The Two Worlds Problem

All,

I asked Rune about the possibility of putting the worlds back together as a possible solution to the Olympus and Everos issues as suggested by multiple people and he answered as follows:

RuneSlayer wrote:

The problem is that the publishers we are working with did not do what they promised. The reason behind the creation of Olympus was the traffic which was expected by one of the publishers. Unfortunately, although we have done what we should have done, they still haven't done their part. This has become a major problem for us and has affected the game in many ways. While I was away for 10 days, among other things, I had several meetings to find ways to bypass the publishers so we can continue developing the game and even make it grander. I believe I have succeeded and I have some great (if not EPIC) news, which I cannot disclose yet. We are very enthusiastic and happy with the new developments and in a few weeks you will all find out what is being prepared in the oven. Prepare for EPIC news...

To the question in hand... It is possible, though it will require some downtime, but we don't have a problem doing so. Is this what the Community wants?

So YES! it is possible. But do we truly want to do it? Please make your voice heard on this issue.

Thank you,

Ferarith

I'm not sure what to think of this..

lots of people migrated from erevos to olympos because erevos was "boring". Now olympos is "boring".

erevos has had a similar problem, with an unconquerable capital and all that. we have been able to solve it/work around it. Wouldn't it be better if the players on olympos learned to solve their problems? this seems so much a mechanistic solution.

(my assumption is that the reasoning behind this suggestion is the dissatisfaction of olympos players with the current stalemate; should any other factor be into play, please enlighten me)

Lack of people, they have less activity than bc1.. Guilds don't see a point to get regions. Pvps are too skellie-dominated. Growth there is slower, upgrade prices higher.

Honestly since the split the "community" has suffered on Everos, less active members and less members in general. I like talking to people, making friends, and a quick coop queue. These things have all been reduced by many people moving to Olympus. But yes the situation in Olympus is the driving force behind the conversation

in response to fyrr:
those last factors could be taken care of by the devs easily, methinks.

the others..that's for the players to solve, not? once the cost goes down/progress goes faster, the motivation to play should be higher.

Spot on Klass,

If I had known that there was no real way to win this game, I would have never started playing. To have to find that out after the investment of time, effort, and money is still difficult to understand.

To be given a forum to ask for and express our frustration, as well as offer constructive ways to fix it (The Stalemate on Olympus) only to have nothing done, again adds to the frustration level.

If the developers can not do anything to fix this, then fine tell us that and I believe we could live with it. If the developers can fix this challenge, and choose not to, that too is fine, but tell us either way. Just stop treating us like mushrooms.

Soulthief

well if thay are close to newbie wave there is no point for merging but other changes are welcome( undead, orcs, pvp and coop que [ maby just newbie wave will solve it])

i dont think that higher/lower prices are a problem its just another server

and well i think its hard to conqer capital becuse of these cp bonuses one fraction is less active (make less cp) so we will give them a bonus for next day so both fractions will do thesame cp next day that idea could just go to trash

but well that is sure that fractions are not thesame so there could be a bonus but based on amount of fame that fraction have ( light have 300k fame dak got 600k fame so light will get 100% cp bonus)

i thought that developers have that not logical idea in game becouse there was nothing to do after capital falls but well now we got achers so i see no sense of it

so resuming
- bring newbie wave fast
- do something to have all races equall
- throw away that cp bonus idea that you have in game because rewarding less activity is just not logic ( maby fame based bonus[ dont cout not activ playes>week not login]).

Soulthief wrote:

If I had known that there was no real way to win this game, I would have never started playing. To have to find that out after the investment of time, effort, and money is still difficult to understand.

The fact that Erevos has been reset after the Light Faction won, proves that the game can be won.

soulthief wrote:

To be given a forum to ask for and express our frustration, as well as offer constructive ways to fix it (The Stalemate on Olympus) only to have nothing done, again adds to the frustration level.

soulthief wrote:

If the developers can not do anything to fix this, then fine tell us that and I believe we could live with it. If the developers can fix this challenge, and choose not to, that too is fine, but tell us either way.

