Continents.

[DeletedUser]

Ok this a (bad) idea. We have continents, and they're generally kind of there.

But for an arbitrary line on a map, they do seem to have quite a large effect. Whole tribes will set their recruitment policy on "K44 only!", tribes tend to ignore the rest of the world, and just war off against tribes in their K. It doesn't matter that Tribe X is taking over the 3 Ks to your NE/N/NW because as long as you're warring the fairly weak tribe who happens to be in YOUR K, they can't bother you.

The fact is Diplomacy, Recruitment and general tactics seem to revolve around K-based ideology, StaMin has been flamed for having members outside of our K, despite the fact that even though 54 and 55 aren't the same number, that doesn't impact on individual player skill.

So what i'm asking, is, what if we had a world without Continents?
(that is to say ones drawn on the map, I guess 3rd parties might create maps with artificial continents)

Well, it'd be different.
It'd end this Continent-Mentality and force people to contemplate the "bigger picture".

So what do you guys think, would the removal of continents affect the game in any interesting or meaningful way?

 

[DeletedUser]

I think it would be a fantastic world. I was trying to get a tribe to merge into mine the other day but the fact that my tribes controlled the area 20 fields away from their K was followed by a no.

 

[DeletedUser]

Wow, interesting idea. This would be very interesting. This would make tribes work in new ways by alienating big tribes being surrounded. This would create lots of smaller stronger tribes, instead of big superpower tribes.

This have the 'Duke seal of approval'. (but you'd get rep if it was in suggestion section which this'll be moved to)

 

[DeletedUser]

It wasn't meant as a suggestion, yet.
It was more of a concept to me, which I expedcted hostility towards. At any rate I think .uk needs a few normal, stable game worlds to get new players interested, before they start changing stuff.

 

[DeletedUser]

I then apologise. Comment retracted and Rep Points supplied.

 

[DeletedUser]

Coolio.
One major concern I have is for newer players.
The K-Tribes list has long been a way of finding out which tribe's are looking good. Without this, as a new player, it's going to be hard to find your way to a helpful tribe.

Now a lot of help and guidance comes from your tribe, especially in the early days, when guides are a lifesaver. If you as a newb, can't find a tribe, how do you improve?

 

[DeletedUser]

How would areas be mapped? Look at any country, and it is split into areas to help navigation. To use the UK (as this is the .uk server) the country has its larger splits such as the West and East Midlands, and then it goes down into Counties such as Oxfordshire.

To look at another example, if any of you have played a Dynasty Warriors game, one of the main points of concern for Sun Quan is that Liu Bei takes over Jing. In the historic novel which the game is based on, Sun Quan spends years trying to get Jing back and is remarkably bitter about it (the conclusion being that Guan Yu the guardian of Jing was captured and beheaded so that Sun Quan could have Jing).

Creating these areas within an area is important to provide a sense of relativeness. If I know that CHE!!! is going strong, but is mainly in K44, I need not worry about them as I am in K65. I can plan a long-term strategy to prepare for when we ultimately meet. Without the continents, it becomes very hard to tell how far away they really are. Where they are really condenced?

Areas play a huge role in war, be it a game or the full blown blood bath. The simple fact that people focus on continents so much demonstrates this if nothing else. If you were to rid yourself of the continents, you would have to replace them with another area marker. I can't really see a TW world going without area markings.

 

[DeletedUser]

Why?

You can measure hours by ram away from CHE villages.
That's much more helpful, if they were in the same K, you might worry, if they were 10 hours by ram, but a different K, you might not worry.

Divides are convienient, but they aren't exactly essential. This isn't a game where relative positioning matters in terms of area, no one area has extra Iron Mines (bonus villages excluded, but they aren't done by K) and so has a tactical advantage. In Dynasty Warriors whoever had to wory about whereever because that land was significant, in England you chop the land up for easier government and taxation, but in TW it doesn't matter.

 

[DeletedUser]

Very interesting idea although I wouldn't want this to ever happen. I find the continents are convenient for finding the tribes close to you without searching around on the map. Also, they're great for diplomacy to set boundaries.

To add to the continent mentality discussion, I think they're a good thing because they give tribes a good goal/direction in the early stages of the world. Dominating your continent is the first major accomplishment you achieve as a tribe. The reason why you don't have to worry about the tribes in other continents is because they're doing the same thing :icon_wink:. Without this goal I think a lot more tribes would fail. They wouldn't know exactly where to expand and I can see a lot more tribes getting gangbanged from all sides. It would be a lot harder for tribes to establish their territory and keep it as others wouldn't feel like they were intruding.

Thats some random overflow from my brain right now.

