Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

Eliminate Nations


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Intrepido said:

Very easy to say and to write in a forum post. The reality is very different. 

The get friends and allies of other timezones was the exactly same bullshit we were told by US and GB.

If people from different part of the world almost always choose other nations than yours you are basically screwed.

Hmm last I checked GB meant Great Britain, which is in Europe. 

stock-vector-united-kingdom-of-great-bri

So I dont see what the point in your argument?  If GB players are making friends with North American players why cant you make friends with North American players.

I mean in EVE, I have German, Polish, French and even Japanese players in the corp I am in.   So I know it is possible to make friends from other timezones. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

Have you tried?  Nope you refuse to try something new.  This is testing phase of a game.  It's not the final release.  So with that you should try new things. If it doesn't work wipe the map and go back to something that works.   The fact ya'll refuse to try means you don't want to encourage more players to come and play.  I ask you why do you think 50% of the buyers of the game aren't playing the game?   Why do you think they stop playing?

But we have already tried a global server. The EU server pre-wipe was a global server with no timerestrictions on the PBs and it failed miserably.. We tried flagsystem, we tried flagsystem + lord protector, we tried alliance patch to basically patch up the problems the timezonedifference creates, we tested all these features and they all failed - hard. So why should we test a broken system once more? - Every single idea that has been proposed to facilitate a servermerge has either some glaring and obvious faults, or already been tested. Now we're tested a regional server + a global server and guess what? - The regional server is the one that actually functions. Why then go back to a bad idea? What is it about global players that makes them think "this game would improve if we took away the players ability to make a choice in regard to when RvR can take place. We have a broken global server where people have left in throves, and a EU server that is stable but I'm sure this is only because EU had 200 players more right after the great wipe, not a reflection on the bad idea that global servers really is!". The lack of reflection on why global has failed is astonishing. Why did global fail??! EU server had about 1k players right after the big wipe. One issue that made a lot of players quit was the insanely stupid shipgrind, but now the numbers on EU have stabilised themselves on a 500 players a day in primetime - i.e. a working server. The global server had about 800 players right after the big wipe but now rarely exceeds 100 players. In short the global server lost 7/8 of it's total population, while EU server lost 1/2 of its population. Don't come up with excuses that is either not really relevant or rather is fixed now - because testing a game is also about fixing the problems. The fact that there are clans on global that is actually trying to flip ports where evreyone can attend is a testimony to the failed idea that the global server is. So answer this question:

Why is competition such a problem? - the answer I'm seeing in all these servermerge threads is that when two rivalling ideas compete, one has to lose. Now rather than appealing for a US server, with US PB timers (that in theory would attract old players that have left the game due to the huge impact RvR has on the gameplay and the many nightflips on global) and a US playerbase. This would be incrementally bad for aussie and asian playerbases - yes. It is however a solution that would work long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Hodo said:

Hmm last I checked GB meant Great Britain, which is in Europe. 

stock-vector-united-kingdom-of-great-bri

So I dont see what the point in your argument?  If GB players are making friends with North American players why cant you make friends with North American players.

I mean in EVE, I have German, Polish, French and even Japanese players in the corp I am in.   So I know it is possible to make friends from other timezones. 

Why do I have to keep educating you in imagined communities? - the reason why you don't experience these problems in a sci-fi game is that there you have imagined nations that noone has an affinity with beforehand. Please don't compare oranges to a juicebox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rediii said:

He is refering to the ingame nation.

GB gets chosen by many other people aswell since they owned so many colonies back then.

In the west vs east war we had all "other timezone" players were on 1 side due to reasons.

Now go away with that servermerge stuff dude. Global is a failed concept.

I didnt say anything about a server merge.  And technically the game is a failed concept at this point.   Seeing as he did not specify in game nation one could venture to say that he was talking real nations. 

1 hour ago, Intrepido said:

Here is some reasons:

-Language barrier. French, spanish, russians and germans usually only speak their own languaje.

-The overall popularity of GB because of his seafaring history, so people from nations not represented in game usually choose GB (or pirates).

-Where do the australians go? Just at their flag and you will have the answer at your question. We had a big clan called AUSEZ playing for GB in the EU server.

 

EVE dont have historical nations like GB, so please stop comparing.