I have already answered that we are aware of the Community's view about the condition on Olympus and that changes are coming. In fact, I have answered to 2 different threads regarding that matter. Having to say the same thing in multiple threads serves no purpose. Having said that, the accusation that nothing is being done towards providing a solution to the Community is not a valid point.

soulthief wrote:

Just stop treating us like mushrooms.

I fail to see how we treat the Community like mushrooms, as we are responding to the situation by saying that changes are coming and why these changes have not been implemented yet. The fact that I was 10 days away delayed the process even longer, which was something that I had informed prior my departure. I cannot help but think that only a blind person would not recognize that our efforts are always towards the direction of making BC a better game along with the help of our Community. My posts in this forum, and especially the recent ones referring to the situation on Olympus prove that.

You know the only reason the world reset on BC1 is that the Dark side stopped fighting back, so to imply that you did it to stop the stalemate is misinformation, again.

We have asked you to allow the light side to sue for peace, to give us some kinda of win win opportunity to get past the stalemate on Olympus, and what have you done about it, the stalemate on Olympus?

I contend you have done nothing. And to pick on the message and not address this issue at hand is key on how you approach matters/ questions regarding this game. The issue is the stalemate on Olympus, and what have you done to fix it?

Stop playing word games and answer the question at hand. What are you planning to, going to, or want to do about the stalemate on Olympus?

Geeze

ST

Hi, I play on both worlds and I pretty much don't want them to merge.  I think Everos is becoming mature and will be a really fun game shortly.   I like having 2 worlds and while Olympus is immature I think it has potential.  I'd like to see some changes.   

First I think the short, narrow approach to the capitals on Olympus is stalemate friendly. But the real issue is and always has been the fact that some people are excluded from being able to attack the capital.  If you want the capital to be extremely hard,  fine.   Make the container huge.  If that's not enough give the defenders a small bonus.  Let the people who helped fight all the way across the map help finish the job.  If they can only contribute 5 cp per fight, so be it.

Soccer wouldn't be the world's most popular sport if only the opposing team's goalie could score.  

Thanks for listening,
Drennalin

RuneSlayer wrote:

The fact that Erevos has been reset after the Light Faction won, proves that the game can be won.

I think that Soulthief's concerns are valid.  The light side was only able to win on Erevos after the dark side gave up.  That is the only way that the game can be won in its current state.  I think an end-game mechanic that depends on large numbers of players quitting or going inactive to achieve victory is flawed.

On Olympus, if the dark side's power is 100 against normal regions, then the light side's power would probably be around 90. The dark side's power to attack the special regions around the capital would probably be around 40.  The dark side's power to attack the capital itself would be about 10.  

The problem is that the light side's power is still 90 on the capital and the special regions.  This mechanic ensures that as long as the light side has the will to defend, they will certainly succeed.

soulthief wrote:

You know the only reason the world reset on BC1 is that the Dark side stopped fighting back, so to imply that you did it to stop the stalemate is misinformation, again.

We did not reset the game world. This is happening automatically when a Capital falls. Therefore implying that we were behind the reset is misinformation.

soulthief wrote:

We have asked you to allow the light side to sue for peace, to give us some kinda of win win opportunity to get past the stalemate on Olympus, and what have you done about it, the stalemate on Olympus?

Have we prevented the Dark Side to discuss matter with the Light Side in regards to a truce and a possible hard reset conducted by us? I don't think so.

soulthief wrote:

I contend you have done nothing. And to pick on the message and not address this issue at hand is key on how you approach matters/ questions regarding this game. The issue is the stalemate on Olympus, and what have you done to fix it?

I have already mentioned that there will be some changes coming next week, probably three times by now, but for some reason, you fail to acknowledge it. This is the last time I am repeating it, as I am certain that repeating things in the Forum becomes very tiring for the users.
I fail to see how I do not address issues, as we are always making changes when the points expressed by the Community are valid. You can of course disagree on the way how I approach matters/questions regarding this game and I deeply respect it, as you are entitled to an opinion.

Drennalin wrote:

First I think the short, narrow approach to the capitals on Olympus is stalemate friendly. But the real issue is and always has been the fact that some people are excluded from being able to attack the capital. If you want the capital to be extremely hard, fine. Make the container huge. If that's not enough give the defenders a small bonus. Let the people who helped fight all the way across the map help finish the job. If they can only contribute 5 cp per fight, so be it. Smile

Soccer wouldn't be the world's most popular sport if only the opposing team's goalie could score.

