Rejected: North VS South World

[DeletedUser]

Reading thought the .Net forums it looks like players have been dropping like flies as of late and I know I'm getting bored with the same old same old game play. Every world you join the starting strategy is nearly the same and there is no real end game.

So I'm proposing a fairly big switch up in the game to try and reignite some interest. That switch is a North Vs South mod, A civil war if you will.

It would be a 2k tall by Xk wide world where you are randomly placed and its north versus south. If you start north of the center line you are stuck fighting for the north and if you are south you are stuck fighting for the south. This allegiance would be based solely on your starting location. So if you noble villages outside your territory and then some one takes your starting village you are still fighting for the side you started on.

Let the north and south break themselves up into factions how ever they want to maintain communication and order but people fighting for the north can not attack any one fighting for the north even if they are in different factions. (no internal nobling you get to wait til they go barb).

Throw a few barbs in there from the start so people can have something to farm and attack right off the bat. Starting locations would be right at the division of north and south and as players join they would be placed slightly further back from the line. Not in the radial lay out like is done in standard worlds.

In order to prevent people at the "back" of a side having no one to attack remove the north south distance from the equation. (force it to be a constant 1 or 2 fields perhaps) and only have the east west be variable. When a side has a majority of every K the world ends. There is now a precise goal in mind and no worrying about "now what do I do?" when you have an X million point account and no end in sight.

Just a thought. Could be fun to test out here after a future restart.

 

[DeletedUser1013]

I like the sentiment of this idea, but am not sure of the logistics of some of it. As you stated people at the South of the South continent would be bored, and I am not sure making it 1 field to the line from where ever would work at all for a plethora of reasons.

Perhaps in keeping with your concept, but avoiding all of these problems you be to change it from South/North, to simply being Team A or B. Thus keeping opposing players all mixed in together.

It is a massively different concept to the game, and will undoubtedly take a lot of innovation and trial and error to get a concept like this working, but I really like it. You are right that this game is becoming slightly stagnant (though still a great game), and new 'Game modes' could be a lot of fun!

You could even introduce certain winning criteria, like 'Kill the King', each side having a King, or a prime base, when that is captured, then the game is won. Or 'Capture the princess' perhaps having a villa that counts as a princess and having to form a line of villas from the enemy capture point back to your own to win, with the maximum villa distance for this chain being 3 or 5 fields.

 

[DeletedUser1021]

another twist on this could be Limited Diplomacy
A tribe has to reach a certain size before NAP/Ally can be formed.

Eg.
1 nap can be made/highlighted when tribe has 1 million points
1 Ally can be made/highlighted when tribe has 5 million points

 

[DeletedUser]

Setting the north south to a constant effectively places all of the villages on the front line forcing all villages out of a safe zone and into the action. You could be "safe" east west of course with enough captures. I agree there is a lot of logistical things to work out but I think "Mods" would bring a lot of new life to this game.

Your A and B thing would effectively accomplish the same game play and probably be easier to implement. Kill the king would be an interesting mod. Have a "king" village in each K and when your alliance loses its king you are forced to become loyal to your new "king". Make a thread with your killing the king idea and we can hash it out there.

 

[DeletedUser]

another twist on this could be Limited Diplomacy
A tribe has to reach a certain size before NAP/Ally can be formed.

Eg.
1 nap can be made/highlighted when tribe has 1 million points
1 Ally can be made/highlighted when tribe has 5 million points

You would just end up with unofficial alliances. They wouldn't be marked but they would still be there. I think this was the way it was when I started in world 1 but its been so long I don't remember

 

[DeletedUser1013]

Setting the north south to a constant effectively places all of the villages on the front line forcing all villages out of a safe zone and into the action. You could be "safe" east west of course with enough captures. I agree there is a lot of logistical things to work out but I think "Mods" would bring a lot of new life to this game.

An example of problems created by this would be that someone right by the divide line could effectively have every single village from the opposite half attacking him in the space of 10 minutes, that just wouldn't be fair. Players at the back from the line would always have at least several hours between an incoming registering and it hitting. Know what i mean?

Your A and B thing would effectively accomplish the same game play and probably be easier to implement. Kill the king would be an interesting mod. Have a "king" village in each K and when your alliance loses its king you are forced to become loyal to your new "king". Make a thread with your killing the king idea and we can hash it out there.

So yes that is why I think your idea should be fashioned more in a mixed up A and B team, but I do not consider it my idea, it is yours, I am just helping to develop the concept with you.

 

[DeletedUser]

An example of problems created by this would be that someone right by the divide line could effectively have every single village from the opposite half attacking him in the space of 10 minutes, that just wouldn't be fair. Players at the back from the line would always have at least several hours between an incoming registering and it hitting. Know what i mean?

This actually wouldn't be a problem since EVERYONE has the same north south component to their attack. Some constant. so some one all the way north attacking some one all the way south would have the same travel time as two people right next to each other(north south) effectively stacking all villages in a column on the front line.

After thinking about this it brings in some huge problems. If some one had multiple villages in one column they could effectively do a T train from different villages.

