My reasoning would be to test the mechanics they are adding as thoroughly as possible now so that when a new world comes we aren't in this same position a few months down the line. If there really isn't any content that makes you want to come back and play right now what makes you think you will be just as interested after you have played the same amount of time during this world after a reset?Salad wrote:What beneficial reasons would there be to keep this world going, and what downsides other than a bunch of bitching and groaning (which will happen if you reset or not, mind you) Would there be if the world was to be reset?
-
Kaios
- Posts: 9268
- Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:14 am
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
-
Salad
- Posts: 346
- Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:09 pm
- Location: Ohio, United States
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
I don't disagree with having these new mechanics tested before a world reset, but why not set up a beta branch so that new implementations can be tested in a controlled environment rather than on the main world where it could possibly blow up in your face and cause problems for your progression and personal game play.Kaios wrote: My reasoning would be to test the mechanics they are adding as thoroughly as possible now so that when a new world comes we aren't in this same position a few months down the line.
The only way you're going to get retention rate up is by making the game more compelling, adding new features, tweaking old ones to be more interesting or fulfilling. QUALITY OF LIFE IMPROVEMENTS, and most importantly, making the game fun (which I do find it fun). Do I think the latest patch was worthy of a world reset? No I don't, but do I think that this patch could have been worked into a far better patch that could have been deserving of a reset.Kaios wrote: If there really isn't any content that makes you want to come back and play right now what makes you think you will be just as interested after you have played the same amount of time during this world after a reset?
The changes we had are.... good, I guess? but it feels like maybe half or a third of a much larger patch. If they would have held off on this patch and shoved it out with the
Then maybe we could be looking at a content patch worthy of a reset. That is, if it looks to change as much (or add as much) as I am anticipating.jorb wrote: perhaps somewhat larger, nice things(tm) patch.
-
tyrtix
- Posts: 1108
- Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:54 am
- Location: Leghorn
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
Robben_DuMarsch wrote:I tend to agree with this as well, so long as you mean exponentially higher costs for stat return.tyrtix wrote:no need for stat cap, just go trough 300 stat like now, then make it harder to get more points, instead of a geometric scale, a logaritmic one will be perfect.
Yes, a logaritmic growth means exponential scale of resources to raise the stat.
-
overtyped
- Posts: 3906
- Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 2:09 am
- Location: Quaran book burning festival
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
It's pretty shocking that most people want a world that lasts only a year.
I think 2 years would be best. People just don't know whats good for them.
But this current world i feel shud end, with so many massive changes, its practically a different game
I mean, now theres no stat cap, combat system is totally different. There are tons of ices and salts that have grandfathered Pclaims, preventing others from contesting it.
New siege system, new kingdom system. It''s so different it's silly. Why should we play when others have a overwhelming advantage already in this revamped haven?
I think 2 years would be best. People just don't know whats good for them.
But this current world i feel shud end, with so many massive changes, its practically a different game
I mean, now theres no stat cap, combat system is totally different. There are tons of ices and salts that have grandfathered Pclaims, preventing others from contesting it.
New siege system, new kingdom system. It''s so different it's silly. Why should we play when others have a overwhelming advantage already in this revamped haven?
Early world exploit: Put your hearthfire inside a cave, then hold shift to position a claim right in front of a cave. After 8 hours the claim will be unbreakable. Since your hearthfire is inside the cave, you can still get back inside, and leave, but nobody will be able to enter, effectively making you unraidable for the first 3-7 days. Enjoy
-
Jesus_Smith_Nandez
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:15 am
- Location: Canada
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
1 year is a very long time, I would even say like 6-10 months to be honest
HnH Videos
God bless
God bless
-
Colin500
- Posts: 1018
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 11:07 pm
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
I still think they should just open a second server with new world and leave this to be (just like legacy haven)
-
Jesus_Smith_Nandez
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2014 7:15 am
- Location: Canada
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
The what happens after we make another world? 3 servers? After that 4 servers? It is not worth going to such heights to protect people's "investments" especially with such a low player base. I would rather have 1 server of 160 than 2 of 80.Colin500 wrote:I still think they should just open a second server with new world and leave this to be (just like legacy haven)
HnH Videos
God bless
God bless
-
Colin500
- Posts: 1018
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 11:07 pm
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
To be fair, lots of people are waiting to play on the new world and they don't want to start playing now. Since they quit months ago they didn't see the changes on their own eyes so basically with the new server we will have the 1st with like 100 people and the second with 200-300 after few months because Hey! the game is playable now not like it was on the beginning of this one.Jesus_Smith_Nandez wrote:The what happens after we make another world? 3 servers? After that 4 servers? It is not worth going to such heights to protect people's "investments" especially with such a low player base. I would rather have 1 server of 160 than 2 of 80.Colin500 wrote:I still think they should just open a second server with new world and leave this to be (just like legacy haven)
-
Redlaw
- Posts: 1638
- Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 10:58 pm
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
This feel the same to me now as it did at the start of this world.... so it it was unplayable then, why would a new world be any better? It still be un playable to those that quit.
-
Colin500
- Posts: 1018
- Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 11:07 pm
Re: should the new worlds have a beginning and end? strawpol
Since I could find the game attractive again after lots of changes, I think there could be more people like me.Redlaw wrote:This feel the same to me now as it did at the start of this world.... so it it was unplayable then, why would a new world be any better? It still be un playable to those that quit.