Hero worlds a bust?

DeletedUser

Guest
Katlian said:
I play in Achilles quite a bit and i'm not so sure manipulation of the standard variables (speed, etc.) is the problem (and clearly there is a proble. The hero worlds were supposed to be COOL! Where is the imagination here? Yes, I know everything has to be planned to the nth, but still. While there is some evidence that focus has been turned toward heroes (the ability to steal favor, etc.), it is too limited.

Puny humans, Quests, and relations with the gods:
If this is a hero world, then make it one. In a REAL hero world the emphasis would TRULY be on the heroes. There heroes should be statistically more powerful here. And how about some quests (lists of actions that must be completed for some gloriously cool reward). What hero doesn't have to complete a quest? And then the fact that heroes are typically offspring of the gods--so why not allow them to pray directly to the gods (prayers cost, but gain things--weapons, powers, etc.).

And finally: if you can steal favor in a hero world, why can't you trade it and even buy it?

Some thoughts. How about a little creativity folks? This hero thing should be 'fun', 'fun', 'fun'!

Katlian
Click to expand...

eww...that sounds like some wierd hybrid of the standard MMO in browser forum.

And how could you possibly implement quests? I can't really see how it would work.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Atticus X said:
I believe the problem doesn't rest with the number of worlds or the frequency that they are released, rather it sits squarely on the fact that there is no significant achievable end game for a server, and the playerbase is spread too thin as a result to accomodate long term playability

We all either jump from server to server looking for new battles to 'pseudo-win' or sit on a dieing world filled with false hope that somehow it will get better.

It's time (imo) to implement a 3 month achievable 'milestone' (end-game) into the game where the server literally dies when it is achieved. (you are automatically sent to colonize in a new world)

Players/alliances tend to jump ship when they aren't doing as well as they expected. The best way to stop that from being a detriment to a server is to prevent the 'new worlds' from opening every 2 weeks and change it to every 3 months with the players knowing that they can 'do something' to stop the top alliance if they band together. Enforce the 'fight over flight' mentality.

My suggestion is to take the server milestones as a framework and every time an alliiance acheives another milestone their 'world wonder' becomes closer to being completed - no resources needed, just alliance progression - you can lose your progression by losing the last alliance held city on the island you select for your wonder island, but you don't need to hold all 20 slots, you don't need to colonize, you don't need to farm if you don't want too, or send resources anywhere, you simply need to fight for the right to be the best.
Click to expand...

The worlds are released as such speed because they fill up so fast, the demand for the game is growing and so is the player base. Without releasing the new worlds at the current rate players would not be able to sign up to a new world.

While I think it feels to fast it is a necessity to keep up with the demand.

I also think long term play isn't as achievable as some would like because of the practicalities of managing 50+ cities but without the game taking over your life.

Just my 2cent. ;)
 

DeletedUser8790

Guest
WAVEBREAKER said:
Still doesn't look like I'm ever going to get into a Hero World...

Stupid requirement to found a city...
Click to expand...

Really? I love founding cities, It is one of the best tactics you can utilize in this game, if you do it correctly. I would guess I have earned at least 4 million DBP on my colonies alone. You just need to figure out where to put them.
 

DeletedUser13405

Guest
Saska said:
I also think long term play isn't as achievable as some would like because of the practicalities of managing 50+ cities but without the game taking over your life.

Just my 2cent. ;)
Click to expand...

Kind of depends on what you want. I find my 79 cities in Beta entirely manageable. The fact that Beta is Speed 1 really helps with that. It is much easier to have a large account on a Speed 1 world than it would be on, say, a Speed 3 world IMHO. There are days where I just have some festivals and there are days when I am launching attacks/defense all day.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
GothamSoldier said:
Kind of depends on what you want. I find my 79 cities in Beta entirely manageable. The fact that Beta is Speed 1 really helps with that. It is much easier to have a large account on a Speed 1 world than it would be on, say, a Speed 3 world IMHO. There are days where I just have some festivals and there are days when I am launching attacks/defense all day.
Click to expand...

