I have been playing this game for 3 years and I have seen clans stop playing and have seen some with 98 weeks inactive. If you want to make this game fun remove the inactive users so that people can grow more within the kingdom without having to move to another kingdom to grow.
This will also shake up the power structure of some of the kingdoms.
Alistar Black said:
I have been playing this game for 3 years and I have seen clans stop playing and have seen some with 98 weeks inactive. If you want to make this game fun remove the inactive users so that people can grow more within the kingdom without having to move to another kingdom to grow.
This will also shake up the power structure of some of the kingdoms.
That's a very good idea. I got the same opinion to this topic. When Plarium don't want to delete the players, then Plarium should automatically deactivate this players accounts after about a year of inactivity I would say.
Another idea of me is that there should be something like a "holiday-mode", to deactivate the game account when you ain't able to play it (of circumstances).
PAGATHEUS
I see you have answered Alistar Black here, as well as has having started your own thread with multiple suggestions.I will respond there.
Alistar Black said:
I have been playing this game for 3 years and I have seen clans stop playing and have seen some with 98 weeks inactive. If you want to make this game fun remove the inactive users so that people can grow more within the kingdom without having to move to another kingdom to grow.
This will also shake up the power structure of some of the kingdoms.
First anyone starting in a new kingdom, is unlikely to see players 98 weeks inactive there.but yes after a short time in inter kingdom battles, and after three years in the same kingdom.
Having inactive towns in the kingdom doesn't prevent a player from growing, unless he means in respect to influence ,gained by fighting live players , moving to another kingdom where there are more live players isn't going to help either unless you are able to win more battles, which can only come from hitting un-shielded towns or having successful tile hits, but is this going to happen easily? I think not.
I would ask Alistar exactly how does he envisage this changing the power structure.
How about, for starters, sending towns below level 6 that have been inactive for more than ONE WEEK, clan or not, to their own little squatters kingdom without events where people who create alts for underhanded gameplay can sit quietly in peace with those who are truly inactive. That would solve the "sleeper account" issue as well as the clutter. If/When they return to the game, they can use the novice relocation to join the kingdom of their choosing and won't be able to affect active or 'soon to be active' events.
Opinions?It would be nice if someone gave a really good reason for the need to eliminate the inactive players towns.
I suspect that one sleeper kingdom/server, wouldn't be enough, and even if it was, it would be a waste of it.
Most owners, if indeed any would need the novice jump, and it would have long expired,they only last 2 weeks now.xyz said:
It would be nice if someone gave a really good reason for the need to eliminate the inactive players towns.
I suspect that one sleeper kingdom/server, would be enough, and even if it was, it would be a waste of it.
Most owners, if indeed any would need the novice jump, and it would have long expired,they only last 2 weeks now.
If they remain in the active kingdom they wouldn't need the novice relo anyway. I've run into several people that make a point of setting up an account in EVERY SINGLE ACTIVE STINKING KINGDOM.. yes, I mean HUNDREDS OF ACCOUNTS each... that they use for the purpose of sabotaging KvK & CvC events. By no means have I met even 1% of everyone in the game so for me to have met more than one of these sorry sacks means that the problem must be more common than most people, and plarium, recognize.
So, it wouldn't be a waste to send these potential cheaters to an idle kingdom and allow them a new novice item to relocate upon return because it would still stop them from affecting those events. No one is going to check that many accounts often enough to keep them active, the problem is in fact solvable with Plarium's forceful attention to inactive towns. ;)
That would be a fairly good reason to get rid of the inactive tiles, except if they are doing as you suggested, which I can quite believe that they are,then they are not really inactive, just dormant.
Not that I wouldn't agree with you that its a form of manipulation, of which I too have seen many other examples,including those operated by players who are currently active.
For instance the recently much criticised pioneer achievement.
The building of extra strongholds, which are in effect inactive too, are also a form of this, and also a detriment to kingdom influence just as much as really inactive towns, and those quasi inactive,because you can really only run one town effectively at a time.
