Pre World Helorus Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
DeletedUser
Guest
Erm...wow...you guys aren't messing around with the new worlds lately.
DeletedUser
Guest
Wow, maybe a little to fast? The best of Gela has only 2000 points!
DeletedUser
Guest
Oh come on grepolis .. This is a waste of time.
DeletedUser
Guest
No more worlds yet
DeletedUser
Guest
Too soon? 
DeletedUser
Guest
maybe they'll actually have decent settings in this world. they haven't had good settings sense calydon
DeletedUser18132
Guest
Too many worlds... Perhaps you should stop making new worlds and try to save the old ones...
DeletedUser23222
Guest
No one can save those slow worlds imo, they are too slow and too boring. Those are just sand boxes for turtles. I watch the forum - those players want slow worlds cause they are too busy in real life to actively play - read their comments sometime. You can play all of those slow worlds if you want - but you will be playing with yourself (so to speak). In fact, if you discount all the speed 1 and speed 2 worlds that INNO keeps releasing, there has not been a speed 3 revolt world since Rhet and that was a long time ago. Most of us missed that world... and we have been waiting and waiting ever since... just the opposite of your problem of too many slow worlds. We have too few fast ones. If the settings were more balanced instead of skewed towards slow speeds - both of our problems would be solved. Right?
DeletedUser
Guest
I couldn't have said it better OD. It is past time for the next speed 3 world. Slow worlds are for turtles
DeletedUser
Guest
I'm on a slow world and I'm definitely not a turtle, but I will say that most of my enemies are turtles.
This is just a guess, but I conjecture that speed 1 worlds are more profitable for IG. Gold confers a greater advantage when build times are so incredibly long, so there's more incentive to purchase.
It's also easier to protect your investment on slow worlds with slow unit speeds, since you don't have to worry about waking up to all of your offensive nukes having been sniped.
This is just a guess, but I conjecture that speed 1 worlds are more profitable for IG. Gold confers a greater advantage when build times are so incredibly long, so there's more incentive to purchase.
It's also easier to protect your investment on slow worlds with slow unit speeds, since you don't have to worry about waking up to all of your offensive nukes having been sniped.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser23222
Guest
I have been yearning for a discussion about this Argos. I do not have enough data to be certain - but here is what I see so far. I started on Delphi - speed 3 & unit speed 3 - it was fun and exciting and I spent a lot of gold - I also got whacked cause I was still learning the game. I tried a speed 1 world briefly and my god it was slow... I would never invest money in a game that takes months instead of weeks to play. And the amount of money to speed up the game to a reasonable pace would be obscene. perhaps some do - but that would make gold use even more unfair on a slow world.
So I started asking around - and I heard the same story over and over. If you have a job, then your time is too valuable to waste. You are willing to spend a reasonable amount on the game to save precious time. And the faster game offers more than a ticking clock as a reward. As for protecting your investment - that is why you play on a team.
I cannot imagine why anyone would play a speed 1 unit spd 1 world like Sparta. I am serious - someone please expain what is attractive about such settings. I have only seen comments that those player have limited interest in active play so they pick the slowest possible settings. And they dont spend gold. Those are the turtles on your world Argos.
If the slower worlds are so popular - then why are the slow players complaining there are too many of them? Meanwhile the faster worlds are not released and all the revenue from the fast player base is lost. Someone explain the marketing wisdom of this to me? Sales are sales.
So I started asking around - and I heard the same story over and over. If you have a job, then your time is too valuable to waste. You are willing to spend a reasonable amount on the game to save precious time. And the faster game offers more than a ticking clock as a reward. As for protecting your investment - that is why you play on a team.
I cannot imagine why anyone would play a speed 1 unit spd 1 world like Sparta. I am serious - someone please expain what is attractive about such settings. I have only seen comments that those player have limited interest in active play so they pick the slowest possible settings. And they dont spend gold. Those are the turtles on your world Argos.
If the slower worlds are so popular - then why are the slow players complaining there are too many of them? Meanwhile the faster worlds are not released and all the revenue from the fast player base is lost. Someone explain the marketing wisdom of this to me? Sales are sales.
DeletedUser6983
Guest
Speed 4!
DeletedUser
Guest
High activity is more rewarding on a slow world and gold goes further to boost you. During the first few weeks of a server, gold goes much further to give you an early edge. In the long term, high activity will earn me a position that's difficult to usurp. The gap between active-aggressive players and semi-active-turtles becomes much more apparent than on a world with faster settings. I've claimed top rankings and even if I go on VM for a month I can expect to remain in good standing. Olympia does not bore me. Like anything else, it's what you make of it. We have a variety of top alliances and a mixture of MRAs, not just Alliance A vs Alliance B, which I think is too simplistic and kills off a server faster than anything (as was the case with en38 Naxos).
