DeletedUser
Only 79 times; you can't plunder yourself.
- 79 from neighbours;
- 79 from guild;
- 139 from friends (you can send 79 friends invites and accept another 60 after that).
That gives a total of 297.
-
Dear forum reader,
To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can REGISTER HERE!
Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
Only 79 times; you can't plunder yourself.
That gives a total of 297.
DeletedUser
Yes I suppose 79 would be more accurate, although the 'hoods can go higher as we've seen in the past, so 80 would be possible too.
In this case, I'm only talking about the neighborhood, so guildies and friends wouldn't factor in.
In this case, I'm only talking about the neighborhood, so guildies and friends wouldn't factor in.
DeletedUser15326
Hey, I thought when a hood got below 40neighbours on the following monday there is supposed to be a neighbourhood merge? well I'm down to 37 neighbours with no sign of any new players in our hood at all.. I have spoken to various different people and most of them have 50/60 plus neighbours, what going on? I am getting bored of the lack of competion.. just seems so scarce. Thanks for any info.
DeletedUser7719
Why not just a reshuffle every week? And it could also be matching the age you are currently in... (the only problem would be the "Current Champion" on the PvP tower :p)
DeletedUser
iirc BlackSmith commented once on this, stating that it will give the servers a heart attack. Furthermore, this way you could work hard toward the first place in your hood and end up last after such shuffle. It throws away sense of progression and any desire to push ahead.(same goes for KingMike random hoods suggestion)
DeletedUser17245
my opinion that those who r in top rank need max 30 neigboors and no more untill rest folks gain em with ranks, why would beginer ever considerin to play this game if he or she knows from the start he or she can never gain those who r in lead
DeletedUser
@ igie Nobody ever won anything by starting with the words: I can never do it.
There is room at the top of each world for anyone who wants to do what it takes to get there.
There is room at the top of each world for anyone who wants to do what it takes to get there.
DeletedUser
I doubt that most realize what your "what it takes" entitles and/or have the most important ingredient to do it... but we digress.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser17245
yes i can do it, got lucky and have always 79 active neigbours with always 8 units in defence and maybe just maybe i get to there in couple of deceys, rofl, guey guy think this is my first game i play
i wont give up tho i know its mision imposible, my point of view with this merge is diferent from other as i see things with my own eyes
i wont give up tho i know its mision imposible, my point of view with this merge is diferent from other as i see things with my own eyes
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
No, it's not the same at all. In my suggestion you never lose your current neighbors, you gain new ones. Then you never lose those new ones either. I don't see how that's going to hurt this "sense of progression"... Also it would take place with just a few merges, not very taxing on the servers.
DeletedUser
The reason I avoided responding to your previous post is because it doesn't seem you try to look beyond what is good for you.
In this case, once you thrown away the merge 'similar progress hoods', it means that players who joined last week can be merged with with half year INA veterans. Since the highest rotation is among new players, it means that new players will become space fillers, merged at the bottom. I can go further, but I don't see the point because IMO compared with the current system, this part is a joke.
The suggestion to limit number of actions was an interesting one, but you didn't addressed the couple balance issues I noted. IMO in game that spans almost half a year, balance has a magic powers over the devs. Because people hate to put so much time into the game only to find out there is nothing else todo half way. So when something makes the game easier for everyone i.e. everyone will be able to get it sooner and it would become common instead of rare/unique, In such case unless you think that it doesn't change the balance or have suggestion on how to address it, you liking the outcome or not bare no relevance to the discussion.
Also the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that your belief that it will "protect new players" is wrong. It will defiantly not protect them, it might dissuade some of the top players, but due to much much bigger hood size IMO it will only aggravate one of the more common problems that people complain about. If you wish I can post several scenarios for you to consider.
In this case, once you thrown away the merge 'similar progress hoods', it means that players who joined last week can be merged with with half year INA veterans. Since the highest rotation is among new players, it means that new players will become space fillers, merged at the bottom. I can go further, but I don't see the point because IMO compared with the current system, this part is a joke.
The suggestion to limit number of actions was an interesting one, but you didn't addressed the couple balance issues I noted. IMO in game that spans almost half a year, balance has a magic powers over the devs. Because people hate to put so much time into the game only to find out there is nothing else todo half way. So when something makes the game easier for everyone i.e. everyone will be able to get it sooner and it would become common instead of rare/unique, In such case unless you think that it doesn't change the balance or have suggestion on how to address it, you liking the outcome or not bare no relevance to the discussion.
