Recent endgame changes

  • Dear players,


    there has been some confusion about the recent changes for the calculation of the required tonnage in the endgame.


    The previous calculation was: TRN2oYI.png

    The new calculation is: qSLoBxE.png


    These changes lead to an overall shorter endgame and bigger cities being less overpowered.

    We made these changes following the majority player feedback about the endgame being too long and bigger cities being unbeatable. We know that there are very different opinions about how long the endgame should be and many among you do not consider a shorter endgame better.

    Others however do and the optimal duration strongly depends on individual preferences. And not just the opinions about the endgame duration are different, the endgame duration itself also greatly differs depending on region, activity, coordination, game world and even individual game round. We will keep monitoring endgames and make further adjustments if necessary. However, we want to make clear that, due to very different playstyles, individual preferences and habits, any solution will be a compromise.


    The second topic we want to talk about here is the lack of proper communication about this change.

    We prepared these changes quite a while ago and waited for a bigger update to bring them to live game worlds. With the recent update for the new shop, the endgame changes went live and, quite honestly, it simply fell through the cracks that this would happen. With the actual development of the changes happening quite a while ago and everyone already working on other topics, no one noticed.


    We apologize for this slipup and hope that the info provided above make the changes less confusing.


    Your Rail Nation Team



    PS:

    • The change is active on all game worlds that started after the 20th of April except PT2 and NL201. On these two game worlds, the consumption is . This will be changed with the next round.
    • The required tonnage is currently correctly displayed in the centred window only, not the side screens. This will be fixed in a future version.
  • No no no no no, a thousand no's!


    We were told when we started the round that our End Game would be moving to a new formula along with other changes that came with HTML5.


    Prior to that the formula for EG targets was not based on "Active players" at all, it was the more simple formula of:


    qXJeNBX.png

    We were told that the new calculation would be and spent three long months with that target in mind:
    TRN2oYI.png


    Not a word from Rail Nation over the entire three months to say that they had changed their mind because some players like the idea of a shorter End Game (Answer - not for mid week End Games, but that's another issue). The first we knew of the changes was when the End Game started and the first city in the End Game had a different target to what was expected. We did the maths ourselves and realised that this formula had been applied instead: qSLoBxE.png

    Still no word from Rail Nation and tickets to Support weren't replied to until we were into the 3rd set of the End Game.


    Shame on you Rail Nation, that is no way to treat your customers!

  • "Some" confusion? No total failure to correctly communicate! As a matter of urgency, you need to communicate to every player on every server exactly what targets that server has, because not everyone reads these forums, and everyone has a right to know what is correct.

    Lets start with your published targets which were very clearly designed to INCREASE the end game length (as unless there were less than 100 players the target increases), combined with feedback from early servers to get the changes that end games were lasting many days. From era 1 we planned around those targets


    Next your objective that a shorter end game makes the big team less unbeatable - NO! a shorter end game gives less chance for the small city to catch the big one as by the time the small city starts (maybe 12 hours behind), it is impossible to catch up.


    It would be nice to know what you think is a good end-game length. Personally I think 36-48 hours is about right. You could ask this type of thing in the countless surveys you invite us to complete, but you are only interested in what we think about your latest new feature.

  • "Some" confusion? No total failure to correctly communicate! As a matter of urgency, you need to communicate to every player on every server exactly what targets that server has, because not everyone reads these forums, and everyone has a right to know what is correct.

    Lets start with your published targets which were very clearly designed to INCREASE the end game length (as unless there were less than 100 players the target increases), combined with feedback from early servers to get the changes that end games were lasting many days. From era 1 we planned around those targets


    Next your objective that a shorter end game makes the big team less unbeatable - NO! a shorter end game gives less chance for the small city to catch the big one as by the time the small city starts (maybe 12 hours behind), it is impossible to catch up.


    It would be nice to know what you think is a good end-game length. Personally I think 36-48 hours is about right. You could ask this type of thing in the countless surveys you invite us to complete, but you are only interested in what we think about your latest new feature.

    The second topic we want to talk about here is the lack of proper communication about this change.

    We prepared these changes quite a while ago and waited for a bigger update to bring them to live game worlds. With the recent update for the new shop, the endgame changes went live and, quite honestly, it simply fell through the cracks that this would happen. With the actual development of the changes happening quite a while ago and everyone already working on other topics, no one noticed.


    We apologize for this slipup and hope that the info provided above make the changes less confusing.


    well done


    Loekie

    CM Team Lead


    For admitting RN communication was wrong and not even communicated to us players.

    point is what is RN going to do about it ??

    i have played from the start of this game thick or thin.

    Even joined the team under Yaenara,

    under the new structure i get the feeling the company dont care anymore about us players. our view dont count anymore.

    My only thing i am proud of is my RN watch you gave me years ago for being a royal player. which i still have in its box. (who amongst you management can remember those days?