I completely agree. That is why we will allow players to attack both the borders and the capital even on Normal difficulty, but with premade AI army compositions of significant difficulty. In other words, players will be able to hit the borders and the capital on Normal difficulty but they will be facing 13+ AI units level. Battle rewards, CP/Influence and AI GS will depend on the difficulty chosen by the player, but the AI army composition will follow premade rules (eg. 13+ AI units level)

This way, all players will be able to hit the borders and the Capital, so we are not forbidding them to do so, but on the other hand they will have to face a foe (army) similar to an end game situation (boss fight).

RuneSlayer wrote:

soulthief wrote:

We have asked you to allow the light side to sue for peace, to give us some kinda of win win opportunity to get past the stalemate on Olympus, and what have you done about it, the stalemate on Olympus?

Have we prevented the Dark Side to discuss matter with the Light Side in regards to a truce and a possible hard reset conducted by us? I don't think so.

That is good to know...I did not realize this was possible.

By "truce" does this mean that it is a tie...or do we have a winner/loser and along with the hard reset we also get Aether reflective of which side we were on?

The former doesn't really do anything, the latter would be interesting. So, how do we do that? I assume we don't need every single person to agree...would it be the all of the top 10 guild leaders...two-thirds of all guilds...do we start a petition and get X number of signatures?

Basically, could you outline what the community needs to do to prove that this is what we want?

RuneSlayer wrote:

Drennalin wrote:

First I think the short, narrow approach to the capitals on Olympus is stalemate friendly. But the real issue is and always has been the fact that some people are excluded from being able to attack the capital.  If you want the capital to be extremely hard,  fine.   Make the container huge.  If that's not enough give the defenders a small bonus.  Let the people who helped fight all the way across the map help finish the job.  If they can only contribute 5 cp per fight, so be it. Smile

Soccer wouldn't be the world's most popular sport if only the opposing team's goalie could score.  

I completely agree. That is why we will allow players to attack both the borders and the capital even on Normal difficulty, but with premade AI army compositions of significant difficulty. In other words, players will be able to hit the borders and the capital on Normal difficulty but they will be facing 13+ AI units level. Battle rewards, CP/Influence and AI GS will depend on the difficulty chosen by the player, but the AI army composition will follow premade rules (eg. 13+ AI units level)

This way, all players will be able to hit the borders and the Capital, so we are not forbidding them to do so, but on the other hand they will have to face a foe (army) similar to an end game situation (boss fight).

I like this very much. However, I have to ask about cooperatives... because I think the imbalance will still exist there. Is there any plan to introduce a more difficulty cooperative mode that allows for attacks on the Capital and bordering regions?

---

Now, as to the point of this thread:

If no new traffic is coming.........merge
If traffic is coming...............don't merge

If merge: 1. Merge into a new map, a map that incorporates the good of both servers; 2. No character reset, progress carries over; 3. Get a winner/loser on Olympus first, expedite if necessary.

Honestly, it sounds like these 'Publishers' screwed you big time RuneSlayer.

By creating two worlds without the new influx of players, you've split the player base, and caused two desolate servers.

Something needs to be done to bring them back together if possible, or join them in some way.

I do agree with peoples concerns regarding end-game stalemates.

Erevos was won by the Light primarily because Dark stopped fighting on the capital. In fact I had direct conversations with Dark leaders on the very topic. We all just wanted it to end, and so it did.

I totally agree that fighting on the final hexes should be harder, but the current Insane & Suicide only system is not the way to do it. There needs to be another way. I don't have any brilliant ideas right now, but I think a few others have already voiced some great ones.

You obviously have a few things in mind and others in the pipe-line. I look forward to seeing what you have planned.

ysosad wrote:

Basically, could you outline what the community needs to do to prove that this is what we want?

I believe a poll is a good start and then if the majority of the most powerful guilds agree on something, we will not find us against that decision. You decide people...never forget that..

ysosad wrote:

Is there any plan to introduce a more difficulty cooperative mode that allows for attacks on the Capital and bordering regions?

Possible...not a quick thingie though.

