• Good day, Stranger! — Are you new to our forums?

    Have I seen you here before? To participate in or to create forum discussions, you will need your own forum account. Register your account here!

Your worlds experience

svegan

Adventurer
Hi

I start this Thread so players can compare different worlds.
If you play only on one world explain your experience there so other players can compare them.
Fell free to explain your world, fellowship and gameplay.

My ingame nick is the same: svegan
l play on EN1; EN2, EN3
I'm new player.I started the game 2017 but i didn't play until 1 month ago when I freed some time and decided to check this game again so I can't say much about before but now I'm playing on all 3 worlds and for now I'm visiting them at least twice a day :)

On all 3 world I'm in productive fellowships and there are a lot of players helping me so i can grow faster.
On EN1 and EN2 I'm in more active fellowships,but on EN3 I'm in more passive fellowship.
EN3 is the last and players have lot less points. From your experience do you think this is about the world or the fellowship ?
 
EN3 is the 3rd world. it was created long after the other 2 to sell more diamonds to players who have already built 2 cities and were nuts enough to start a 3rd city to manage. it was also created to reduce the playing experience in the other 2 worlds by reducing the number of new players that join each of the 2 already existing worlds. there might be more people leaving the first 2 worlds than the number of new players who start new cities there by now. a 4th world would create a game that would be watered down, full of vacant neighborhoods, and fellowships that will never have 25 members.

it's too bad it's too late to get rid of EN3. isn't having 1 human and 1 elven city enough for most people? some people probably feel like EN3 is easier, since the competition is weaker there. i'm sure some people feel better about being ranked more highly there since they are bigger fish in a smaller pond there. i don't play in EN3. but i have seen this in the difference between EN 1 and EN 2. it's much easier to do better globally in tournaments and have a better city ranking because of the weaker competition in EN2. i'm sure the competition level in EN3 is pathetically weak.
 

Pauly7

Shaman
it was also created to reduce the playing experience in the other 2 worlds by reducing the number of new players that join each of the 2 already existing worlds. there might be more people leaving the first 2 worlds than the number of new players who start new cities there by now. a 4th world would create a game that would be watered down, full of vacant neighborhoods, and fellowships that will never have 25 members.
Surely.... and this is just off the top of my head.... if all the players in any one of the game worlds were arranged together efficiently, then it shouldn't matter how many people are playing on the server... unless it's so few that a lot of people are exploring out of the 'cluster' and into vacant areas.
 
it would be nice if they arranged the cities that were active into better neighborhoods.
it is easier to get tournament ranking points in EN2 than EN1. i'm sure competition for those in felon-whatever is pretty weak and it wouldn't be too hard for a top 10 to top 50 finish in weekly tournaments.
my city in EN2 was ranked higher even when it had less ranking points because there are less higher level cities in that world. there are less higher level cities in EN 2 and EN3 and they are going to have a harder time getting tier 4 and tier 5 trades. i'll bet people from EN2 and EN3 were the ones complaining the most in the thread titled "lack of tier 4 goods"
 

svegan

Adventurer
On EN3 my fellowship is 20th and on en1 and 2 they are 50+ but they are similar in points....
on EN1and 2 we are geting 8-10 chest on EN3 we get 5 chests with minimal involvement
All stronger players have 700% boost and a lot of shards so they don't fight much in tournaments.... not even the easy ones
EN1 and EN2 are more tounament oriented and they have a lot KP swap treads.

Also on EN1 and EN2 i have a lot empty slots around me... there are gold mines and players only with Main hall

On EN3 there a lot of stronger players and not even one gold mine :)
 
Last edited:

SoggyShorts

Sorcerer
All stronger players have 700% boost and a lot of shards so they don't fight much in tournaments.... not even the easy ones
Low level players do the tournament for the relics, higher chapter players do it for the KP.
a 4th world would create a game that would be watered down, full of vacant neighborhoods, and fellowships that will never have 25 members.
Like when US servers added US6/7 and funneled new players into those? Yep. New players where frustrated because they had no active neighbors turning them into 1-day quitters who in turn frustrated other new players etc. Meanwhile, as players slowly moved on from the game for various reasons on the older servers those suffered as well.

The worst part is that a server merge wouldn't even solve anything. Players are very resistant to changing fellowships so instead of having 300 fellowships with ~16 players in each you'd just end up having 600 FS with 16 members in each. The importance of even being in a 25 member FS just took a major hit with the new RR spell, so I guess inno is coming at it from the other side: instead of encouraging players to form strong 25-player teams, make teams matter less.:(
 

Pauly7

Shaman
Just to throw this into the ring - I have no frame of reference to personally confirm or deny this, but I've heard a lot of people say that it's much more difficult to recruit good fellows on EN1 than it is on the other two.
 

svegan

Adventurer
Low level players do the tournament for the relics, higher chapter players do it for the KP.
Here higher chapter players instead of catering stronger opponents in tournaments they cater provinces and get same amount of KPs + they get expansions from it
 

Pauly7

Shaman
Here higher chapter players instead of catering stronger opponents in tournaments they cater provinces and get same amount of KPs + they get expansions from it
I'm not sure about that. One good tournament can be worth a total of nearly 300KP to any given player.
 

svegan

Adventurer
In tournaments 10 chests with 10 provinces on lvl 6 give you max 215 KPs
If you use the resources for scouted provinces you will get half of that...i think expansions worth a lot more than any KPs and rewards you'll get from tournaments :)

I think the best combo in tournamet is to get 20 players with 1250 points you can get them with minimum units lost and cater.

