That shows everybody who has hauled good to the harbour, which could have been 2 days previous. We are talking about who is running trains there 'now' especially important to see who is ruining cities/industries.
No I don't think it is ok, I just don't believe that someone running one extra account will make that much difference. Making many fake accounts for sure does, but one is only the same as a husband/wife both playing and looking after each other's accounts.
Reducing consumption is already there, it's the support city feature that is available to the President and the cabinet and reduce consumption by 10%.
I'm very much against raising consumption, would be another incentive to hostile takeover.
Reducing consumption works fine. Raising consumption allows the mayor and/or president to defend the city against hostile actions. Currently 1 active player can level a city against the wishes of everybody else, increasing consumption makes that much tougher.
You are fractionally below 50% imo. around $54 more should do it I have just done a quick calc in my head, you can do a more accurate one if you wish.
Rᴬᴵᴸᴵᴺ ᴿᴼΝ® would like exploding engine houses
In Europe scenario Mayor and/or President should be able to increase city consumption, as well as reduce it. Not to spoil the other person's gameas such, just to make it harder for a rogue player to spoil it for the majority.
I haven't had the issue myself so can't check. I just know that I have seen many associations with an iunactive chair.
How bad is it actually to run 2 accounts on a server with little activity? I am not talking someone who runs 10+ accounts obviopusly.
Not necessarily players we don't like, but those who are trying to spoil the game for others.
10 is too few for those wishing to spoil EG for another city. It is fine for most people who use a train to run a supply line.
Inactivity does not mean a chair is removed. They stay there throughout as chair, whether active or not :(. I have seen many associations with an inactive chair.
You will also get booted out of all offices if reported for a chat/forum offence
I requested this some time ago. It is extremely time wasting having to check everybody's individual train schedules.
2. Forums do not offer much useful information, and should help the community more. For this we have Guides & Tutorials section where players share guides for beginners and experts, and you can also compare engines there. You can find more useful links here: List with fan sites and channels 2019 - The question still remains, how can we help the community more here on forum? (without spoiling the fun of finding and learning how the game works for yourself, or together with other players)
Rather than relying on players to share guides it would be useful if there was also a certain amount of help pages from the game designers explaining aspects of the game not covered in Lucy's walk-through. Especially on the SoE aspect of the game where it differs from the east/west and classic.
1. The landmark and the relationship with the city.
2. How the warehouse works.
3. How the harbour works differently from the warehouse, such as importing goods, twinning cities etc..
4. Explaining how industries, warehouses & harbours grow.
5. The role of the Mayor, Council, President & Cabinet.
I think the game has run its course
At least one of the ads does that and needs to be reloaded every time. Plus there are a couple that appear to be blank but show a small arrow at the bottom. Click on the arrow and an advert appears, which you need to close by using the normal X to get the reward.
I much prefer the new association window.
I am shocked by
- unpaid work.
- same as naike above, i agree that staff should not be a player like us, but again, if the company doesnt pay them for their work, of course they cant prohibit them from doing what they want and i have seen clear favoritism by these `awesome` (that is laughable) support staff who are in the server, always ignoring who they do not favorite, and immediately attending whatever wish by certain players, no matter how absurd it is.
sniffa, you are aware that in most companies this is a paid job like any other, yes?
I am a volunteer in many areas and have been throughout my life. As a teenager I did voluntary work at an old people's home and helped run school clubs. As an adult I have coached football & cricket for schools, cubs/scouts & local clubs etc.. As a paid match official i regularly refused to take my wages, preferring to see the money go towards the upkeep of the clubs. Unfortunately I cannot afford to be a full time volunteer but money is not the be-all that some make it out to be. When it comes to online gaming if it was a choice of playing or moderating I would always choose playing but if I can do both without compromising either then why not?
Why would anybody moderate a game that they are not part of?
I have moderated chats & forums on various games over the years, but only whilst logged in to the game myself. I wouldn't log in to a server just to moderate chat, I value my time higher than that.
1. And if they opt for that, they will also have to spend the time that it requires. This is like weightloss irl, You can decide to only eat vegan, but if you make an active choice to make it harder for yourself, you'll also have to expect things to take a bit, or a lot longer.