Funny, in Eve they also tend to speak their native languages also.  Hmm.... I mean there is the whole SOV block which is short for SOVIET which is mostly Russian players. 

In WWII Online which is French, US, UK, and German nations.  You see a fair number of Germans who play allied, (not Germany) and a good number of Americans who play as Germany.   Hmm.. odd. 

PotBS, there were a good amount of non-Spanish speaking players who played as Spain. 

And there are Australians who play other nations also.  I can think of about 2 dozen or so who play US, Pirate, Swede, and French.

47 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

Why do I have to keep educating you in imagined communities? - the reason why you don't experience these problems in a sci-fi game is that there you have imagined nations that noone has an affinity with beforehand. Please don't compare oranges to a juicebox.

While this is by far your best counter argument to date, you would be surprised at the number of players who lean towards one "race" or the other in game based on real life racial preferences.  

But as stated above, explain WWII Online, and Pirates of the Burning Sea... or any of the half dozen other online MMOs that have real historical nations in them but are played by mostly people of not that nationality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm putzing around over in Russia on EU with the old RDNN/RUS players on DK.  On TS yesterday there had to be maybe 10-12 languages/nations represented on the coms, granted english was the common language, with multiple different time zone coverage.  It works.  The real russians come in, they have a translator.  It's no big deal.  Most of you in the old Eastern Alliance fought with these types of coms, multiple translators.  It worked then.  Point being, this is the type of game myself and many others signed up to play and this is the real global experience.  Our group on Global also is about as multi national as you can get over there.  Couple dutch, german, swede, Brits, Aussie and even a Croat.  I dislike how nationalistic and isolationist aspects of this game have become.  I remember talking to a couple US players that tried to start up a clan in Spain back on EU before the split and they were basically run out of the nation for being American.  I've heard this same tale multiple times now from various people or clans over the year+ I've been playing.....not to mention some of the nasty insults we used to get during port battles with some of those spanish clans.  Some nations seem to work well with others, some don't.  

The game is vastly different than the last time the timer/lord protector system was introduced.  I think everyone is assuming that if we have one, we're going to get the other back.  Flags were universally disliked and should never be reintroduced.  The timers worked fine.  Some of you might recall that back when we had the timer system the game also happened to have higher population numbers.  It's no coincidence that server that was able to accomodate more time zones just happened to have more people on it.  Go figure.  The game is different, the focus is more on clans now.  The results will be different.  Stop being obtuse.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

The nasty insults come too from the so polite american players. Remember, between the two servers, probably the EU one is the less toxic. Also, you seem to forget all your posts in the national news, so keep your mouth close, Chris. Blackmails, arrogance, insolence... were the common behaviour from your guys.

Also it is funny that in Global the biggest pop nations are US, GB and pirates. It is not a coincidence. It was like in the old days of PVP1, so those nations will have a 24/7 playerbase while others wont.

 

And the timers never worked fine. When we had that mechanic the game was still fresh and was receiving content each month and moving forward, introducing some really interesting features as the new damage model or land in battles.

Whats the difference between one nation or one clan? It is only a matter of numbers of players involved. Nations were/are composed of clans,  those clans agreed setting the port battle timers for the national ports. There would not be any kind of difference, and we will see the same ways to negate content to the other side: conquer a port in the EU primetime and set the defense timer at US primetime, even if you dont have players at that time. GB as nation just did that many times to piss off their enemies. GB clans can do exactly the same, why not?.

The same mistakes of the past will be back if not-working mechanics are implemented again. Stop being obtuse.

In the 3 afternoons I've been on EU the global chat has been just as toxic as global.  2 Days ago there was someone going on about white superiority, calling the russians animals and some various other things that aren't worth repeating here.  The same old salt is on both servers.  Online gaming is always going to be an interesting environment, no server is different from the other.  Only one player base here is threatening to quit and blackmail, which just happened to be the same player base that did it last time.  I've seen Spain declare total war a couple of times, I don't think anyone should take national news seriously.    

Majority of the Brits play over on EU, most of the US players play on Global along with aussies.  There sure is a lot of fake news going on about who and what global actually is.  I feel like you have an issue separating what nation a person plays for and what nationality they actually are.  Makes sense given your post history.  

Anyway, the facts are that the game had it's highest population numbers back when there was a timer system.  Primarily because the server could accomodate more players in different time zones.  Insert whatever various reasons you want, facts are the facts.  

