DeletedUser
Guest
How would WWs cause this? WWs have NOTHING to do with the beginning of a world?
How would WWs cause this? WWs have NOTHING to do with the beginning of a world?
DeletedUser
Guest
Yes, people want to win worlds. If they start late, (or get rimmed) and see players with 100k more points than them, they move to an easier world, as why would you think you have a chance of winning world wonders if there are much bigger players and alliances than you?? In 1.26 there were no wonders, you could start a 5 man alliance and not be bothered about being a "loser." Now, all top alliances have similar tactics, sizes, and member numbers to try win WW's.
Do you think a 10 man alliance in a post 2.0 world can win?? It is almost impossible. Yet these sorts of alliances were extremely successful in 1.26.
Do you think a 10 man alliance in a post 2.0 world can win?? It is almost impossible. Yet these sorts of alliances were extremely successful in 1.26.
DeletedUser
Guest
Well considering I was talking about maybe the first month or two..no one would have 100k points by that time period. Also, who really cares about WWs that early in the first place? If it was me, that'd be the last thing I'd worry about at the time. Why not enjoy the gaming aspect of it first. Rather than the farmville aspect.
**I do get where you were coming from; although, you went into several months down the road whereas I was just discussing the present.** No biggie though.
DeletedUser
Guest
Ahh yes well world hopping after 2 weeks is pretty pathetic, if you mean that fast 
DeletedUser5554
Guest
Yeah seems to be a problem. I only actively play Paros and don't world hop around when i'm set on one world. If I have changed worlds its a good indication that I had to quit the old one for a period of time.
I remember most of my first alliance including myself got rimmed in Gamma. Most of us came back to play again. I saw the same on many other worlds. I think WW happens to be the problem or any form of end game really. When this was a survivalist game and you took pride on being one of the alliances with longevity, or overthrowing the top dog, or even just holding your own against the top dogs. That was when this game was at its height. Powers changes, people were motivated, worlds were populated for a long time.
I'm on Paros right now and I can flatly tell you that world is already dead. Both in the game and the externals. O-56 is considered the rim and the world isn't even close to maxed in population. Yet somehow another world which is now also growing slowly has opened. It may be time for Inno to start accepting that this pace of release is too fast and making the game worse for players. Which in turn will make us not want to play. The most longevity I've felt since I left Omicron was on Delos which was a 1 speed world and stayed alive maybe a month longer than normal worlds.
The problem is most people think like Jono and will leave thinking the world is lost. That's why WW is the problem. People went from playing a game to winning. Its like college football vs the NFL. In college you trained hard to have fun on saturdays and go to good bowl games. If you didn't play well you still got an education, partied, and had a good time. And if you're team didn't do well it really didn't matter because its college you're there for an education mostly not for wins. However if you find yourself drafted suddenly its all different. You have to preform or get cut from a team. Those who don't preform wind up on the outside looking in.
That's kind of the difference between 1.26 with no WW and 2nd gen. In 1.26 if you're alliance "lost" you either hopped teams, rode solo, or got rimmed. Mostly because of the fun you had from the experience and having no need to preform better or get a win. You came back and tried again. So in a way 1.26 is a lot like college football. 2nd gen however is more like the NFL. Alliances are very world winning oriented. I found people a lot more shrewd and even obsessed with winning a crown. If they lost the general opinion was to try a new world. And because worlds are being pumped out at an increasing rate each year there's no reason to stick around.
Last edited:
DeletedUser
Guest
I'm a newer player, so I have no idea what the 1.26 game was like. As I've stated in several other threads, though, I think the idea of the endgame sets grepo apart and makes me feel like I'm playing for a reason. I guess I just like how the endgame gives a sort of narrative to the entire experience. I'm not so interested in an endless game. To me, that would make all the sound and fury to signify nothing. Like the difference between The Sopranos and Breaking Bad. The Sopranos went on for too long, and it got to the point where the events that comprised the series shrank in meaning because of the long overall timeframe. I hate that Breaking Bad is ending so soon, but by doing so they give greater importance to the events that took place. A game without end end is like a series without end to me -- pointless.