Exaggerated loyalty to failing associations/clans/guilds is something I see in FPS games, MMOs, etc and this is rarely anything that pays dividends, it's usually a waste of time. When you write "not all" you're trying to refute my argument with the rare exception. Yes maybe 5% of associations that end a round with less than 15 members at EG have something nice going on towards building up in the next round, but the other 95% are still useless crap that will waste the time of everyone involved, and where their gameplay towards better region efficiency or asso ranking etc would benefit from split+merging a lot more.
I did say that they wanted to do it gradually - over a few rounds. Any sensible person knows it isn't going to happen overnight. Many players who you call 'useless crap' are no such thing, they just haven't had anybody take the time to talk to them, explaining how the game works etc. I will agree that there are also many who have no wish to learn the game but are quite happy pottering about in their own way and I say good luck to them. It is up to the rest of us to deal with them to the best of our ability.
3. That would force a big association to cut people out that have been playing whole gameround with them, how would you feel if you have done a good, productive round but is just the 21st player and have to be cut? In the quest for fairer associations I think forcing associations to punish individuals is a bad route to go, then it's much better to have them open from the start. See the origin server with already made teams forced apart because they have to wait for the earning power to make stupid HQ donations, in an overcrowded economy with low earnings...
Valid point about cutting members who don't deserve it, so I withdraw my restriction suggestion :).
None of my associations even managed to get more than a couple of people into the same cities on Origin so have formed completely new groups of players, which has actually added more interest in some ways.
1. Because if they did care about it they would just use the messaging function and be in a crowded place next round. I and many many others have done this time and time again. Begin somewhere at era 6~the previous round, connect with someone you deem worthy, and pre-reg with them for the round you actually intend to play. Simple.
Not necessarily. I know many people who care about it but they wish to actually earn it by building up a decent association over several rounds, rather than just jumping aboard the gravy train. I have been asked several times by more powerful associations to jump ship and go with them the following round but I am staying loyal.
2. No of course bigger isn't automatically better, but most bigger associations get better by kicking the crap and keeping the good. However one thing that all the horribly ranked associations that never get much hauling done and play SOE without ever noticing there is a landmark is that they are all small and they are all filled with players who either refuse to communicate at all or do so extremely immaturely.
No all smaller associations are like that. I am in two associations at the moment, which are gradually growing, but by educating players, rather than kicking them out. It is much more rewarding turning a poor player into a good one than it is just replacing them.
3. Well in most other games there is an offensive function, which is used to kill off these kinds of annoyances. In railnation we don't have that option, and all we can do right now is to attempt to move away from them. There is no "human right" for players to be parasites and expect the players they are piggy riding on to reward them for it.
I agree but that is part of the challenge. Either making it so hard for them that they quit, or by educating them with some patience and perseverance. I do wish it was harder for one or two rogues to level the city though.
4. I believe you are refering to "Big Ben" where power shifted when "Team Europe" quitted and the new alliance that was formed specifically to challenge them suddenly became very dominant instead.
Sure that happened because Team Europe quitted, and their satelite associations in city merchants, vikings etc were not strong enough to replace them.
However the intent with the new alliance(Valar, Diamonds, SAS, Batmen and now in the last round CLMH) that was in the SW and won the last 2 rounds, was to form up and challenge the former victors. I can't say who would have won, but the mechanics work; >100 players joined forces in order to challenge the other 100~ that had previously dominated the server.
I've also seen it shift on towerbridge for similar reasons, a couple of strong assos allied together and won over enterprise a couple of rounds ago in the NW.
What makes SOE fun at all is the fact that there is a bigger "macro meta" to engage in for more experienced players. Players/associations who feel excluded are free to communicate with each other and form their own alliances.
And in order to make competition more accessible for those, I have many, many times suggested that all associations should begin with 25 open slots from the start, to give eveyrone equal opportunities to compete and form new assos.
I have also quit Big Ben now due to time restraints and am concentrating on 2 SoE servers & 1 Origin but no that wasn't the one I was thinking off, it was actually Tower Bridge, where it looks like the power may be on the move again, but that is because some of the larger associations are looking for a new challenge.
starting with 25 slots is not a bad idea, but how about a max of 20 pre-reg so you can invite newcomers in straight away, rather than waiting 3 days?