Talking with you on the forums is kinda like smacking ones face into a wall over and over.  At some point dude, you just gotta stop being bitter.  Anyway, we'll all be back together soon enough.  Until then, stay salty! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Christendom said:

Anyway, the facts are that the game had it's highest population numbers back when there was a timer system.

*When there was no other choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Intrepido said:

You can get the global experience in the called global server if you like it so much.

The nasty insults come too from the so polite american players. Remember, between the two servers, probably the EU one is the less toxic. Also, you seem to forget all your posts in the national news, so keep your mouth close, Chris. Blackmails, arrogance, insolence... were the common behaviour from your guys.

Also it is funny that in Global the biggest pop nations are US, GB and pirates. It is not a coincidence. It was like in the old days of PVP1, so those nations will have a 24/7 playerbase while others wont.

 

And the timers never worked fine. When we had that mechanic the game was still fresh and was receiving content each month and moving forward, introducing some really interesting features as the new damage model or land in battles.

Whats the difference between one nation or one clan? It is only a matter of numbers of players involved. Nations were/are composed of clans,  those clans agreed setting the port battle timers for the national ports. There would not be any kind of difference, and we will see the same ways to negate content to the other side: conquer a port in the EU primetime and set the defense timer at US primetime, even if you dont have players at that time. GB as nation just did that many times to piss off their enemies. GB clans can do exactly the same, why not?.

The same mistakes of the past will be back if not-working mechanics are implemented again. Stop being obtuse.

You seem to be getting mad over this topic, when I see Christendom and myself putting forth non-confrontational counter arguments.  

And why should he keep his mouth "closed" when he is voicing a very valid point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hodo said:

While this is by far your best counter argument to date, you would be surprised at the number of players who lean towards one "race" or the other in game based on real life racial preferences.  

But as stated above, explain WWII Online, and Pirates of the Burning Sea... or any of the half dozen other online MMOs that have real historical nations in them but are played by mostly people of not that nationality. 

Actually I've been pointing to this fact ever since the nightflips started - it's basically been stated for months. As for the other games, they are rather insulated against the nation-effect since the players that has no nation actively in the war is going to whatever nation they find has attributes or gameplay characteristics that they find interesting. In this game however all the players that doesn't come from Denmark, Norway, Sweden or The Netherlands will go to the nation with the grandest history in naval warfare and that is GB. As for pirates of the burning sea - I haven't played that game, but what I can say is that RvR has a huge impact in this game in regards to economy and crafting so in this game the imbalance in players hurts the game. This imbalance is balanced by the regional servers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Intrepido said:

The only guy with that problem seems to be you when you didnt answer a direct question.

At what point did I not answer a direct question??? 

I have answered every question you have asked and counter argued all your points 

neither do I have a problem 

the only problem here is yourself and bearwall who seem to speak for the entire EU gamers community on a merge of servers 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bearwall said:

But we have already tried a global server. The EU server pre-wipe was a global server with no timerestrictions on the PBs and it failed miserably.. We tried flagsystem, we tried flagsystem + lord protector, we tried alliance patch to basically patch up the problems the timezonedifference creates, we tested all these features and they all failed - hard. So why should we test a broken system once more? - Every single idea that has been proposed to facilitate a servermerge has either some glaring and obvious faults, or already been tested. Now we're tested a regional server + a global server and guess what? - The regional server is the one that actually functions. Why then go back to a bad idea? What is it about global players that makes them think "this game would improve if we took away the players ability to make a choice in regard to when RvR can take place. We have a broken global server where people have left in throves, and a EU server that is stable but I'm sure this is only because EU had 200 players more right after the great wipe, not a reflection on the bad idea that global servers really is!". The lack of reflection on why global has failed is astonishing. Why did global fail??! EU server had about 1k players right after the big wipe. One issue that made a lot of players quit was the insanely stupid shipgrind, but now the numbers on EU have stabilised themselves on a 500 players a day in primetime - i.e. a working server. The global server had about 800 players right after the big wipe but now rarely exceeds 100 players. In short the global server lost 7/8 of it's total population, while EU server lost 1/2 of its population. Don't come up with excuses that is either not really relevant or rather is fixed now - because testing a game is also about fixing the problems. The fact that there are clans on global that is actually trying to flip ports where evreyone can attend is a testimony to the failed idea that the global server is. So answer this question:

Why is competition such a problem? - the answer I'm seeing in all these servermerge threads is that when two rivalling ideas compete, one has to lose. Now rather than appealing for a US server, with US PB timers (that in theory would attract old players that have left the game due to the huge impact RvR has on the gameplay and the many nightflips on global) and a US playerbase. This would be incrementally bad for aussie and asian playerbases - yes. It is however a solution that would work long term.

