New faction limit

[Dalkironik]

So far most of the changes to the era system have been alright, but the new limit of 20 per faction and 5 per house is really causing issues amongst new players. it was stated that your update was to make new players feel welcome and not be turned against, although you made it worse as instead of 480 per house the limit is 100, meaning weaker and newer players are cast out, their villages and parishes snatched from them because they can't join. This is causing far to much aggression amongst would be friends and many new players suffer, dislike he game because of it and ultimately you may lose players. I ask for feedback from other players to get SHK to consider changing this one rule

[SOLID CREED]

with 20 players per factions and 5 factions per house that would mean every player in a house will spread them selves thin just to progress with properly claiming lands that allows factions without a house to claim, and everyone knows what happens to factions that doesn't have a house. they get * on. so to make factions feel a little more welcoming we all have to resort to making sub factions that will be apart of a house but without a house, no glories gained mean factions without a house will suffer more unless firefly remove this stupid idea that we all don't need a house cap of 5 factions/20 members rule that no one wants.

[WaywardChampion]

I will agree that the number of factions that can belong to a house needs to be increased.

All that has happened is that you have a select few players who rank up quickly and create several sister houses to compensate for this smaller house size. So, instead of 12 - 18 independent houses, you end up with 3 - 4 super houses.

People want to play together with the friends they have made on other worlds, that's just human nature.

So, when you reduce the faction size, they just create more sister factions. When you reduce the house size, they just grab more houses to control.

It may seem like there are some new faces taking charge, but in fact it is still the same 3 - 4 groups who normally dominate a server, they are just using more houses to do this.

I guess the point that I am trying to make is that if you want to capture the interest of new players, or keep the interest of many long time players, then you will have to make some room for them.

[Dalkironik]

Exactly thankyou! if some of these changes are left how they are, after 5 years of playing I think it will be time to stop, it has been ruined for newer players who are now cast out

[BeowulfKing]

20 faction rule and 5 factions per house will prevent what just happened in dom3 where all best players joined one house and finnished server in day10.

And look what happened in island warefare map just recently: two 20mil houses confront in big war and one house was completely destroyed after 1-2months. At the end majority of best players from defeated house rejoin to winning house and sealed age1.
There is no point to play that map anymore bec there is no oposition, next war will not happen in a year.
This scenario happened on many servers.


This rule of 100players in one house will prevent these things to happen. From now on there will be dozen of strong houses on every world and destroying one house will not mean that world is dead.
There will be more war planing against leading house and for leading house will be very hard to mantain their position.

[TVasi]

Maybe, if the rule does not change, a solution can be to create more houses, real ones.

[MiladySkye]

Exactly thankyou! if some of these changes are left how they are, after 5 years of playing I think it will be time to stop, it has been ruined for newer players who are now cast out

It won't matter what rules they put in place . . . certain players will find a way around the "rules", manipulating whatever system is in place to work to their advantage. That being said, I don't see that as being particularly unfair, even if it is tough on newer players. It's a strategy game (among other things) so they are supposed to be using strategic maneuvers to win. I have less issues with that kind of approach than those who buy the win by pumping huge amounts of cash into the game or using alt accounts to give them the advantage (particularly in Age 1), which I personally feel is a far more problematic issue.

[Wilksy]

Exactly thankyou! if some of these changes are left how they are, after 5 years of playing I think it will be time to stop, it has been ruined for newer players who are now cast out

It won't matter what rules they put in place . . . certain players will find a way around the "rules", manipulating whatever system is in place to work to their advantage. That being said, I don't see that as being particularly unfair, even if it is tough on newer players. It's a strategy game (among other things) so they are supposed to be using strategic maneuvers to win. I have less issues with that kind of approach than those who buy the win by pumping huge amounts of cash into the game or using alt accounts to give them the advantage (particularly in Age 1), which I personally feel is a far more problematic issue.

I have no issue with carders. We all use cards and enjoy using them. If you can afford to spend a few $ that's fine with me as it is a legitimate element of the game.

Alts accounts I despise. This is an area that FF need to work very hard on to stamp it out imo.

[Fire Fry]

Exactly thankyou! if some of these changes are left how they are, after 5 years of playing I think it will be time to stop, it has been ruined for newer players who are now cast out

It won't matter what rules they put in place . . . certain players will find a way around the "rules", manipulating whatever system is in place to work to their advantage. That being said, I don't see that as being particularly unfair, even if it is tough on newer players. It's a strategy game (among other things) so they are supposed to be using strategic maneuvers to win. I have less issues with that kind of approach than those who buy the win by pumping huge amounts of cash into the game or using alt accounts to give them the advantage (particularly in Age 1), which I personally feel is a far more problematic issue.

I have no issue with carders. We all use cards and enjoy using them. If you can afford to spend a few $ that's fine with me as it is a legitimate element of the game.

Alts accounts I despise. This is an area that FF need to work very hard on to stamp it out imo.

Alts are just a way of competing for players who don't have cash, but do have time. You can't fight the market.

The smart play is to create incentives that balance both, but given the Apathy around these parts, they'll just let the players tear each other apart and go on hating one another rather than going after the ones with the power to change things.

[Wilksy]

Though alts are cheating and buying crowns is not.