    My point is such is my disappointment i have signed up for my last server, so 3 months i leave the game.l


    yomus

  • If shorter end games is the goal, then end games should somehow always be scheduled for a weekend when people can devote 24+ straight hours to the EG. During the week, people work and have to sleep, and it becomes an endurance contest among the teams that can manage to keep enough people online. In those cases, longer is better.

  • I'll never understand mid-week server starts. well over 50% of most team members is the average Corp are employed full time, in some it's pretty much the entire corp, with the VAST majority only being off work on weekends.

    just look at the numbers logged in at various times during these mid-week End Games, they speak for themselves.

    dumb, just dumb dumb dumb.


    don't even get me started on the communication issues from Travian. that's been a joke since the day i started RN.

  • Totally agree, shorter End Games are only ok at weekends.


    Weekday End Games stink and even more so if they're going to be over in under 24 hours, then most players may only get a few hours online during the first evening. That stinks big time!!!


    Most of all, where are the official notifications about the new End Game changes?


    I'm playing on another server and still waiting to see an announcement.... :sleeping:


    I think there should be a formal acknowledgement of the stuff up for the servers who had their EG mucked up because of the unannounced changes too!

  • I'll never understand mid-week server starts. well over 50% of most team members is the average Corp are employed full time, in some it's pretty much the entire corp, with the VAST majority only being off work on weekends.

    just look at the numbers logged in at various times during these mid-week End Games, they speak for themselves.

    dumb, just dumb dumb dumb.


    don't even get me started on the communication issues from Travian. that's been a joke since the day i started RN.

    I understand mid-week starts, as it helps balance the server loads (remembering here the bad old days when servers had major performance issues in the EndGames).

    What I now don't understand is why a server is offline for over a week, when they are targeting a sub 24 hour end-game.

  • the midweek serverstarts are only because there is no one working during the weekend and evenings.

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

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

  • hello all,


    there are several reasons for mid-week serverstarts. First of all by doing so, we allow everyone to find a server that suits his/her private timeschedule (also think of starting day for the endgame), secondly it is easier to balance for our system and last but not least, in case something might happen we can react faster.


    Loekie

  • Hi Loekie


    Noted about mid-week server restarts being handier for RN.


    However, can you explain why when we had urgent questions about the changed targets in the End Game on Loch Ness there was no one to be found from RN at the time?


    No replies that first afternoon, no mods in the in game chat and nothing on the RN forum.


    Ahem...

  • Hello, with the recent changes, I was wondering how do you feel about new accounts created in soon to be megacities? There is a couple of days left until endgame on my server, we are in number 1 city, which we leveled just recently, and already I see a couple of new players with career lvl 1, steadily raising the number of active players. A few days ago we were at about 70, now we are closing to 90.

    Of course they might really be new players, who just decided to manually look up our server (since the website offers you primarily newest servers). But with the recent changes in mind I kinda doubt that. I cant of course prove anything. But its kinda lame and I feel maybe should have some set rule. It cost me about 130 tracks to connect to other megacities, but some people might prefer easier way...

    I would suggest, that there is a requirement set to 20k prestige in order to be counted towards active players and that it wouldnt be possible to join to a server in last era.

  • Hello, with the recent changes, I was wondering how do you feel about new accounts created in soon to be megacities? There is a couple of days left until endgame on my server, we are in number 1 city, which we leveled just recently, and already I see a couple of new players with career lvl 1, steadily raising the number of active players. A few days ago we were at about 70, now we are closing to 90.

    Of course they might really be new players, who just decided to manually look up our server (since the website offers you primarily newest servers). But with the recent changes in mind I kinda doubt that. I cant of course prove anything. But its kinda lame and I feel maybe should have some set rule. It cost me about 130 tracks to connect to other megacities, but some people might prefer easier way...

    I would suggest, that there is a requirement set to 20k prestige in order to be counted towards active players and that it wouldnt be possible to join to a server in last era.

    We had at our server not that many new level 1 accounts just before the start of the endgame. We saw a lot of high ranked players logging into the server a few days before the start of the endgame. Used the free tracks to build to the endgame cities in reach. Most of them connected to the same endgame cities. Only the carreer train was parked in a city no other trains and activity. It looked like some rival players asked teammates from other servers to log in to create a high connected amount of players.

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

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

  • Or "career-tourists". Login to a server few days before the endgame starts, connect the leading city, switch home city to it is a easy way to brute force trying to get points for victorious metropolitan. (The smart way would to use a level 1 acc to have a look around to identify the city with the best chances, delete the level 1 acc and login with your real account in the most promising city)

  • the high ranked accounts at our server were not carreerpoint hunters. It were very high level carreer players, I doubt they needed a megacity win. Some did build their station buildings, that were the carreer hunters. But the ones with only a carreer train and parked were not the hunters, no endgame city set as homecity. They were there only to create higher numbers connected and give some cities a big disadvantage compared to other cities.

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

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