

Talking of "active" accounts, I wish here reflected those.
For example in-game Ranks actually show 2300 something on Idaho and 1400 on Colorado (both numbers with lots of low levels) .. But there both 20k+

 

[RaiderTr]

I mean.. last 3 servers shows the situation pretty clear (Not like any other is different, except Colorado) ;

https://www.westforts.com/en21/battles

https://www.westforts.com/en22/battles

https://www.westforts.com/en23/battles

Each successor having more damagers than the predecessor and eventually all fails mainly because of the ever increasing premium gap.
Most of the "premium" and/or hardcore players be on one side, and casuals on the other. Guess what's the outcome.

Some people thinks new server(s) will be better but doing the exact same things and expecting different outcomes is being naive at best.
So yeah, there you have it: A vicious circle.

 

[Jack Beauregard]

So if I understand correctly there will not even be a balance between classes and those who are adventurers will have to bear the gap with a duelist or a soldier without having the possibility of being able to at least change their class.
I don't translate the rant in Italian

 

[lulumcnoob]

So if I understand correctly there will not even be a balance between classes and those who are adventurers will have to bear the gap with a duelist or a soldier without having the possibility of being able to at least change their class.
I don't translate the rant in Italian

It seems as though the only choice for any class to compete right now is to buy/gamble for premium nugget gear and skill as a damager, but don't worry too much about class bonuses - nuggets overcome all

I hope this changes but it hasn't over 2+ years.

 

[RaiderTr]

don't worry too much about class bonuses - nuggets overcome all

Indeed.

For example.. from Idaho ranks of Westforts (aka Damage ranks)
Here, Adventurer "damager". And he wasn't even Charisma & Leaders-t all the time + started to server pretty late (level difference).
2nd, 3rd, 4th and 14th (notice the amount of Battles!!) are Workers.

Another interesting fact/observation:
Adventurer hit ratios seems higher than Duelers and can easily outdamage them even (when skilled as "Damager" that is)

It's as if there is a certain and different threshold for each Class to Land/Dodge a hit almost %100 when passed.
But since default Attack is higher than Defense (+25 v +10) , and the fact that there is no Tank set with as high stats (and/or Defense bonus) as Union.. that doesn't happen for Dodging.

 

[DeletedUser4619]

@Leones
Hi, if you say InnoGames has not planning add new features to this game, what about to make many people just a little bit happy and make a sale with the old avatars?
A lot of my friends in the game would welcome that and I think they weren't the only ones who liked it!
Christmas is coming and with them of course the sale in the game and I think the opportunity to buy an old avatar could be a super gift from InnoGames!
What do you think?

PS: And if InnoGames say no, please can you say why?

 

[RaiderTr]

Here, I had/have some collection of ideas (and all that) regarding FF balance issues.

IMO percentage based Resistance is a must. It's common in other games and idk why still not exist here.
Flat Damage and Resistance bonuses don't make sense and only leads to more and more issues with the ever increasing power-creep of sets.

Other than that, "Sector Damage bonus" has too much effect thanks to the 2nd part of the Leadership/Damage formula that boosts it.
For example, I'm having an outright %25-35 boost to my Damage on Union Officer sector. And that's with me using a Murrieta set.
Otherwise it'd be even more so.

Of course that's not just me. Multiply that boost with the number of people in the sector and the amount of rounds battle lasts.
Yea, it goes beyond insanity.

 

[Leones]

@Leones
Hi, if you say InnoGames has not planning add new features to this game, what about to make many people just a little bit happy and make a sale with the old avatars?
A lot of my friends in the game would welcome that and I think they weren't the only ones who liked it!
Christmas is coming and with them of course the sale in the game and I think the opportunity to buy an old avatar could be a super gift from InnoGames!
What do you think?

PS: And if InnoGames say no, please can you say why?

I'm not sure if that's technically feasible, but we'll pass it on

 

[DeletedUser4619]

I'm not sure if that's technically feasible, but we'll pass it on

Good, so we have hope.

 

[DeletedUser4338]

Hello @Leones . Is there any chance that there are going to be new achievements added ? For example Participate in 1000 battles, play 2000 adventures etc...
I was thinking it may be interesting for players to get maybe a rifle or some other useful stuff as a reward for reaching these achievements. It also may give players reason to play battles and adventures. From my point of view this wouldn't be that hard to implement. Just an idea.

 

[RaiderTr]

I'd rather have them use their "limited" time for PvP balancing, but if they wanna encourage ppl via Achievements.. they better make them worth to get..
I mean we have too many useless & pointless achievements in the game already.

I'm not sure if that's technically feasible, but we'll pass it on

On "old" servers those Avatars still active, so they are still on database.. Not sure if they have a different format though.

 

[DeletedUser4619]

On "old" servers those Avatars still active, so they are still on database.. Not sure if they have a different format though.

In our community was a competetion by our admin and as a price he was here old avatar.And these days is running in our community competetion where one of the prizes is maybe old avatar(still prizes its not confirmed by admin).So I think it's possible to have old avatars on newer worlds, at least I hope so.

 

[bis174wt]

as i said on the .net forum, adventures are probally the most imbalanced part of the game, as you can have a team with the highest lvl player being 70, and the enemy team being all 150s, plus, some players have lvl 3 lucile lasso whilst players like me who only do small nugget purchases and have to work on the quest to get lasso, only have 1 non upgraded lasso.