EA Forums - Banner

more servers?! any changes?

Kinshasa551
69 posts Member
edited November 22
@EE_Elephterion

there are many questions here about new servers + changes to the game.
I don´t see one answer...

Therefore once again:

1. do you see that because of the updates/changes there is almost no more pvp on every server?
do you agree that this is bad for the game in general? Are there any changes to that in the near future?

2. because of the "alt-situation" ( i agree you can´t do anything against it) we def. need more servers at the same time so that all the "fair-players" don´t have to deal with the project guys . Do you agree to that? Will there more new servers?

3. will there be new servers the next weeks + while project is playing the WCS or do all the other guys have to wait month before they can play again?

Replies

  • We will start worlds on a regular basis parallel to WCS, that has always been the case.
    We are open to feedback and discussion what can be done to incentivise PVP again, without rolling back the various fixes to exploits and other loopholes.
    Envision Entertainment Community Liaison
  • chadthurston
    225 posts Member
    edited November 23
    delete
    Post edited by chadthurston on
  • Kinshasa551
    69 posts Member
    edited November 23
    PVP

    1. increase the pvp loot (ofc not to the level years ago) - most important aspect

    2. reduce the rep-time for pvp - for example 50% less reptime needed for pvp in comparison to base shooting (factory max. rep time 3h -> max reptime factory for pvp 1,50)...something like that

    3. reduce the bubble time at the beginning to a few hours - so players can start pvp earlier- after 7 days its almost impossible

    GENERAL

    1. reduce the impact of pois - own base production because of good shooting should have some value

    2.to continue starting new worlds on your regular basis is the wrong way! There have to be more new servers on a shorter period. There are so many worlds already finished (Tib 50,51,53 - don´t know all the others in detail) + because of the project guys playing the WCS most of the other guys immediately would start new worlds.so why waiting?
  • Agree with above
    First well done to Project (TTD) for there organization

    But it is now killing servers,
    Many now, who are not in one of the Project alliances, no longer finance, just play with 100cp and 12 hours repair, for fun of playing, what is considered a dead server. 47,49,51 and now 53

    So for Mr Average player the comments above make 100% sense
    so come on Time between Dropping new worlds, is not written in stone. or is it !!!!
  • gamerdruid
    4333 posts Moderator
    We've been told in the past that new servers come when the previous one is nearly full - but even that isn't a strict rule.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • gamerdruid wrote: »
    We've been told in the past that new servers come when the previous one is nearly full - but even that isn't a strict rule.

    everybody knows that - you don ´t have to repeat it again and again.

    We try to explain why this „rule“ should be changed!

  • gamerdruid
    4333 posts Moderator
    edited November 23
    gamerdruid wrote: »
    We've been told in the past that new servers come when the previous one is nearly full - but even that isn't a strict rule.

    everybody knows that - you don ´t have to repeat it again and again.

    We try to explain why this „rule“ should be changed!
    You know that but I'm not sure 'everybody' does!
    My comment was in direct response to the this question posed:
    Agree with above
    so come on Time between Dropping new worlds, is not written in stone. or is it !!!!
    Obviously you didn't read or understand that!

    As for why the rule should or shouldn't be changed. I personally think a lot more worlds could be launched, more special worlds with unusual settings as Firestorm worlds, a Vet world and a number of simultaneously launched worlds with limited numbers of places, maybe even as small as 2000, but with large world settings. Even more level 80 worlds, maybe with a start level of 30 as they have done in the past on the PTE would prove interesting.

    However, I don't have a voice in the discussions that take place and don't know the contents of the contract between EA and Envision in any respect so can't predict or change anything any more than the rest of the people posting here!

    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • JabbaTheHutt1000
    17 posts Member
    edited November 25
    Not sure how many posts i´ve seen the last years´s about required changes to the game. Ofc there have been some small updates - but thats nothing. Its a waste of time to write anything because Envision is not willing to put any intense work into that game. Finally you have to accept the game is the way it is. If you´re bored of that play look for a different game. Don´t hope for changes - it will not happen.

  • Not sure how many posts i´ve seen the last years´s about required changes to the game. Ofc there have been some small updates - but thats nothing. Its a waste of time to write anything because Envision is not willing to put any intense work into that game. Finally you have to accept the game is the way it is. If you´re bored of that play look for a different game. Don´t hope for changes - it will not happen.

    You´re right.
    "We are open to feedback and discussion what can be done to incentivise PVP again"

    Not a single answer. I don´t care about that game any longer.



  • приравняйте ремонт к очкам атаки в пвп и все будет норм я про разницу в затратах
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.