 

[DeletedUser360]

I think it's a great idea. I have been spending a lot of time talking about my disgust when I see maps and you see tribes with perfectly straight lines as borders to another tribe the clear "no nobling our K" rule has come in the and the stronger side has suffered..

Also them tribes that are like "we are rank #1 in K12 and you ar only third in your continent and fourth in your other" it's not so great when your cluster is tighter than theirs and spread across three contients. Overtime you move into their continent and they still claim to be better due to being rank #1 in K12 up until the day you take that rank #1 and they disband.

Also stopping the idiots that wait for the first village in K0 to appear and you are getting 20-30 morons going for the same 116 point barb just because it is in a new continent..

 

[DeletedUser]

From some points, it's a good idea
From other points, it's a bad one.
Propose it directly to InnoGames and see what answers they will give.

[th]OK?[/th]

 

[DeletedUser]

Madalin, you just got unbanned, do not come back acting king of the forums. You are not the smartest and not the most knowledgeable about the forum.

These suggestion are posted here as Tracey the Admin looks here regularly for suggstions to go directly to Inno.

You are not a moderator or an admin, stop acting like one it was annoying before and still is.

OK?

 

[DeletedUser]

From some points, it's a good idea
From other points, it's a bad one.
Propose it directly to InnoGames and see what answers they will give.

[th]OK?[/th]

[th]Why are you writing Thar style? Only he can do that! [/irony][/th]

Anyway, if this happens, I might actually join xD

 

[DeletedUser]

it's a great idea, but ofcourse it has it's drawback(which i am too lazy to list)

The Continent ideology in .net didn't start till w24 i think, before all those worlds people never put any mind on continents.

 

[DeletedUser]

it wouldn't be that good as tribes would have to send troops for 200 hours just to support them, why do you think the have continants in the first place. bigger continants or/and less continants would tho

 

[DeletedUser]

it wouldn't be that good as tribes would have to send troops for 200 hours just to support them

Why? Just only recruit members who are say 10 fields from 2 or more existing members, but not less than 5 fields.

Sensible policy, you'll just need to think before you recruit, and not just say "If he's in my K, he's ok!"

I think they're a good thing because they give tribes a good goal/direction in the early stages of the world. Dominating your continent is the first major accomplishment you achieve as a tribe.

I'd agree with this. A lot of the worse tribes i've been in need things like "We're #1 in our K" or "We're now in the top 30!" to keep members motivated and interested. At the same time, it'll take away the pressure to be #1 in your K. Tribes on W1, like CHE!!! are strong in a small area, but over a whole K they rank lowly. IF you can't see who's the best in your K, and only judge by your area, this gives small players a boost as they don't need to compete with tribes who joined at the start of the K, and have a 2 week headstart.

 

[DeletedUser]

hmm, please correct me if i'm wrong with this post because i be tired.

This won't make much of a difference other than removing continental stats. Also, to an extent confuse and make it harder for noobish tribes and players.

To see where you and your tribe are located in the world all you need to do is go to TW stats. In case you plan on being a duke or recruiter you simply have to set a perimeter and recruit from within that area. Another thing that you could do is simply compare a world with continents to a world without continents and you'll see in what continent you are, to make it easier just draw the lines in a paper and place that paper in your screen and you'll see in what k you are if the world had Ks.

If you are tribeless and you decide to pick a tribe later on then it might be annoying finding a good tribe but still it couldn't be that hard. Just use your area, TW stats and worlds ranks.

 

[DeletedUser]

So what i'm asking, is, what if we had a world without Continents?
(that is to say ones drawn on the map, I guess 3rd parties might create maps with artificial continents)[/QUOTE]

Of course that would be possible.

But the fact is these lines on the map don't mean anything, and anyone can draw up their own lines. But people allow these lines to govern their line of play, and actually I think Dukes drawing their own lines on the map would be much more useful, and would allow strategic thinking, instead of hamstring-ing yourself by using the arbitrary ones TW set up.

 

[DeletedUser]

Maybe a new feature could be implemented along side this if such a thing came into effect, that gave the location of a tribe's 'centre point' along with a s few stats. Now we already have such a point, the place where the server tries to place you when you get nobled out and restart in near the 'centre point'. My comparing these you could tell who is a threat to you. And the stats I have in mind should show the tribe's density in a given radius.
clueless42, I really like the idea as I hate f****t tribes and players who only care about having villages inside a geographical area. Tbh, they are worse than point whores as they only care about stats, being ranked x in the K. Such an idea would hopefully but an end to such <insert>.

 

[DeletedUser]

It wouldn't work because people would just do it by the village co-ords anyway. You'd need to change the co-ords.