Of comparable servers, en39 Olympia has very high activity with 4,349 active players. Worlds of similar age average around 2,000 players.
Settings: Speed - 1; Unit Speed - 1; Alliance Cap - 200; Beginners Protection: 6 Days; Revolt; Morale - Active
Players that enjoy small worlds complain that there are too many server launches for good reason. If my enemy is getting spanked (as in my case), it's easy for them to jump ship and start in a more favorable position on a new world. Frequent server launches rob me of active players, both ally and enemy, and it devalues my long term investment.
Spamming new servers will split the pool of active players with every launch. Mature worlds are fun, but if there are only a few hundred active players in the later stages it leaves us with an anti-climactic ending. It's hard enough to reliably maintain active players for two years to complete the age of wonders.
Of comparable servers, en39 Olympia has very high activity with 4,349 active players. Worlds of similar age average around 2,000 players.
Settings: Speed - 1; Unit Speed - 1; Alliance Cap - 200; Beginners Protection: 6 Days; Revolt; Morale - Active
Players that enjoy small worlds complain that there are too many server launches for good reason. If my enemy is getting spanked (as in my case), it's easy for them to jump ship and start in a more favorable position on a new world. Frequent server launches rob me of active players, both ally and enemy, and it devalues my long term investment.
Spamming new servers will split the pool of active players with every launch. Mature worlds are fun, but if there are only a few hundred active players in the later stages it leaves us with an anti-climactic ending. It's hard enough to reliably maintain active players for two years to complete the age of wonders.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
make it speed 1 ..cause it exciting that way ..
DeletedUser
Guest
I'm not saying it's more exciting, but slower worlds require less daily commitment. They're better for those that want to stick with one server for a very long time, but don't want the obligation of extremely high activity to remain competitive.
DeletedUser
Guest
since when did we last have a hero world...It seems inno dont care about hero worlds anymore...We got hero awards and can use them..there are only 2 worlds that are hero worlds...maybe we will get a hero world soon...anyway this will be speed 1 as ussual
DeletedUser23222
Guest
thank you argos
+rep for your time and thoughtfulness
some quick reactions
i am troubled a bit by the "captive victim" image - why should a player be forced to play out a losing postion for a year? I think everyone should have a reasonable hope of winning or they should learn from their mistakes and start over - what is gained by revisiting a failed strategy every day?
I always thought that the slow worlds favored the gold user - your comment about the ease at which you can use gold to build an unassailable position early in the game seems to confirm this.
releasing a fast world should not dilute your investment very much since fast players wont play slow worlds and slow players seem to be afraid of fast worlds
I know my spend rate on a fast world, and I have a good idea how much fast players spend - i dont see how the total revenue could be less than what slow players spend, even over a longer period. Understand that the fast world revenue is lost because fast players dont play slow worlds
Two years to world wonders? Well that is the crux of the problem itself - a well balanced fast world should only take one year and that's a whole lot easier to maintain.
Time to be silly - if minimizing daily commitment is the goal - than play a speed 0 world - you wont need to log on at all. Silly - but there is a point. If you like your world speed and level of commitment than i am happy for you - i just wish I could find a fast world for my team.
+rep for your time and thoughtfulness
some quick reactions
i am troubled a bit by the "captive victim" image - why should a player be forced to play out a losing postion for a year? I think everyone should have a reasonable hope of winning or they should learn from their mistakes and start over - what is gained by revisiting a failed strategy every day?
I always thought that the slow worlds favored the gold user - your comment about the ease at which you can use gold to build an unassailable position early in the game seems to confirm this.
releasing a fast world should not dilute your investment very much since fast players wont play slow worlds and slow players seem to be afraid of fast worlds
I know my spend rate on a fast world, and I have a good idea how much fast players spend - i dont see how the total revenue could be less than what slow players spend, even over a longer period. Understand that the fast world revenue is lost because fast players dont play slow worlds
Two years to world wonders? Well that is the crux of the problem itself - a well balanced fast world should only take one year and that's a whole lot easier to maintain.
Time to be silly - if minimizing daily commitment is the goal - than play a speed 0 world - you wont need to log on at all. Silly - but there is a point. If you like your world speed and level of commitment than i am happy for you - i just wish I could find a fast world for my team.
DeletedUser
Guest
Speed 1 requires a lot of time to stay competitive I hate to say it. The que's are slow but to get the res you need to be on it all day. Also slow unit speeds just means you get a heads up. You will still need to be active enough to time your response.
edit: this does seem like a lot of new worlds though. I thought these games could last over a year
edit: this does seem like a lot of new worlds though. I thought these games could last over a year
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser24050
Guest
How about a seed 3 unit speed 3 hero world! I will never play a slow world again! It takes far to long and if you end up with an alliance of back stabbers then you start all over again. and what happened to you in Achilles superbuilder?
- Status