How can you say one server failed???

 

did both servers start with the exact same player base? Nope 

did we have set mechanics/rules? Nope 

 was it tested fairly? Nope 

 

so the test was set up to fail 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JG14_Cuzn said:

lets face it folks.

The game is on life support.  

Are we going for a record for the LONGEST Alpha release? 

Global server has no population and those that remain are sailing in a bizarro world where the Pirates are the LEAST pirate like nation and the vast majority of players in one of the biggest nations squirrel away in ports 2 hours from the front lines. 

Prussia, Russia and Poland somehow sailed to the Caribbean and want in on the action?  really?  :huh:

Adding 3 new nations to a withering population has not infused the game with new players and it's only a matter of time before the Dev's either sell the game and cash out or just give up. 

I dont think even a server merge will help as panties will get twisted, and folks will leave just on principal.

 

oh well.  

I have to agree it’s all about legends here on out I believe 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Intrepido said:

Answer to this: which are all the multiple solutions for making a server merge viable?

 

The only problem here is christendom and you who want to impose a non working solution for all the players of NA without their consent.

and about 2/3 of the people that voted, give or take.  :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Rebrall said:

How can you say one server failed??? Because the call for a servermerge is evidence enough to state that global server failed.

 

did both servers start with the exact same player base? Nope The difference in playerbase on day one was neglible. 800 on global, 1k on EU.

did we have set mechanics/rules? Nope The ONLY mechanic difference between global and EU is that EU has fixed PB timers. True there was made a minor mistake on global but that was fixed quickly and cannot explain the player loss.

 was it tested fairly? Nope Yes it was. Or do u propose a new great wipe?

 

so the test was set up to fail A juvenile conclusion that has no basis in the facts of the mechanics or the servers but is only reached as a result of a disappointment and unwillingness to accept that global has failed. To reject a result merely because the result is not what you wished for has nothing to do with testing a game, or trying to improve the game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

 

Global never had 800 players.  Seriously it hit 400 once, 1 night.

EU had a peak over 1100/1200 players.  Global had a peak of 400.  We're down to about 150-180 and you're down to about 500-550.  Both servers lost at least 50% of their population since the wipe.  I'd say the game is failing as a whole and both servers seemed to have lost around the same percentage of their players.  You had more to lose, which can be chaulked up to all sorts of things like a poor global server launch, not a real wipe and a few other things we've beaten to death.  

Math always tells the truth.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Christendom said:

Global never had 800 players.  Seriously it hit 400 once, 1 night.

EU had a peak over 1100/1200 players.  Global had a peak of 400.  We're down to about 150-180 and you're down to about 500-550.  Both servers lost at least 50% of their population since the wipe.  I'd say the game is failing as a whole and both servers seemed to have lost around the same percentage of their players.  You had more to lose, which can be chaulked up to all sorts of things like a poor global server launch, not a real wipe and a few other things we've beaten to death.  

Math always tells the truth.  

This idea of a "not a real wipe"? Care to elaborate?

- As I see it there was no real difference.. Sure it came as a surprise that the clans still existed but that was about it and we all organise our ppl on TS anyway so what was the big deal? And the 100k was really not that much of a burden to start a new clan up. As I recall the eve of the relaunch after the big wipe the global server had 800, feel free to correct me, but do it with hard data not assumptions - my assumption and poor recollection can be as valid as yours. 

But by all means - let's have another "real" wipe and relaunch. I'm betting the problems in the global server will persist and that EU server will have the same numbers as now after about 3-6 weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

This idea of a "not a real wipe"? Care to elaborate?