SO that brings in my next thought, a multiplier for the north south component to make it much less of an influence on travel time. right now its travel time=C(sqrt(x^2+y^2)) make it travel time =C(sqrt(x^2+.1(Y^2)) Where C is some constant time to cross a field based on world speed.

This still packs every one on the front line in the action but eliminates the multi village T train.

So yes that is why I think your idea should be fashioned more in a mixed up A and B team, but I do not consider it my idea, it is yours, I am just helping to develop the concept with you.

I meant for the Kill the king idea. It would be fun to work out that idea.

 

[fp0815]

The German players may help me, because I'm not quite sure about it yet, but don't we have similar settings already for the speed rounds? Not exactly the same, but only 4 tribes, which you can't change, similar winning conditions, fixed allies etc.?

 

[DeletedUser73]

Reading thought the .Net forums it looks like players have been dropping like flies as of late and I know I'm getting bored with the same old same old game play. Every world you join the starting strategy is nearly the same and there is no real end game.

As of the past few months we the Community Managers and InnoGames have been looking quite deeply into a number of End Game ideas, for ways to keep up long-term motivation, and examining ways of creating an actual winnable world. I imagine that at some point Beta will have the honour of testing a few of those. (Quick note, an End Game phase was recently activated on W12.net.)

Have a "king" village in each K and when your alliance loses its king you are forced to become loyal to your new "king". Make a thread with your killing the king idea and we can hash it out there.

One of the most beautiful things about TribalWars is, in my opinion, the 'Player Governed' gameplay aspect. Players can attack anyone they want, decide who to follow, and decide for themselves where their loyalties lie. Not only would forcing player's loyalties be limiting the - until now - unlimited PvP possibilities, is there really any realistic way of doing so? If players don't like their team, they will find a way to help the other one, or simply quit.

The German players may help me, because I'm not quite sure about it yet, but don't we have similar settings already for the speed rounds? Not exactly the same, but only 4 tribes, which you can't change, similar winning conditions, fixed allies etc.?

Yes, there is the possibility to randomly assign tribes, and making leaving impossible. (It was even done full-scale on W27.net) For the record, you can also make it so that you can't attack inside your tribe, support outside it, or promote other people to dukes.

 

[DeletedUser]

One of the most beautiful things about TribalWars is, in my opinion, the 'Player Governed' gameplay aspect. Players can attack anyone they want, decide who to follow, and decide for themselves where their loyalties lie. Not only would forcing player's loyalties be limiting the - until now - unlimited PvP possibilities, is there really any realistic way of doing so? If players don't like their team, they will find a way to help the other one, or simply quit.

I see your point. BUT limiting the pVp isn't necessary limiting the game as long as you introduce some other game aspect. Like you said if you can force players into a team, not allow them to attack their tribe and defend enemy tribes they have to figure out how to make it work. I guess they could just be a spy and screw their side.

With the North Vs South idea I included the option for factions on the side so you could work with different factions with in the side, mainly to simplify communication. Perhaps give the leader of the most powerful faction on a side the leader of the side. So say the north breaks up into 8 factions. One of the factions controls 30% of the villages(point wise maybe) so their leader runs the north. They control the army camps and what not.

This scenario might work better on a pretty small map. Perhaps pre-build teams of 400 or so players and once 2 teams are loaded up start the world 400V400 (or what ever number is decided on).

 

[DeletedUser1013]

I agree Telos, these concepts do not have to replace the current Tribal Wars format, simply to offer another style to play, the same as speed rounds.

 

[DeletedUser]

Maybe an extra game round could be implemented for this. So unlike High-Perf and Speed rounds, this would be just this certain modification.

Of course, you COULD make it premium, but I say the first 3,000 don't have to pay. But details are disclosed for later.

I do like the idea though... One group, verse another group... Would be an entire war to begin with!

 

[DeletedUser1013]

That sounds good, i would definitely pay to play that, also I think I would be more likely to pay, knowing that everyone had to pay to play. You certainly don't want to be stuck with a load of inactives on your team,, if they have to pay then they are far more likely to be active.

 

[DeletedUser]

Exactly. Instead of making a speed round where it's just a bunch of 500-600 paying active players, and getting nobled in a few hours, why not have a world up for a month or two, with speed of 5, troop speed 3, and then let them rip on each other with these settings.

When X amount of players are left standing (Of course, before a certain period it will be cease fire because of how fast it is, to build up to a fight. Imagine, 5x speed will mean that people are going to be dominating with co-played accounts, and we all know it), the teams are shifted, and shortened to fit it to an even amount per side.

Repeat process until the final few.

The world will be over in a month, and no doubt it will be hectic until the very end!

 

[DeletedUser803]

speed = 5
and
troop speed = 3

WOW!!!

that gives the troops moving at 15 squares / minute. Way to fast unless your account is handled 24/7

a
speed = 4
and
troop speed = 1

would be fast enough for most players


I also like the idea of team 1 vs team 2.

BRING IT ON!!!

 

[DeletedUser]

Wait, I never knew about that being so fast for troops... I guess 1 is enough then.