W1 Discussion - Mods please read

DeletedUser589

Guest
Recently I have been hearing a lot of you out there talking about how you feel this world is slowing down too much, becoming boring and I see many active W1 players jumping ship to play new worlds in search for renewed excitement ( I have been guilty for this even if it was for a short week) After chatting to players all over W1 the general feeling is that it is caused because of two reasons:

1.) Price of nobles (especially for those of us in the top 20)
2.) Internals - The game is more like internal wars than tribal wars for most of the tribes at the moment

I have been discussing some thoughts i've had on the matter with members of my tribe and also in the W1 leaders chat, and now I want to put it to the public forums to see what the majority of you think to a.) the state of the world, b.) solutions and c.) my solutions which I am about to suggest below. Perhaps if enough of us agree that this world is starting to stagnate and that it could do with a push, the mods will look into how they can alter some things.

1.) £££ Nobles: Because of the no farming scripts rules, people are either having to set up bookmark farming (which is starting to take its toll) or manualy farming (which now takes tooo long for those of us with jobs or school) because of this most people only mint in a day what their villages produce from mines (minus the resources used for mass recruitment) This is meaning that in average people are generating between 1 - 2 nobles a day which for some accounts with 300 nukes, isnt enough to sustain an appetite for growth.
Perhaps a solution would be to either a.)reduce the costs of nobles eg half the amount of coins needed to produce nobles or half resources, what ever is easiest for the staff and in addition put a cap on the amount of coins needed so that once you reach 1k villages the required coins will not increase further. b.) increase the speed settings of the world now that it is later game so that villages are producing 4 times the amount of resources . . . I know this is speed 1 and we all chose it for this setting but I think that matters more in the start up stage, at this point I think we can all handle a speed 2 - 4 setting for resources (perhaps leave the rest as is if possible)

What do you all think?

2.) Internals - Too many players are quitting, some due to RL, some due to point 1 but what it means is that the rest of us active players now need to divert our attention away from the red dots to focus on the blue. We take internals because we don't want the enemy to take free villages that strategically would hurt our tribes. If my member goes barb near the core of W1N than my enemies have a chance to get in there and set up a cluster that would cause too many issues. All of us leaders prioritise the internal to stop this tactic from taking place.
Taking out an internal uses nobles which are hard to come by and also means your tribe end up using time and resources nobling a village that the tribe all ready had to work hard for previously.

Therefore I suggest that once a player decided to quit and hits delete, the villages that go barb can NEVER be attacked, they have a ban on them. This means the enemy can not take what the tribe has all ready won and your tribe can continue in its war and nobling red dots.
Essentially this game is tribal wars, and a tribe will win this game not an individual. So therefore when a player quits, in my opinion, it should not mean that the tribe has to then re-fight for the area it has all ready claimed. This would encourage players to hit red and also means that the prescious nobles we all save hard for can be used for the right reasons.

I know all tribes have internals going on and I would assume that like me youd prefer if those nobles were being sent to another tribe (W1N in a lot of your cases probably lol)


Anyway let me know what your thoughts are, am I wrong? Is this world perfect as is? Or do you to agree that this world could do with something to speed up the aggression and ultimately the end game, or do we all want to be here for a life time finishing this one off?
 

DeletedUser1942

Guest
Id certainly back the cheaper nobles idea, and the speed of the world getting faster. Not sure if the 2nd is possible, but would be great to up the speed slightly.

I reckon its about time they shut off world 1 completely now. Theres 6 other worlds now to join - 2 reletively new ones, so anyone joining world 1 is just going to be taken out by the the tribes occupating them areas.

The ideas would significantly help the dominant tribes clean up the world - and the world would end up being over quicker. The longer this world goes on as it is, the more and more players will leave the world without even losing a village.
 

DeletedUser589

Guest
Yep I realise there are a lot of potential flaws with the second idea but thats why i wanted to put it as a discussion to see if anyone would be able to take the idea further.

Cheaper nobles would be great and I have seen them do it on .net worlds so that for sure has to be a possiblity?
 

DeletedUser2918

Guest
agree with all the points made above.

cutprice nobles would be my preferred way forward. Nukes and Def are not a problem for people now and it now relies on the skill of the tribes involved to arrange ops/defence. The only thing holding the world back is the inability to actually capitalise on any ops that go ahead.

end of the day - you want more people to want to play late game or not? Most of the arguments i've seen on forums between start up vs late game 'experts' use the proposition that people move on to new worlds all the time because they get bored after 1mill points.

personally think its perhaps time to make it less boring then......

(btw...we actually got any mods left on world 1?"??!?!? lol)
 

DeletedUser6603

Guest
For the smaller tribes like KnK, boredom is a major problem. Its no fun waiting for the inevitable ;-). That was the main reason we turned on R & co, because its fun and is far more interesting having an enemy right in amongst us than just the one frontline. So for us, the nobles idea is a waste of time, weve probably got more than enough to be getting on with! I can see why W1N would be interested in it though - if I was in your position id be very interested in it too.

The trouble youve got is that you will never be able to get something done that will suit everyone. One idea that I liked that was suggested in the W1 leaders skype room, was something about increasing the build speed of offensive troops, or reducing the build time of defensive troops. Cant remember it exactly, but I liked it, because if we could all build nukes in a few days and we knew that the troops we killed were less likely to be replaced as quickly, it would make for a much more aggressive and open world. That might work combined with the nobles idea, but either idea on their own probably wouldnt work for the whole world imo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
I prefer the coin storage system use on UK worlds 3 & 5 rather than that current used on the other uk worlds.
The coin costs has been lowered on some of the .net worlds as well, and its about time that UK1 follows.
Its currently
holz.png
9.324
lehm.png
9.990
eisen.png
8.325 per coin on world 20.net compared to
holz.png
28.000
lehm.png
30.000
eisen.png
25.000 per coin on UK1.
Enough said.
Ian.
 