- As I see it there was no real difference.. Sure it came as a surprise that the clans still existed but that was about it and we all organise our ppl on TS anyway so what was the big deal? And the 100k was really not that much of a burden to start a new clan up. As I recall the eve of the relaunch after the big wipe the global server had 800, feel free to correct me, but do it with hard data not assumptions - my assumption and poor recollection can be as valid as yours. 

But by all means - let's have another "real" wipe and relaunch. I'm betting the problems in the global server will persist and that EU server will have the same numbers as now after about 3-6 weeks.

I mean if we must. 

Admin stated that PVP 1 and 2 would be merged into 1 server named Global and a NEW server would be created labeled EU.  One with no restrictions and one with.  This was announced well before.  Instead the servers were just renamed and not wiped completely of names, clans and friends.  PVP2 turned into global and PVP1 turned into EU.  PVP1/EU was the dominant server beforehand and remained as such.  XP wasn't merged unless you did the cutter thing.  Even then I know a couple dozen players that still had their XP screwed up and Admin wouldn't return it.  They quit or went back to EU.  I'm fully convinced that had the servers been merged and completely wiped Global would of had a better shot.  Maybe I'm wrong, doesn't matter now.

The "night flips" that EU players lose sleep over don't happen on global.  We work with the clans and attack various ports depending on who owns them.  We don't attack ARMED (aussie ports) unless it's a weekend and everyone can be on.  Vice versa.  We attack US ports in our time zone.  It works.  

Both servers seem to have lost the same percentage of their populations, I think its callous to say one server didn't work over the other.  If you sell over 100k copies of a game and only have 700-800 players actively logging on a year and change later.....its  a failure all around.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Bearwall said:

 

Clearly maths and science are not your strong suit, 

 

at the end of the day the game is in need of player all around and splitting us up at this point and the point of the split was a mistake and has killed the game along with bad mechanics 

Edited by Rebrall
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Christendom said:

I mean if we must. 

Admin stated that PVP 1 and 2 would be merged into 1 server named Global and a NEW server would be created labeled EU.  One with no restrictions and one with.  This was announced well before.  Instead the servers were just renamed and not wiped completely of names, clans and friends.  PVP2 turned into global and PVP1 turned into EU.  PVP1/EU was the dominant server beforehand and remained as such.  XP wasn't merged unless you did the cutter thing.  Even then I know a couple dozen players that still had their XP screwed up and Admin wouldn't return it.  They quit or went back to EU.  I'm fully convinced that had the servers been merged and completely wiped Global would of had a better shot.  Maybe I'm wrong, doesn't matter now. I really don't believe that the success of the global server is down to wether or not your friends was removed or not. And you could with no restrictions have made a new character since the xp were redeemable on the account - so no starting over just to get a new name. To state that the success or failure of the global/EU server is down to not creating an entirely new server for EU is simply ridicolous.

The "night flips" that EU players lose sleep over don't happen on global.  We work with the clans and attack various ports depending on who owns them.  We don't attack ARMED (aussie ports) unless it's a weekend and everyone can be on.  Vice versa.  We attack US ports in our time zone.  It works.  Yet another proof that global doesn't function. A failed idea.

Both servers seem to have lost the same percentage of their populations, I think its callous to say one server didn't work over the other.  If you sell over 100k copies of a game and only have 700-800 players actively logging on a year and change later.....its  a failure all around.  What data do you base the assumption that both servers has lost an equal amount of population on? I have already stated that as far as I recall the global server had 800 players or there about right after the wipe, where the EU server had about 1k. I may be wrong, but I'd like to see the stats.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rebrall said:

Clearly maths and science are not your strong suit, 

 

at the end of the day the game is in need of player all around and splitting us up at this point and the point of the split was a mistake and has killed the game along with bad mechanics 

I think the game functions just fine. The split was necessary to save the playerbase, to merge the server will simply remove the EU playerbase as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bearwall said:

I think the game functions just fine. The split was necessary to save the playerbase, to merge the server will simply remove the EU playerbase as well.

 

1 hour ago, Bearwall said:

The "night flips" that EU players lose sleep over don't happen on global.  We work with the clans and attack various ports depending on who owns them.  We don't attack ARMED (aussie ports) unless it's a weekend and everyone can be on.  Vice versa.  We attack US ports in our time zone.  It works.  Yet another proof that global doesn't function. A failed idea.