I know because I played game where you had more than one centre of operations, and I have an account in another kingdom.
1LONEWOLF3...
ABSOLUTELY!!!
PLARIUM NEEDS TO STOP USING DERELICT TOWNS TO MAKE THE GAME SEEM BIGGER THAN IT IS!!
IT IS BIG, BUT NOT 10+MILLION ACTIVE.
THEY SHOULD SEND AN EMAIL NOTICE AFTER 3 MONTHS OF UN-SHIELDED INACTIVITY,
NO MATTER WHAT LEVEL THE TOWN IS, AS IT HAS CLEARLY BEEN ABANDONED.
AND INFORM THEM THAT IN 15 DAYS THEIR TOWN WILL BE PERMANENTLY
DELETED IF THEY DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.
PLARIUM HAS ALL PLAYERS EMAILS SO THERE IS NO REAL REASON
FOR THIS NOT TO BE IN PLACE ALREADY.
THEY ARE LITERALLY AN EYESORE, LITTER, AND A HUGE LAG FOR THE SYSTEM.
PLARIUM CAN SAY THEY HAVE 10M+DOWNLOADS, (WHICH IS TRUE) AND 1M+ ACTIVE DAILY USERS, WHICH IS TRUE.
BUT RIGHT THERE ON THE DOWNLOAD PAGE IS THE OBVIOUS PROOF OF WHAT WE ARE SAYING...
9 MILLION DERELICT TOWNS!!
JUST LOOK AT THE GREEN DOT ON THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE...
7+ MILLION REGISTERED USERS... HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE NOW OWNERS
OF DERELICT TOWNS?
THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND HOW UGLY AND A MESS IT LOOKS LIKE, AND IT IS A HORRIBLE
EYE STRAIN TRYING TO LOOK FOR THINGS ON THE MAP.
I assume those dead cities will also blow up the server resources needed, absolutely without any benefit for Plarium. But this aspect is their problem. It really doesn´t make any sense to me to see players with a lvl 1 city, who haven´t been online since about 180 weeks.
Btw, as far as I remember, it was announced that dead cities blocking corrdinates for Pioneer achievement wpuld be handled appropriately by Plarium. As I see, they are still blocking those locations, making it impossible for new players to get this achievement. Many cities on those locations were just founded to block these coordinates. That´s all tey do. Not very fair for newcomers who could be on their way to even paying players, if they didn´t lose any fun playing the game by being handicapped in this way.
marauder's post explains why plarium retain all the dead towns; they wish to pretend (in common with all other mmorpg proprietors) that there are millions of people playing their game. The only shred of credibility to sustain this fantasy is the number of accounts opened. Of course all the world knows that the vast majority of the accounts are inactive so the device fails. But all the proprietors persist in it.
As player who joined this year, it looks like a dead game when you see all these deserted towns. Who wants to spend time or money on a dead game? Dead towns lead to more dead towns, decay brings more decay.
I would suggest that after 6 weeks after last login (or shield end), town simply dissapear from the map. If the user re-apear, he could be promted to place his town at a vacant spot.
What is the good reason to keep ghost towns?
Unless things are different now ,for new starters in new kingdoms, I think your reasoning behind dead towns creating more and more of them is untrue.
Players leave , because they realise what the game is all about.
If events follow the same pattern as they did when I started, then most of the players give up playing as soon as they are attacked continuously after the loss of the first free shield, or constantly being tile hit, and most are gone by the first or second week of the kingdom opening.
Players have suggested the removal of inactive players towns many times, and the company seems to have little interest in obliging the request, as stated above recently, they probably have what they believe is a sound reason for keeping them.
You asked
'What is the good reason to keep ghost towns? '
Many players use them as a source of free resources.
As I have asked before..... What is a good reason for getting rid of them?
If they did remove these towns, would you be complaing there is no one around?
Are you really asking that everyone should be playing so you can attack , either their towns or armies yielding from the tiles?