DeletedUser589

Guest
Thanks for the input Pablo, I was keen to know how my ideas would effect the smaller tribes. But as an over arching view it seems you agree we need the world to be more aggressive amongst tribes
 

DeletedUser2918

Guest
oh - also - would be nice to know if any of the staff do actually read this thread.

there was/is a suggestions thread in the general section......but i never saw any feedback from any of the things posted on there.....if you're gonna ask for feedback then at least let people know if its appreciated!!! :icon_rolleyes:

for example - i think i was one of the first to suggest extending the tutorial to include farming. never got any feedback on it but lo and behold the tutorial gets altered. Every large company knows that feedback works both ways. Otherwise why bother?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
like your thinking

Quicker nobles, now there's an idea worth looking into.Not too sure on the players deleting idea though.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Cheaper coins, but noble price to remain the same would be for me the best idea. if the .net prices are used a maxed village could produce three coins a day.
 

DeletedUser6164

Guest
CHEAPER NOBLES PLEASE

As to internals well cheaper nobles take care of that for me tbh.
I want the world closed no new players and lets have some fun again I am sick of farming for hours for a few nobles takes all the fun out of it tbh. Cheaper nobles would really help or give us farming scripts we are allowed to use.
 

DeletedUser4

Guest
[tt]We are following the same rules as .net for noble cost reduction these being:~

< 1000 for 0.5
< 500 for 0.333

So sorry to say you have a bit of a way to go yet before you hit these figures[/tt]
 

DeletedUser

Guest
As luke says this game is about war not property portfolios and as the war is won when the enemy either dies or routs the focus on taking villages seems odd when you get to late stages.

To counter the price of nobles and realistically the time it takes to collect the resources to fund them, perhaps the use of a farming script (barbs only) could be allowed above a certain number of villages if the price does not either reduce or stay the same at a certain point.

Not sure all of the second idea is viable - the hit delete and leave a wasteland option could leave massive areas of the map that cannot be nobled into if you are looking at turtles that eat every barb. A bit too scorched earth for me.

I like the number of ideas circulating at the moment though - the no plunder even from barbs idea is quite attractive at mid - late game especially and at least would allow everyone to have a life outside of TW. Might even encourage a few players to stay on longer at the start and get a proper foothold so buy premium and continue playing longer.

On a similar subject, the morale penalty needs a tweak in my opinion. For example a couple of players that have gone inactive have left a stack with a paladin and cats in their final villages which if they only have one village left in effect makes a superstack when the morale penalty kicks in. The player is beaten so should be folding in that vein not pulling off a fantastic last stand well above the odds despite being inactive.

Finally I think archers should have much better attack values so they can be used as offensive troops as well as defensive.They take a lot of resources and time to build, have an achilles heel already and at least doubling their offensive value would be a bit more interesting I think.
 

DeletedUser589

Guest
[tt]We are following the same rules as .net for noble cost reduction these being:~

< 1000 for 0.5
< 500 for 0.333

So sorry to say you have a bit of a way to go yet before you hit these figures[/tt]


So we have to wait until there are less than 1000 players in the world before we can get the noble reduction in cost? If there is a general feeling that this would improve the game for everyone can that me discussed?

Just realised that according to the other thread only 740 players are above 100k accounts and lets be honest if you are under 10k at this point in the world you aren't really playing, so half price nobles please :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Tracey, every single world is different.
Please reduce noble costs.

Thanks!
 

DeletedUser6158

Guest
I'm in agreement with the original poster

as for following the .net settings. We have been told that .co.uk is different to .net. In particular when it comes about to the opening of worlds.

If there is an aspect that would bring more enjoyment to the players playing world 1, then isn't it better to discuss and look at implementing them rather than simply referring to .net as to why it won't happen.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Therefore I suggest that once a player decided to quit and hits delete, the villages that go barb can NEVER be attacked, they have a ban on them. This means the enemy can not take what the tribe has all ready won and your tribe can continue in its war and nobling red dots.
Essentially this game is tribal wars, and a tribe will win this game not an individual. So therefore when a player quits, in my opinion, it should not mean that the tribe has to then re-fight for the area it has all ready claimed. This would encourage players to hit red and also means that the prescious nobles we all save hard for can be used for the right reasons.

i don't agree with this, you know 'jackattack' left , he owned 15% of K72
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1.) Price of nobles (1.) Price of nobles (especially for those of us in the top 20)
some reckon, cos we have the vills/points, we have nobles/res(can't farm if nukes out)
-------------------------------------------------
Ps, ABDO, i'm on W6 and 7
 

DeletedUser

Guest
i think yes to the world speed, but no to the noble cost. as if you are getting say x2 res per hour, then the nobles will become not cheaper but more coins per hour. therefor more nobles per hour/day.

we cant have it both ways more res and cheaper nobles, i say one or the other.
 

DeletedUser6748

Guest
[tt]We are following the same rules as .net for noble cost reduction these being:~

< 1000 for 0.5
< 500 for 0.333

So sorry to say you have a bit of a way to go yet before you hit these figures[/tt]


Can't we just increase these numbers to 2000 and 1000 respectively?
 
Top