Also the more I think about it, the more I am convinced that your belief that it will "protect new players" is wrong. It will defiantly not protect them, it might dissuade some of the top players, but due to much much bigger hood size IMO it will only aggravate one of the more common problems that people complain about. If you wish I can post several scenarios for you to consider.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I addressed all of this in my last reply, my opinion hasn't changed. It has nothing to do with what's good for me, I play this game pretty casually anyways. You make a lot of assumptions there, but in the end, it's just what you think will happen.
DeletedUser2511
FAiR GAME ?? Nevver was !!
Most of the points we make in game come trough the battles we do at PvP Tour's with our neighboors!
I'm one leader for now, but in my neighbourhood we NEED to DIG HARD to Make 24 fights/Day, on our regular 45, active Neighbours.
In others places of Arvahall, other Leaders are doing 67 battles in one day! By this way I'll loose the leadership, because of this game is not done in equal terms!
... This is not correct ! This is not FAiR!
(...)
:confused: Maybe we should have less worlds for we get bigger neighbourhoods! :confused:
Most of the points we make in game come trough the battles we do at PvP Tour's with our neighboors!
I'm one leader for now, but in my neighbourhood we NEED to DIG HARD to Make 24 fights/Day, on our regular 45, active Neighbours.
In others places of Arvahall, other Leaders are doing 67 battles in one day! By this way I'll loose the leadership, because of this game is not done in equal terms!
... This is not correct ! This is not FAiR! (...)
:confused: Maybe we should have less worlds for we get bigger neighbourhoods! :confused:
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I say what's good for you, because you want more people to interact with and as far as I seen only tried to address other concerns after I raised them. Still on two occasion you claimed its the better proposal that address all issues.
Your opinion aside, my scenarios aren't about what 'I think will happen'. I try to look at what is made possible by the suggestion and then comment on how I think it will effect the game. For example your suggestion here, to get rid of 'similar progress hoods', will mean that players who joined last week could be merged with with half year INA veterans. Which is one of the things 'similar progress hoods' intended to prevent. Furthermore, I know that the highest rotation is among new players, but if you wish you can go the global ranking and make sure that more than half of the player on the roaster never passed the Iron age and since they are vented on something like two(?) week basis, its a lot of rotation(High rotation = their size drop the fastest = most active groups in merges = used for to fill small gaps in low rotation one).
So if you think that my assumptions are wrong or my conclusion that this will lead to new players becoming space fillers for older hoods. Please explain why. Personally, I have no doubt which system I prefer in this regard. Also note, that it doesn't mean that I think that the rest of the idea is bad, only that this part is.
Your opinion aside, my scenarios aren't about what 'I think will happen'. I try to look at what is made possible by the suggestion and then comment on how I think it will effect the game. For example your suggestion here, to get rid of 'similar progress hoods', will mean that players who joined last week could be merged with with half year INA veterans. Which is one of the things 'similar progress hoods' intended to prevent. Furthermore, I know that the highest rotation is among new players, but if you wish you can go the global ranking and make sure that more than half of the player on the roaster never passed the Iron age and since they are vented on something like two(?) week basis, its a lot of rotation(High rotation = their size drop the fastest = most active groups in merges = used for to fill small gaps in low rotation one).
So if you think that my assumptions are wrong or my conclusion that this will lead to new players becoming space fillers for older hoods. Please explain why. Personally, I have no doubt which system I prefer in this regard. Also note, that it doesn't mean that I think that the rest of the idea is bad, only that this part is.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser276
this is what happens when people play multiple worlds. People are in neighborhoods and eventually get to the point where they cant keep up the fighting and playing on all worlds so leave which in turn leaves gaps in neighborhoods until there is a merge.
Criteria for a neighborhood merge.
1. both neighborhoods must have a total of under 82 players
2. average points need to be similar for both neighborhoods
Its not a hard criteria to meet but can some times take a while to get. though if you have 45 neighbors you should be having 45 fights a day. Unless they are guildmates. But its not such a great idea to have guild mates in the same neighborhood if it can be helped.
Criteria for a neighborhood merge.
