Idea to Balance US servers.

    the concern is that far too many players are resorting to "gaming" the system.

    they are simply watching the dominant associations and following them to 1 of MAYBE 3 viable End Game cities, where you will have 100-200+ players in a single city just for the EG.

    I have the following suggestion to attempt to add a new dynamic to balance the server somewhat:

    Players only get End Game win Bonuses if they were connected to AND delivering (WITH A MINIMUM TONNAGE REQUIREMENT) to the winning EG city IN ERA 1. this should include ANY winning EG city prize/bonus: Prestige, Career Points or gold.

    Too restrictive in my opinion.

    I can see your point, but it should allow for more movement and many players can’t get out of a bad town in Era 1, especially if they are new to the game. I would say Era 4 as a cutoff for connection, and Era 5 as a cutoff to start hauling XX tons of RG to any EG city in order to be able to play in that city’s EG.


    However this could have the side effect of changing the role of spoilers in EG. While Im sure most of us hate the prestige hunters who deliver a bit of everything, regardless of calls, it is a part of the caller’s job to account for those delays. I think limiting who can benefit from hauling would be a much bigger change than you may be expecting.

    There are a lot of players who move halfway to another city, often with the whole association and when only era 1 counts you exclude them from the bonusses while they work half the server for that city.

    Now you can't switch city when the endgame has started so you never know in front which city wins the endgame.

    In your proposel you make it impossible to move to another city and get the bonus even when you started later and have the bad luck to start in an inactive city or even to start later and get the bonus at all.

    What about the prestige hunters you get the prestige of the goods that are delivered and when you even deliver 1 ton you get the prestige, so they will stay anyway or you have to change this in total and when you don't get your city in the endgame you make it impossible in this way to play in the endgame of another city. There are also players who didn't manage to get their city in the endgame and play with another city for the endgame, just because they love to play for the endgame.

    MuchachoNL wrote:

    That would make moving to another city to join a corporation nearly impossible, wouldn't it?

    ok, i see this point. so perhaps move the cutoff to Era 3.

    Same for MokMonster's concern.

    Perdita wrote:

    There are a lot of players who move halfway to another city, often with the whole association and when only era 1 counts you exclude them from the bonusses while they work half the server for that city.

    This is precisely the situation that needs to change. whole associations only move significant distances to team up with the purpose of dominating an EG without actually competing. gathering 150-200+ players in 1 city is not competition.

    this is why typically there are only 2 viable EG cities in US servers.

    Limiting the ability to create these "super alliances" would open the door to having 7-10 viable EG cities with populations in the 80-100 range actually competing on a field where any of these cities could win.

    think of this idea you have an association of 10 members and no other association in your city, at some time you hardly can level your city, no chance to reach the endgame then you move ot another city so you have the chance to build that city to the endgame i don't talk about associations who can bring their own city to the endgame but more about the associations who don't reach the endgame or you're fighting the whole server to reach the endgame you end at place 12 or so, so no endgame and then they still want to play the endgame and the neighbourcity reach the endgame you gonna help in that city. don't you think that those players move because the idea that you give, and i admit that there are really to much players that plays the endgame in the city who makes the best chance but there are to many players who just want to play an endgame that you exclude from the chance to play it anywhere and get for their work no prestige,

    In the past i have moved myself for another city because we had no chance to reach even close to the endgame every level was a struggle and frustration just because we had not enough players in the city, so halfway we moved to the city close by and worked with the players there to reach together the endgame, with your proposel we even couldn't get any reward for our hard work we did there.

    So there must find another way to avoid the situation you give right now.

    Perdita wrote:

    think of this idea you have an association of 10 members and no other association in your city, at some time you hardly can level your city, no chance to reach the endgame then you move ot another city so you have the chance to build that city to the endgame .....



    ....So there must find another way to avoid the situation you give right now.

    if we shift the "cutoff" to the end of Era 3, people would have ample time to realise they can't win with their city, and work out a partner or partners in a close by neighboring city, or bring a team or 2 into their own city to help. you know by the end of Era 1, early Era 2 at the lastest, what your realistic prospects are. This would also add some urgency to work out partnerships and/or mergers far earlier, and stick to them to have a legitimate chance.

    again, this would allow for 7-10 cities with 80-100 players competing on a far more level field for an EG win.

    One thing to consider: this issue i understand is in the classic servers as well, tho i don't play those, so that is not something i can really speak to.

    i do however know that participation in US servers has fallen way off in just the time i have played. primarily due to the ability of a very few associations to dominate at will.

    I think that, instead of a cut-off, the limiting factor for those team-ups should be a real increase in tons / consumption, with more active players.


    Right now, the added consumption with 50 extra players is completely unsignificant. If you change that, and make it so that the consumption actually increases the difficulty of having to play an EG with 200 players, to the kind of same difficulty as playing one with 60 players, then maybe the strategies will move.



    As long as playing the EG with 35-40 active rushers will mean you can 1-shot every good, while 15-25 rushers can't do shit, then people will continue to group into groups of 40-60 people, which in most servers (for example the french ones I play in), means 2-3 "real" EG cities, and only 1 with a shot at winning.

    Fr-201 Bad Wolf de coeur

    en pause indéterminée - away from the game until next interesting server


    If an active team wants to try new strategies on an E v W scenario (winning EvW agressively), I might be down for it > pm me :)

    I played some US servers, on that servers there was made an arrangement between the cities of each side which city should be the endgmame city. During the 3 months most players of each side did build towards the chosen city. But I think that is the main goal of the US server, win the game with your region, the blue or red.


    If you want to go for a city win the classic server is more suitable

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -:engine1::engine1::engine1: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

    If a turtle doesn’t have a shell, is he homeless or naked?

    the us servers need to make it so if you do not unlock a good then come endgame you have to wait for it to be unlocked by a city that has unlocked it to haul it to completion plus an hour so the strategy of not working as a team to max out cities and picking a lower spot to have less to haul is taken away its supposed to be a team game but it has now swung way too much to being individual play everything is focused on personal conquests rather than teamwork. team work should count for more prestige than single play

    and also every person that joins an eg city should add 10k to the total needing to be hauled on top of the initial haul amounts during endgame making it back to cities actually competing instead of 2-3 getting flooded in the end

    I had pretty much the same idea as sacroima. It´s not even that new to the game, as you progressively change wait time in factories depending on the number of goods hauled within last hour.

    Now you would change the consumption during endgame according to the amount of delivered goods within last 15 minutes. It should be set so that there is an optimal range of delivered goods, in my opinion about 40 - 60 people.

    The point of this would be to create a balancing factor to motivate people to spread to more endgame cities. Because the sole winning factor now is gathering as many players as possible (I play on Czech servers).

    It would still be possible to play for whatever city you want, but at some point another player would in factnot contribute and at another point it would even be counterproductive, as the city would eat more, than the other player deliver.