Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Important announcements and patch notes will be posted here.
Forum rules
Please do not start any New Topics in this Forum.

This Forum is only to be used for News Posts related to updates and any other topics will be removed.
Post Reply
220897
Posts: 211
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 10:02 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by 220897 » Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:32 pm

i do find the part where you say together, with your help we will continue to ban them, but i have a mail from someone who admits to account sharing, (against the rules) but there still playing.

let alone they then messaged the person who reported them saying i was told by a MOD that you reported me...

doesnt at all seem like everyone gets fair treatment...
...

Micha7835
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:28 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Micha7835 » Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:49 pm

the funniest thing is that you still believe there is a way to stop alting

neither of your propositions will work against alts, because everyone will find a way to get one, if they will want to. there are just certain things that will make alting less attractive, and therefore less viable in the game. the way you want to make it rn is to make all alt accounts at least level 20, where they can monk, and during the passive farming they will get enough fp to do 2-3 waves of monking before they become useless, so actually it will be like in order to alt well you have to invest more time into it

other change is that if you want a viable alt account for a war you need to get it to prince so not only wars will be delayed but alts will start running since the beginning, then being pumped by others. IT WONT STOP, DEAL WITH IT. there is no ruleset more effective than actually legit work put in from administrators into detecting alts and improving the game systems

also believing that knight razers were alts...well this is just stupid because its rly hard to fight on 1 account then imagine fighting on 3. knight razer was a simple and good alternative for someone who got banned, getting an account to knight wasnt so difficult and amount of researches required to be effective was low enough so someone could remake account. after i got banned for paypal drama i remade account and got my knight account running and effective in war in 2 weeks, with a help from princes of course, but i could play on it without having to get running acc from someone

john your rules are bs aswell, the perfect world was world 1 where we had normal wars and nobody complained. being in a house to raze will be countered effectively, as there would be a rule "pick an alliance or quit the game", as you cant defend yourself being neutral, and you would have all houses effectively occupied by major alliances, unless retards are in charge. the same goes with monking, in general, the way you want to make the mechanics is, that only players in house are able to do anything on the map, but in fact this is wayyyyyyy too abusive with a group of people who know how to abuse these mechanics, like i said, just form 5-man factions and take over every house and bye bye faction vs faction wars

BTW NOT SURE IF YOU REALISED BUT DECREASING THE RESEARCH TIME WILL ONLY I N C R E A S E THE AMOUNT OF ALT ACCOUNTS BECAUSE THESE WOULD BE DEVELOPED PROPERLY X TIME FASTER THAN IN CURRENT STATE WHICH IS ANNOYING AND PUSHING AWAY FROM ALTING ITSELF

Lord Alacrity wrote:
Dave1 wrote:Yes good fun being a low rank raiser Knight or Barron been there got the T shirt but cheats use them as the high ranks blow the castles open and in a lot of cases use these low rank raisers/alts just to save the high ranks honor
Exactly. We are not removing raze from the game, but we do feel like it is a very harsh tactic best reserved to high rank players. Some have mentioned the "need" to raze low ranked players, but we feel that the changes made to curb the abilities of these players eliminates this need.
in fact you are not removing the raze from the game, you are removing the balance, which favors heavy carders and AI worlds abusers, because only these will be able to strike effectively quickly in a game. or you are delusional and believe in someone investing large amount of money, to develop someone else account. either way, raze was in a good state of the game, if you want to raise the level, be serious and make it level 18 or 19. for me you are twisting your own mechanics. because for me its an absurd, that you can be sherriff at level 16, but cannot raze at level 16. you forgot that you implied capitol army for certain reason, 600|750|900 troops are incredibly powerful (and bh abused this absurd the best, everyone can confirm how ridiculous were 3x750 armies wiping the entire castle) and right now it will be in hands of someone who cannot use it EFFECTIVELY. yes, you will say that he can always open the village- but for who? for a capture, or for a prince? how many villages can prince have? how many villages can he hold in warzone? and taking out the possibility to ID a prince from other ranks isnt helping in that regard. oh, and dont forget with these mechanics you make it unable for anyone in fact to get rid of unwanted villages, other than just abandoning it. AAAAAAAAND lastly, if there is ANYONE that has brain, if you realise its a capture, and enemy doesnt want that village, just launch some slow army from long distance, and there is no way that he can abandon. and prince has to decide, whether he raze useless village of house member, or enemy village. rly stupid mechanics
if you want to be serious, then implement changes for capital seats aswell. because it doesnt make any sense at all to be able to hold a county at 16th level, but to raze someone you need to be 22nd level. oh, and on top of that- dont forget, that in current state of the game a county, province or country is given to most active and most useful players to abuse the benefits it gives to the holder- but also leaves on him the major responsibility for holding it, with the help of the others in the county. YES, OF COURSE, YOU WILL SAY THAT THE CHANGES WILL LEAD TO IMPROVING THE TEAMPLAY- but, let me ask you- ARE YOU BLIND? do you really think on the map so huge like global you have that many ways to manipulate holding of the land, where already on GC1, which had been very active, there were serious problems of holding the areas? 1 village per parish is a rule since long time, mostly because players DO NOT PLAY ACTIVELY. so with these changes you also have to change the capitals and follow with even more changes, otherwise the system you created will be incoherent and illogical

Roland of Bremen
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:41 pm

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Roland of Bremen » Fri Mar 17, 2017 4:16 am

This is years behind in happening. Before UK Worlds 3, 4, and 5 started, this should have happened. Also, why not be able to turn around monks and merchants? That is something that has been asked for since the first world that opened. And as for people with multiple accounts, why not just ban it, like it was during UK 2, before it was changed? No accounts with same IP allowed in same world. If it's friends or relatives, or people in the same school, well there are enough worlds that they can split up into. That would cut people from using multiple accounts, or sharing accounts. These are things that have made thousands of players leave this game. I would rather see worlds be cut down to maybe 50 players, at the most, and where you could build a castle without it being just in a little box. Plus, add elements that were in the original PC game.