1. both neighborhoods must have a total of under 82 players
2. average points need to be similar for both neighborhoods
Its not a hard criteria to meet but can some times take a while to get. though if you have 45 neighbors you should be having 45 fights a day. Unless they are guildmates. But its not such a great idea to have guild mates in the same neighborhood if it can be helped.
DeletedUser
You missed the point. It's not about fair game or your comfort and fun, it's about money.
DeletedUser2511
I listen many players talk about this merge... I can ask on my neighbours how many they remember (4 or 5) and how long we do not see a single merge (since Colonial Age starts).
I only have 5 neighbours witch belong to guild, then the other 40 are all valid but they have no defence, fact that I'm sure could be change in a bigger neighbourhood, I think they do this because they have no one on its level.
Even so, I still short more then 20 fights a day witch ends up on 140 a week.... This is a lot of points!
I only have 5 neighbours witch belong to guild, then the other 40 are all valid but they have no defence, fact that I'm sure could be change in a bigger neighbourhood, I think they do this because they have no one on its level.
Even so, I still short more then 20 fights a day witch ends up on 140 a week.... This is a lot of points!
DeletedUser6461
Hi Vipirate,
Since all the neighborhood starts from a total capacity of 80 at the beginning of the game, all people will have theoretically, equal chance to grow and equal chance to get a neighborhood merge during the course of time. but due to the small differences in the nature of neighborhoods (e.g.: more attacking & plundering neighborhood may cause some early dropouts in numbers which causes an early merge but some peaceful and cooperative neighborhood stays for long), the so called merge happening at different times. But in the long run, if you take the average number of people in an "x" neighborhood for a period of six months or more, it would be almost equal as an average number of people in a "y" neighborhood, even if there is a small difference it would cover-up overtime.
The other point that you mentioned is the increasing number of 2 spear men defense; this can be changed to an extend if you keep up a dialogue between the neighborhood members. like in our neighborhood; we, the top 5 members have decided not to plunder any member who keeps a decent defense and we conveyed this message to everyone through individual messages and a small note in our our profile text. On our surprise, we got 75% members defending their city instead of the old 50%. I hope it helps you too
Since all the neighborhood starts from a total capacity of 80 at the beginning of the game, all people will have theoretically, equal chance to grow and equal chance to get a neighborhood merge during the course of time. but due to the small differences in the nature of neighborhoods (e.g.: more attacking & plundering neighborhood may cause some early dropouts in numbers which causes an early merge but some peaceful and cooperative neighborhood stays for long), the so called merge happening at different times. But in the long run, if you take the average number of people in an "x" neighborhood for a period of six months or more, it would be almost equal as an average number of people in a "y" neighborhood, even if there is a small difference it would cover-up overtime.
The other point that you mentioned is the increasing number of 2 spear men defense; this can be changed to an extend if you keep up a dialogue between the neighborhood members. like in our neighborhood; we, the top 5 members have decided not to plunder any member who keeps a decent defense and we conveyed this message to everyone through individual messages and a small note in our our profile text. On our surprise, we got 75% members defending their city instead of the old 50%. I hope it helps you too
Greywolf
Sergeant
Playing in a big neighbourhood doesn't neccessarily mean you have an advantage over players that dwell in smaller neighbourhoods. Imagine having lots of neighbours who defend their city with 2 Spearmen. I'll take the small neighbourhood with players that actually try to defend their cities any day.
It would probably be better to shuffle neighbourhoods every week and repopulate them randomly in such a way that there is less discrepancy in points between players in a neighbourhood. Though I can imagine that peaceful players in less aggressive neighbourhoods might object to this idea. Not sure if this is something the devs will consider. If I remember correctly then similar suggestions have been made in the past.
Anyways when 'guild wars' or similar PvP options are implemented (which might happen soon) then this will be less of an issue, since then there will be more possibilities to earn points from fighting.
It would probably be better to shuffle neighbourhoods every week and repopulate them randomly in such a way that there is less discrepancy in points between players in a neighbourhood. Though I can imagine that peaceful players in less aggressive neighbourhoods might object to this idea. Not sure if this is something the devs will consider. If I remember correctly then similar suggestions have been made in the past.
Anyways when 'guild wars' or similar PvP options are implemented (which might happen soon) then this will be less of an issue, since then there will be more possibilities to earn points from fighting.
DeletedUser
May I suggest that you take this to private message because this come across as a personal feud.