Along this line, I do not see the endgame as much of a factor on what I consider the real problem - world hopping - as others do. The biggest factor that affects world hopping is the speed at which new worlds are opened. There will always be the kind of player who sees a new world open and jumps in because they think they will have more success, or want to be an alliance founder, or just because there's a shiny new world out there. Nothing will change this type of player. This is an argument for limiting the opening of new worlds.
On the other hand, if a brand-new player does not join a brand-new world they will be at a distinct disadvantage. Also, when my current world ends and assuming I want to join another, I'd want to join one just opening and not have to wait months for that to happen. Opening new worlds is a bit of a double edged sword.
My world, en-39 Olympia, a speed one world, has nearly 2,000 active members still and is very lively, even if our forum is dead. My alliance is involved in several entertaining wars, and the world contains many good grepo players. The people who stick and stay will do so regardless of whether there's an endgame or not, and the world hoppers will never become top-flight grepo warriors, IMHO. I think the experienced people should teach this to the youngsters and world hoppers. I know I learned the most the fastest from getting my butt kicked. A restart is not going to make you world hoppers any better. Only learning hard lessons and how to up your game will do that.
Along this line, I do not see the endgame as much of a factor on what I consider the real problem - world hopping - as others do. The biggest factor that affects world hopping is the speed at which new worlds are opened. There will always be the kind of player who sees a new world open and jumps in because they think they will have more success, or want to be an alliance founder, or just because there's a shiny new world out there. Nothing will change this type of player. This is an argument for limiting the opening of new worlds.
On the other hand, if a brand-new player does not join a brand-new world they will be at a distinct disadvantage. Also, when my current world ends and assuming I want to join another, I'd want to join one just opening and not have to wait months for that to happen. Opening new worlds is a bit of a double edged sword.
My world, en-39 Olympia, a speed one world, has nearly 2,000 active members still and is very lively, even if our forum is dead. My alliance is involved in several entertaining wars, and the world contains many good grepo players. The people who stick and stay will do so regardless of whether there's an endgame or not, and the world hoppers will never become top-flight grepo warriors, IMHO. I think the experienced people should teach this to the youngsters and world hoppers. I know I learned the most the fastest from getting my butt kicked. A restart is not going to make you world hoppers any better. Only learning hard lessons and how to up your game will do that.
DeletedUser
Guest
DeletedUser5554
Guest
Oh boy where to start. I guess I should start with that i'm glad you enjoy the end game and it brings you purpose. But you have to consider that purpose I suppose. You fought hard for months just to pour resources into a wonder on a dead world that nobody competes on seriously anymore. Suddenly this takes meaning away because if you established early dominance and are diplomatic its pretty much a locked up win. In a older world competition was a lot more fierce and this came mostly from no end game feature and slow world production.
The end game isn't bad because it ends the game. It's bad because it kills all competitive sense and on top of that creates a demand for new worlds on the weekly. Look at Paros its not even full. Delos was opened a few months ago and stands at 2k players. When Gamma was a few months old it was buzzing with life and not only that rim alliances that weren't MRA's were still breaking into the top 12. Same on Theta and Epsilon. This is what I define as a competitive world. You think you wouldn't have fun in an no end game server but are you really having fun if you want the game to end in the first place? Having been on old servers I know everyone was sad to see a server they played for almost two years be finally shut down. The fun goes from building the world wonders to your story of survival throughout the world and how you got to where you are. To me that would be a better story.
I've seen some guys get conquered early on and come back to be a force. They didn't have the choice to hop so they found themselves a good team and became a decent and productive player. Brand new players on old worlds isn't bad either. New alliances with experienced leaders used to start up in the rim all the time. Because of this they would need more member and would train those member. This in turn produced top alliances.
I do think WW needs to go in order for this whole thing to get back on track. When you become obsessed with winning a world as opposed to just playing and surviving it doesn't enhance game play it kills it. Today the WW stands a reminder of what was supposed to take us to the failure known as the Hero Worlds. We all seem to ignore that that's the sole purpose of the World Wonders. But the Hero worlds were a massive failure mostly because of easy admission into them and players not wanting to stick around after playing 1-2 years. To top it off nothing really edgy came in the Hero Worlds.
