You are not logged in.

Dear visitor, welcome to Tagoria. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.

Dervish

Beginner

  • "Dervish" started this thread

Posts: 12

Occupation: aspiring writer/critic but makes ends meet as a dispatcher

  • Send private message

1

Saturday, July 11th 2009, 10:12am

General Council: Fate of W3: Interlocked Alliances

Without some bold steps, even the most dedicated players will continue to leave one by one, sapping whatever vitality remains of this world. While no one horde or player can accomplish this, there has to be a rebirth of the horde structures as it stands. The interlocked alliances have created a landscape where battles have become all too predictable. Inactive hordes get picked on for reasons other than a rousing battle to be enjoyed by all. Many hordes become bullies preying upon one or two weak hordes. Mercenary hordes attack each other with little excitement and leave most of us wanting.

Several things can be done to change this before it is too late. Before offering my personal suggestions, I wish to see if others feel the same for one. And for another to see if others have ideas on how to bring about resurgence.... Any takers? :sleeping:

jeffnz56

Beginner

Posts: 23

Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Occupation: Manager

  • Send private message

2

Thursday, July 16th 2009, 1:52am

I agree that soemthing needs to be done but have to say that isn't this what the game is about. Why would you play a game if it wasn't to progress your character and enter a horde and make it the best it can be. Why would we won't to make it more competative when human nature makes us all want to win, well most of us and I certainly don't play to lose or come second.



We could split the hordes as suggested in W2 forum or break alliances so we don't have 2? factions dominating the game. Whilst this would seem simple in theory in reality a bit harder to control as people would just have unofficial alliances and we would be back to square one. Maybe all it would take is for one of the bigger hordes to go out by themselves and this would make the battles a bit more competitive.



I'm open to whatever thoughts everyone has but don't see a simple solution to something that seems inevitable given the way the game is setupo.

3

Thursday, July 16th 2009, 3:04am

There is an obvious problem with this as too few a hordes are active enough to "keep up." The top players in most hordes are but no one wants to leave. There are also fewer players in this world it seems. Not exactly sure what to do about it Jeff except to... Keep Moving Forward... as my boy says :D

I am open to suggestions also. I get tired of fighting the same fights over and over again...

Dervish

Beginner

  • "Dervish" started this thread

Posts: 12

Occupation: aspiring writer/critic but makes ends meet as a dispatcher

  • Send private message

4

Thursday, July 16th 2009, 6:35pm

I appreciate you Jeff and you Insaneham for your responses.

While no person wishes to join a horde that loses or go out of their way to give up obvious, innate or earned advantages, there comes a point when this pursuit works against the very thing that made each of us pursue for excellence, for joy of victory and gladness in being successful. It is my opinion that W3 has reached that point. Winning a fight when the outcome is already decided may be fun, fun for those who see exp gain as an end in itself but some of us don't care for them. Some may enjoy playing poker with a group even when winning is all but a formality, I am not. And some may shirk the predictability of battle as I outlined above, it becomes tiresome to those gamers who have a tiny care for the spirit of the game and not merely for the results.

I fully agree in RL, when so much is and should be considered a zero sum game, there is no need for graciousness or mercy. After all, history has shown what happens often to those who do like Christ or other weak-hearted folks who turn their cheek. The world is just too ugly for all that. Hmm but then there is the point this is a game as I've heard so many repeat such mantra. And in that case why not try to be better than what we're allowed in RL and play for the game? At least a little bit?

Just saying. As I said no one horde can make this happen although if each horde that keeps more than 2 allies can cordially shed one or two, at least there is no rancor if "unofficial" friends or allies fight for another side in battle. As in RL indirect friendships and allies will always pervade. But formal allies are binding. It is exactly this binding nature which is choking this world imo. I do appreciate your replies you two. I'm actually fairly shocked anyone thought to touch this thread. :) Cheers.

Posts: 13

Location: Melbourne, Australia

Occupation: Business Advisor

  • Send private message

5

Friday, July 17th 2009, 12:07pm

Dervish you know my thoughts on this. Revamping of alliances will not by itself achieve the rebirth you are looking for although it is definitely worthy of further consideration. There are a number of challenges facing this world no different to that of other worlds.

All new hordes that emerge seem to be merc hordes who contribute little to this world overall. As a result battles have become a lot more predictable. Don't get me wrong there IS a place for mercing but these need to be funded by someone. Won't happen if everyone becomes a merc horde .

Some of the merc pricing is getting out of hand to the point that the handful of players who fund these battles have lost interest the game and in doing regular battles. A general policy (and some self restraint) is needed to encourage more battles for the same diamond spend. I am talking about a win/win policy here. At the moment it is increasingly a win/lose relationship.

The new worlds (W5 will open soon) have done much to damage the older worlds. Initially players leave these older worlds to start fresh with a new one in the hopes of getting some sort advantage (we've seen a few return or continue multi worlds). The true damage has been the lack of new fresh players entering W3 and the clutter of old characters still in the system. The SB has become almost silent from the voices of newbies. At least if we could identify the new players we could provide more proactive help.

As you know many of the existing hordes with a lot of members now have their healer hut at high levels. The great expense of Healers Hut is a real drawback when considering the creation of a true new horde. It provides too much of a competitive disadvantage when conducting battles to therefore even bother in creating a horde from scratch by experienced players let alone with by a lot of newbies.

Let's not forget to state the positive of W3 being that there are a lot of genuinely good people there. Having said that, there is no substitute to making a real effort and commitment over a reasonable period in investing in new players on a regular basis before you start seeing great results.

I think this is a good thread and this is just some of my personal thoughts on the matter. Let's see if we can galvanize many more players to spark :thumbsup: things up.

Dervish

Beginner

  • "Dervish" started this thread

Posts: 12

Occupation: aspiring writer/critic but makes ends meet as a dispatcher

  • Send private message

6

Friday, July 17th 2009, 5:06pm

Yes Wasa we've exchanged some worthy reflections on what is at the heart of the matter, if that matter is a resurgence. I fully agree that a concerted, community action to foster and bring along new players would help some. And the disadvantage of starting a horde given the hefty price to max out the healing hut prohibits even the most experienced players from banding to form a new, fighting horde.

While I stand behind my premise that a restructuring of the remaining active hordes is essential to any revitalization of W3, the healing hut has furthered the haves and have-nots. I also believe there in truth are only 200-300 serious players, and only a small minority that care of the lofty idealism I and you hint at. In some ways this thread was DOA. I will mention that a reduction of the cost of hiring mercs will help but this won't revive the soul of W3. It will add a little spice to an already spoiled plate. ;(

I certainly hope my pessimism is misplaced and this thread or other actions in W3 can spark something toward true gamesmanship. Silly idealists see games as an opportunity toward ritual action to manifest a part of themselves disallowed in RL-- or at least with great risk of harm. Thank you for your generous, thoughtful comments. Your fine points are not without support in this far corner of tag. 8)