^^^^^^^^^^^

giphy.gif.0420d5d43a50e72e4c981c6de6ff4974.gif

 

( @Christendom That's just for you )

all it proves that the split was absolutely not necessary at all and the #nomorenightflips was a small minority within the EU community issue not anyone else.

as i was one of the party's involved in making RvR work so we could all turn up and have a good fight i know first hand the US and SEA/Oceanic players are very approachable!

and as for saving the player base all you have actually done is split players apart from each other for absolutely no reason other then a lack of diplomatic skill that some of you seem to posses.

FYI the port battle timers and the agreement between US players and Oceanic players on global are the same yet you say it has failed, that's very contradictory

and proves that there is no need for multiple servers at this stage of the game's development. I would agree for release with a functional player base that you are indeed correct in a server split.

1 hour ago, Bearwall said:

Both servers seem to have lost the same percentage of their populations, I think its callous to say one server didn't work over the other.  If you sell over 100k copies of a game and only have 700-800 players actively logging on a year and change later.....its  a failure all around.  What data do you base the assumption that both servers has lost an equal amount of population on? I have already stated that as far as I recall the global server had 800 players or there about right after the wipe, where the EU server had about 1k. I may be wrong, but I'd like to see the stats.

Global server peaked a little over 400 after the wipe peak time and that was once btw we never ever reached 800,

so a say a peak of 400 to an average now of around 170 so my maths work that as 400 - 170 =230, 230 / 400 x 100 = 57.5% decrease

EU peak was 1200 i believe and average now of around 500? by all means happy to be corrected on numbers i don't play EU after all, so my maths here says

1200 - 500 = 700,   700 / 1200 x 100 = 58.33(recurring)% 

and you call the EU server a success, sure ok 

 

1 hour ago, Bearwall said:

Admin stated that PVP 1 and 2 would be merged into 1 server named Global and a NEW server would be created labeled EU.  One with no restrictions and one with.  This was announced well before.  Instead the servers were just renamed and not wiped completely of names, clans and friends.  PVP2 turned into global and PVP1 turned into EU.  PVP1/EU was the dominant server beforehand and remained as such.  XP wasn't merged unless you did the cutter thing.  Even then I know a couple dozen players that still had their XP screwed up and Admin wouldn't return it.  They quit or went back to EU.  I'm fully convinced that had the servers been merged and completely wiped Global would of had a better shot.  Maybe I'm wrong, doesn't matter now. I really don't believe that the success of the global server is down to wether or not your friends was removed or not. And you could with no restrictions have made a new character since the xp were redeemable on the account - so no starting over just to get a new name. To state that the success or failure of the global/EU server is down to not creating an entirely new server for EU is simply ridicolous.

as for this we will never know now the players are gone so......., one thing that would of helped also was proper server descriptions if were to have one that is limited in its time and one FFA srever

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, instead of eliminating nations, it probably would be more constructive to eliminate clans inside a nation.

I do not understand what the PB made by clans, cities hold by clans and related that gives positive, but I know a lot of players (including me) who are upset of clan rivalries and impossibility to play Naval Action if not being in a clan (might be lived as hostage of the clan mechanics).

I heard yesterday a well know and fair captain questioning himself about going on playing NA or not. He is playing NA from the very beginning, when the player base was 60 players... But, why going on now? Only solution to survive, according to him, is to forget all related to the role play: we are hostages of clan ==> we must forget nations.

Some "fake" clans are created in game, joining players who do not want to join a clan, but who'd like to make RvR. Maybe, this is the best solution, but the tax mechanics would rapidly kill this solution if all players do it...

So that for me, clan solution means no solution...

Edited by Eléazar de Damas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rebrall said:

as for this we will never know now the players are gone so......., one thing that would of helped also was proper server descriptions if were to have one that is limited in its time and one FFA srever

 

This right here is one of the biggest reasons the failure happened.  I dont know how many Tattered Flags members I heard from the EU server didnt know which server was which after the wipe, and had NO idea they needed to jump through hoops before the wipe to keep their XP.   So when the wipe happened they were Foxtrot Uniform Charlie Kilo Echo Delta.   I am sure TF lost at least 10 people a few days after the wipe because of that alone.   They lost another 5 due to the stupid grind at that point.  Hell now the whole clan stopped playing because of the crap handling of the Global server.  

So there went a sizable clan right there and a moderator on top of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...