User avatar
Macon3
Posts: 301
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:57 pm

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Macon3 » Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:58 pm

I support the changes, maybe they'll work, maybe not.

Alt'ing is a big issue in the game and they're trying to address it, thanks ff.

the changes should lessen the number of alts and/or the usefulness of alts. ff knows they can't stop alt'ing even if it was only 1 account per ip, there are ways around ip restrictions.

ff is also a biz, so they don't want to stop people in the same household/dorm/etc from playing together and speeding $$$ on the game.

this is a "happy medium" imo, ff will probably lose $$$ from less alts with these rules, but they're hoping to offset that with more players sticking around and playing the game = more $$$.

Dave1
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 10:57 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Dave1 » Fri Mar 17, 2017 8:20 pm

Prince only can raise is the worst thing that you can do there are many more implications than just attacking and raising by so called Alts it stops players defending their areas form being taken over / invasion you will not be now able to counter raise to stop incoming invaders, they can plant alts ready to capture and unless you save a free slot and counter capture they land but then you have to counter captured and you are stuck with a village you don't want until you can drop it ( you can only abandon 1 village a week) during that time they can drop another alt and capture that nothing you can do
So if everyone in your team has to save village slots to counter capture so you can defend your area you are slowing down their chance of ranking up to prince
Knight raisers have been a major factor in this game from the start used by honest players / factions when the faction supplies them with arms honor goods etc to help them fight theirs wars all good fun and team work not cheating
But i assume some cheat by using alt raisers but i think that is only a few most cheats use their alts for FP they don't put the effort into the work of building up a Knight raiser
Prince raise only will only help carders and the guys 24 / 7 on the wolf world collecting free cards and lead to more bullying so more will leave the game but it will not help team spirit if your faction has to sit back and do nothing but get hammered if you don't have a prince to fight back
THIS WILL BE THE END OF THIS GAME

Dave1
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 10:57 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Dave1 » Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:15 pm

LOL no way from what i hear they don't pay enough money for me to even think about working for them

Lunks
Posts: 230
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 3:25 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Lunks » Fri Mar 17, 2017 9:41 pm

Good point - I didn't even think about how to defend against a low level invasion.

You would think by know FF would have analyzed how H19 in GC1 played the game to determine how to best deter cheating.

At the end of the day you have to remove the "WHY" the player cheats. If you can remove that or make it so much harder to cheat - then you'll reduce it.

DwarvenDefense
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:21 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by DwarvenDefense » Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:19 am

The problem of alts is fixed! Now people would have to invest slightly more time into their 'dummy' account. Or people paying money for multiple accounts, that never happens. Nothing new in terms of innovation from Firefly to see here, move along folks. Waiting for their 'bigger news'..

DwarvenDefense
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 8:21 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by DwarvenDefense » Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:27 am

Firefly should be making changes in areas that promote the usage of a single account, reward being active on a single account instead of spending spare time seeding alts in various places around the world(s)... Instead, they monetize people having excess time waiting around (unless they continuously pay to speed things up) which just promotes the act.

I suggested drastically changing the rate at which free cards are generated. If this is done in tandem with requiring the 'clock' for the reward to run only when the player is online, it would discourage spending time lvling these alt accounts to whatever level FF escalates it, and would encourage investing more time on a single account... This is just one quickly thought of solution. C'mon guys, you've had yearrrsssssssssss.

There are ways to change the monetization strategy while improving the gameplay and attracting a larger player base....why do you keep pandering to a relatively small community of shoe-size-measuring that is the current SHK-P2W model.

Micha7835
Posts: 51
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 11:28 am

Re: Dev Diary: Era Worlds & Gameplay Changes

Post by Micha7835 » Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:47 am

DwarvenDefense wrote:Firefly should be making changes in areas that promote the usage of a single account, reward being active on a single account instead of spending spare time seeding alts in various places around the world(s)... Instead, they monetize people having excess time waiting around (unless they continuously pay to speed things up) which just promotes the act.

I suggested drastically changing the rate at which free cards are generated. If this is done in tandem with requiring the 'clock' for the reward to run only when the player is online, it would discourage spending time lvling these alt accounts to whatever level FF escalates it, and would encourage investing more time on a single account... This is just one quickly thought of solution. C'mon guys, you've had yearrrsssssssssss.

There are ways to change the monetization strategy while improving the gameplay and attracting a larger player base....why do you keep pandering to a relatively small community of shoe-size-measuring that is the current SHK-P2W model.
Dumbest idea so far xD

Post Reply

Return to “News & Client Updates”