XViiper wrote:

Honestly, it sounds like these 'Publishers' screwed you big time RuneSlayer.

That is exactly how we feel XViper. This is why I have made some decisions. We want to not depend on publishers, so we can do things as they should be done. Give us some time, and I can personally guarantee you that we will surprise you. If you like BC as it is, then imagine BC x 4... Unfortunately I cannot say more things about it...

I appreciate you taking the time again to explain RuneSlayer. I will start a thread on this site to ask those of the light side if they want to continue the fight on Olympus and wait for said changes, or something else.

Either way thank you again for taking the time to explain it, again. If I did not care about the game I would not bother.

ST

soulthief wrote:

If I did not care about the game I would not bother.

This goes both ways soulthief.

RuneSlayer wrote:

I completely agree. That is why we will allow players to attack both the borders and the capital even on Normal difficulty, but with premade AI army compositions of significant difficulty. In other words, players will be able to hit the borders and the capital on Normal difficulty but they will be facing 13+ AI units level. Battle rewards, CP/Influence and AI GS will depend on the difficulty chosen by the player, but the AI army composition will follow premade rules (eg. 13+ AI units level)

This way, all players will be able to hit the borders and the Capital, so we are not forbidding them to do so, but on the other hand they will have to face a foe (army) similar to an end game situation (boss fight).

IMO the big frustration from people has been that there has not been any answer, I realise you have been away, which of course has not helped, so it is good to now hear the plans you have.
It sounds like it will be quite tough, but we shall see....the one question I have is will this include dark side being able to do coops in these areas?

clambam wrote:

It sounds like it will be quite tough, but we shall see....the one question I have is will this include dark side being able to do coops in these areas?

We may be able to add a different COOP difficulty for the borders and the Capital, so as to enable COOP and simulate the difficulty of an End Game battle...

RuneSlayer wrote:

clambam wrote:

It sounds like it will be quite tough, but we shall see....the one question I have is will this include dark side being able to do coops in these areas?

We may be able to add a different COOP difficulty for the borders and the Capital, so as to enable COOP and simulate the difficulty of an End Game battle...

That would be much appreciated, we would definitely need it to have a chance with the extra difficulty

At this point i'm not sure how they would merge servers. Gear is different already. Buildings and technology prices would be off. First off I think that now both sides can assault the capital and it's regions is great. Second off I refuse to just lay over and die for the darkside to take the capital. You darkies will have to earn that win. Soulthief you can't expect all these changes to happen so quickly. I don't know much about it but common sense tells me that coding for these games is neither easy nor quick and seems like bugs like to pop up everywhere. But I agree with Ysosad. If their is going to be a noob swarm then don't merge. If there is not then some sort of solution needs to be figured out.

However I wanted to add a solution for gear if the two servers were ever merged. If you have a godlike weapon(BC2) with +25 melee and +24 strength. the 25 melee is 100% out of 25. So it would then be a +30 melee weapon in BC1. 24 strength is 96% of 25. So then it would be 28.8 out of 30 on Olympus. I think it should be rounded up in that case to 29. As for building and technology prices perhaps meet in the middle or defer to the lower Everos prices. I think the current building/technology prices on Olympus discourage new players.

ysosad wrote:

If merge: 1. Merge into a new map, a map that incorporates the good of both servers; 2. No character reset, progress carries over; 3. Get a winner/loser on Olympus first, expedite if necessary.

Nice you think so...  but those of us who have been sweating blood on Everos since our reset may have a different idea of where the merge should go especially considering we're the substantial majority of the player base.

Just a thought,

Dren

I have advocated a re-merging of the servers pretty much since the split, I still believe that spreading out the player base without the influx was a mistake. Granted, its not on the developers in this case, but when the publishers failed to honor their end of the deal, the servers should have been re-merged to prevent atrophy.

In my own opinion, there should be one game server that rotates map worlds each time a capital falls. This keeps a large base of active members while at the same time allowing for increased diversity in strategies based on the two worlds. This opens up possibilities like special event maps, or the 3-way split for an eventual 3rd faction with minimal disruption from switching to new maps. A new map at the end of a capital falling would add a level of excitement, especially if other layouts could be introduced expanding the lore and scope of BC.