You get 8 chests that is 85 KPs+ 50KP from provinces + other rewards
 
Last edited:

shadowblack

Necromancer
In tournaments 10 chests with 10 provinces on lvl 6 give you max 215 KPs
If you use the resources for scouted provinces you will get half of that...i think expansions worth a lot more than any KPs and rewards you'll get from tournaments :)
Don't forget there's a limited number of expansions you can get from the World Map. Sooner or later everyone will reach that number.
 

SoggyShorts

Sorcerer
@svegan
Instead of doing 10 provinces 6 times, I and others like me do provinces 1-5@ 5 times, and provinces 6-30 2 times for about 150 KP.
My scouts take 60 hours which means I can clear fewer than 3 world map province per week which would be 24 KP.
The tournament also gives an additional 135KP from FS chests.
285>24 :p

"advanced" players have scout times of around 48h or more. A week has 168 hours, so the max is 3.5 world map provinces for 28 KP.

It's also not a matter of this OR that. Players that I know who are past the orcs chapter scout and clear the map 24/7 AND do the tournament.
 

Pauly7

Shaman
In tournaments 10 chests with 10 provinces on lvl 6 give you max 215 KPs
If you use the resources for scouted provinces you will get half of that...i think expansions worth a lot more than any KPs and rewards you'll get from tournaments :)
I'm not sure about your maths, but also I'm not classing 10 provinces as a good tournament. Completing at least 5 rounds of 20 provinces is hugely more KP than 10, not to mention all the bonuses with 10 chests.

Completing provinces on the world map nets you 8KP per province. I don't understand how that can even compare on KP, aside from the factors of how slow the scouting is and the limitations to exploring as previously mentioned.
 

svegan

Adventurer
@SoggyShorts
My scout time is 4h so I didnt count on that it at all ...I have more provinces scouted than i have resources to finish them so for me is cheaper to go with the scouted one than to go with more than 1600 points per tournament.

I go for provinces 1-8@5 times and 9-10 @3 that is 1626 points , if everyone do the same 25 players that is 10 chests with minimal resources and units lost.

There are players with +200 000points and get only 300 from tournaments...i was thinking that they are going for the scouted ones but as you point out scouting time is around 48h for them so that have no logic ...

@Pauly7
The math is correct I checked it with Tournament Rewards calculator
I made example with 10 provinces, they are enough for getting 10 chests, if you like more you can do them... I like to find best way to get max. KPs with minimum amount of goods and units
 

Pauly7

Shaman
I made example with 10 provinces, they are enough for getting 10 chests, if you like more you can do them... I like to find best way to get max. KPs with minimum amount of goods and units
It's not the best way to get max KPs. Doing 20 provinces would get you an extra 110KP.... and compared to ratio of goods and troops used you would use far less than clearing 14 provinces on the world map.
 

SoggyShorts

Sorcerer
There are players with +200 000points and get only 300 from tournaments...i was thinking that they are going for the scouted ones but as you point out scouting time is around 48h for them so that have no logic ...
Laziness is why they get 300 points. You forgot about laziness. :p

For your level of tournament, you could get more KP if you did
1-5@5
6@3
7@2
8@1
9@3
10-14@2
Should cost about the same or less in goods/troops.
 
I side with EN3
It was the first server I ever joined, and my city is in a good neighborhood full of active players.
I am in a great 25 member fellowship, that strives to get ten chests occasionally.

Without Felyndral it would just be too difficult for lower level players to build cities.
:steel::scroll::elixir:
 
because the 3rd world is getting more new players who chose to play in a less competitive world.
because they never clean up and move dead cities in EN 1 and 2. EN3 hasn't had enough time to be as much of a mess as EN1 and 2.
if the current trend continues, EN3 will lose both older players and its share of new cities when they start EN4.
 

SoggyShorts

Sorcerer
The statement was that without E3 it would be harder for newer players to build cities, and I still don't understand why.
Isn't it much easier to grow in an environment where established players can help you?
And spreading active players across 3 servers instead of 2 can't possibly be a good thing for helping smaller players grow.

The lack of cleanup on the world map applies to all worlds, and the easy fix on the player side is to join a FS. Basically, ignore your neighbors except as a source of coins.