DeletedUser27700
Guest
To me this falls back to the players though.
There is nothing stopping anyone from starting an older world and making a rim alliance, like you said they did in the old days. They choose not too because they want to win, winning meaning building WW.
I recently quit most of my worlds after building the WW in Ithaca to take a break, but when I come back it will not be in the newest world, it will be on the rim for fun.
WW is not that bad, and it does give a purpose to the game. If a new player starts an old world with no WW, and is already surrounded by 3k people with 10x as many points as him/her, that person does not have much reason to stick around.
With WW however, they can join an alliance and get trained, take easy cities, and be a part of an end goal, regardless of size.
You may say they can do the same if we did not have WW, and you would be right. But with WW it takes pressure off because you have your goal to achieve, not just endless war against people much bigger than yourself.
There is nothing stopping anyone from starting an older world and making a rim alliance, like you said they did in the old days. They choose not too because they want to win, winning meaning building WW.
I recently quit most of my worlds after building the WW in Ithaca to take a break, but when I come back it will not be in the newest world, it will be on the rim for fun.
WW is not that bad, and it does give a purpose to the game. If a new player starts an old world with no WW, and is already surrounded by 3k people with 10x as many points as him/her, that person does not have much reason to stick around.
With WW however, they can join an alliance and get trained, take easy cities, and be a part of an end goal, regardless of size.
You may say they can do the same if we did not have WW, and you would be right. But with WW it takes pressure off because you have your goal to achieve, not just endless war against people much bigger than yourself.
DeletedUser5554
Guest
But there's no reason to join Ithica, a world with 800 players and a won world. I've always found people are more out for themselves and high strung because of WW. Even I was an initial victim of this and I think it showed to some. I'm not saying no end game is perfect but if you're paying up to hundreds or thousands of dollars to play well then I suspect you'd like to play for a long period of time and have a lot of adventures in your world. WW and many of 2.0 updates practically drove off several devout costumers and very good players. My dad was one of these veterans. After 2.0 he gave up his 120+ cities in Theta. I'd find more fun and less pressure in a world with 10-20k players still sticking around and many start up alliances being decent. Many players would be going through what you're going through and many alliances are open to helping you out.
DeletedUser27700
Guest
lol, I didn't mean join Ithaca.
What I am saying is, when I start looking for another world to join, it will be 2-4 weeks old. If I was starting today I would probably join Paros over Rizinia for example (ignoring the settings).
What I am saying is, when I start looking for another world to join, it will be 2-4 weeks old. If I was starting today I would probably join Paros over Rizinia for example (ignoring the settings).
DeletedUser5554
Guest
yeah but you wan't a world that's bringing new players constantly. Again a Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Epsilon, and Theta style of a world where you had 20k+ consistently until the end. You've seen the results Iced Ithica died so fast that by the time AAB fell less than 2.5k players were left. The #1 alliance I believe was also suffering from inactivity issues from sheer boredom at the time. Don't you wish IGB got more bang for its buck?
Speaking of Paros and Rizinia both of those worlds are pretty stillborn. Paros isn't even maxed and Rizinia doesn't even look like it got anywhere near close to max. This is exactly what i'm talking about. Theta was buzzing with life as was Kappa. Rizinia is not. Gamma and Epsilon were also full of life and buzz and stayed that way until much later. What made old Grepolis great was the fact that anything could happen but the only reason upsets and power shifts happened in the first place was because of longevity.
Speaking of Paros and Rizinia both of those worlds are pretty stillborn. Paros isn't even maxed and Rizinia doesn't even look like it got anywhere near close to max. This is exactly what i'm talking about. Theta was buzzing with life as was Kappa. Rizinia is not. Gamma and Epsilon were also full of life and buzz and stayed that way until much later. What made old Grepolis great was the fact that anything could happen but the only reason upsets and power shifts happened in the first place was because of longevity.
DeletedUser27700
Guest
I completely agree, nod.
I just think its a player mindset that needs to change.
The worlds get released because people jump on the new worlds, fill them up, then a new one comes and they repeat the process.
If we can get people to stay put longer, then the worlds will stay full, meaning less demand for new ones.