Point taken, and I used to do the same I had 177 cities in Gamma in times of "peace" it was easy and took little time, but when you are near a front line (it is a war game) and you are attacked day in day out it takes more of your time.

While the fighting isn't the point I was making I found that cycling 177 cities and topping up troops each day took the time, and in the end was the key reason I left the game along with alot of my allaince.

Cycling a city took around 30 seconds on average, that include festivals and topping up troops to the ratios we worked to. (while I am aware we now have a run all festival button). It was around 90 minutes twice per day for me to top stuff up that was was on top of all the fighting and normal game stuff.

I comment was:

I also think long term play isn't as achievable as some would like because of the practicalities of managing 50+ cities but without the game taking over your life.
Click to expand...

If it was achievable, then alot of the old worlds would not be 'dead' or dieing. en27 has about 4k players left on it the top player has 80 cities we will see over the next few months the numbers on the drop drastically as more and more people get to around the 50 city mark - it goes too much for people to play.
 

DeletedUser22650

Guest
Saska said:
The worlds are released as such speed because they fill up so fast, the demand for the game is growing and so is the player base. Without releasing the new worlds at the current rate players would not be able to sign up to a new world.

While I think it feels to fast it is a necessity to keep up with the demand.

I also think long term play isn't as achievable as some would like because of the practicalities of managing 50+ cities but without the game taking over your life.

Just my 2cent. ;)
Click to expand...

imo the demand for the game isnt growing anywhere near as fast as the available servers, lamia filled up with 40k players and allready only 3k of them are what i would call active even if i was being generous, too many have hit an advert link and taken a look only to not like it or not give it a fair crack, i must have accounts on every rts out there but ive never stayed on any others because they just didnt grab me, i think some sort of advanced servers could maybe work if ppl actually wanted to play them so they werent spread out over 40 maps but apparently hw's arnt it
 

DeletedUser13405

Guest
Saska said:
If it was achievable, then alot of the old worlds would not be 'dead' or dieing. en27 has about 4k players left on it the top player has 80 cities we will see over the next few months the numbers on the drop drastically as more and more people get to around the 50 city mark - it goes too much for people to play.
Click to expand...

And that is a very good point. For the majority, it is too much.
 

DeletedUser8969

Guest
Atticus X said:
...the players knowing that they can 'do something' to stop the top alliance if they band together....
Click to expand...

this strategy never works. coalitions always fail if their targeted alliance has any skills unless the top alliance gets bored and quits. pacting always affects growth. i would say why it is a fail strategy but then folks might stop forming coalitions against alliances i am in.

the WW point requirement could be cut in half and that would certainly help quite a bit. last i checked there weren't even enough total cities on the server i play to meet the point requirement let alone in the top 50 alliances.

perhaps have a bp requirement as an either/or option in addition to points. 20M alliance bps and WW open for that alliance only. it would encourage activity instead of the simming and hand holding that seems to have become dominant in grepo over the last year or so.

i don't have the HW award because i have refused to colonize. one would think that getting 1M bps on two moraleless servers would be enough to automatically gain entry:p. imho their should be alternative ways to gain entry that are less distasteful to vets and people who are expert in this game.
 

DeletedUser8790

Guest
Anyone else notice that the new hero world announcement was immediately buried by a system update announcement. Inno must really dislike these hero worlds LOL.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
callinectes said:
Anyone else notice that the new hero world announcement was immediately buried by a system update announcement. Inno must really dislike these hero worlds LOL.
Click to expand...

Yes, its all a big conspiracy, you found out our secret plot. :/
 

DeletedUser

Guest
chrss2128 said:
Yes, its all a big conspiracy, you found out our secret plot. :/
Click to expand...

We won't stay silent on that. We will protest and ask for a change in the system like the Arabs are doing who's with me?? Liberty or death (in here ban).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top