I just think its a player mindset that needs to change.
The worlds get released because people jump on the new worlds, fill them up, then a new one comes and they repeat the process.
If we can get people to stay put longer, then the worlds will stay full, meaning less demand for new ones.
DeletedUser5554
Guest
That'll never happen. It was like me trying to fight off the whole world of Ithica while surrounded. Clearly that wasn't going to work out for the way I had built that team. As I said earlier people don't make good decisions so in some cases you have to make decisions for them.
Lets take conquest vs founding. How many people probably would found first given a choice? A significant amount more. So in turn we set ground rules and tell them conquest is the way. We have to be the same with worlds too. Obviously nobody is going to make the right decision and rightfully so. Everyone loves that new world vibe and the smell of new opportunities. But what makes a new opportunity more special is when it doesn't come around often.
Also in world release news it appears World 63 is now in the making...There's 24k and 8k on the past two worlds.
Lets take conquest vs founding. How many people probably would found first given a choice? A significant amount more. So in turn we set ground rules and tell them conquest is the way. We have to be the same with worlds too. Obviously nobody is going to make the right decision and rightfully so. Everyone loves that new world vibe and the smell of new opportunities. But what makes a new opportunity more special is when it doesn't come around often.
Also in world release news it appears World 63 is now in the making...There's 24k and 8k on the past two worlds.
DeletedUser38652
Guest
Not only that check the ithaca forums and you will see DeB recruiting for 48 hrs after u guys fell.
DeletedUser5554
Guest
I get that Inno wants to make money. Who doesn't but if the quality declines so do the number of customers. Anyone who passed a high school economics class would know this. Hence why I think we should tone down the world productions.
DeletedUser6029
Guest
Nod, he has a point, and in fact this is for the most part OUR fault. Many many posts are about "the next" so and so world, premade. Then it comes, they get their donkey's kicked, whine about being bullied and bail. There is no loyalty anymore. Now to that point, innogames hasn't really fostered the whole loyalty well, they have left the model of long term good ole fashion skill for the sake of the dollar.....
BUT...and let me be clear, I said all of that with an absolute but in the making....
They are aware there are structural problems in many areas, and if you look at the road map, and the fact that every game now has a Dev participating on the forums of the .en worlds, they are taking stock in what the majority of the gripes are. Also, I believe OUR Dev liaison wrote a very well written post explaining the fine line they as a company is having to walk. I can't find it, well let me resay, I didn't bother to look...but I did read it. I even forwarded it to my guild on Forge because it was so well said. I am content to wait and see if the road map will offer a good working relationship between long term, serious, new but awesome, loyal and the addicted players vs. the financial department of innogames. I personally am very excited to see what will happen when they begin to implement these "improvements".
On a bunny trail, some of these improvements are absolutely player beneficial and some of them are company beneficial, but to be fair, the fact that they have put so much effort into both communication and game quality, I think there is hope.
Anyway that is my well inflated, and highly self thought important two cents.
DeletedUser5554
Guest
Haha thanks for that Domino I hope you're correct about that. It means Inno does care to a huge extent. But I wasn't saying it's not our faults. It clearly is we always want more and that will never change. But as a wise person once said "good things come to those who wait" remember the real hype to new worlds? Lets bring that back!
Also where are you at in Grepolis now a days? If you aren't doing anything you should join me in south east Paros.
DeletedUser6029
Guest
I am always correct about how awwwweeeeesooooomeeee I am
Oh you mean my comment....meh
Oh you mean my comment....meh
DeletedUser
Guest
I usually think your posts are spot on, but on this one I'm completely in disagreement. It's not a mindset, it happened all in one go as soon as we switched to 2.0, and with a combination of that and new worlds all the time, the game simply rotted from the inside. I'm not blaming 2.0, I mean, we have to move on, but with 2.0 came a lot of negative response and we lost a great portion of the community. It has NOT returned to that state since the switch.
People don't stay in worlds longer because there's no benefit to it. The start of a game is intense (and I find boring at the same time) because the buildings are built in seconds, and everything is easily obtainable. Once that's over (normally a week), people get bored incredibly quick, and I don't blame them.