Starting a server very late

  • Just for fun, I decided to start a server already at the WW stage with no intention of staying long. Sure enough I was landed with a 16 pop king. I think that anyone who joins and only stays long enough in the first session to get to 16 pop should not ever be a king. The other governor's pop is 91, and mine after an hour is 61. There are 2 oases inside our kingdom. One has 141 snakes and 268 boars, and the other has 173 rats, 98 boars and 148 wolves. My suggestions are that everyone joins as a governor, and only those growing at a reasonable rate are offered the chance to become kings, and the other that if a new kingdom is founded then the number of animals inside oases automatically drops to reflect the newness of the kingdom.

  • You wouldn't end up with enough kings that way, especially not at the start of the server. It would lead to people not being in any kingdom. Which I'm probably all for but the devs won't be :D

  • Hi,


    just a quick outlook: we will introduce a new feature (probably in the next big update), where you can choose as a governor to relocate to another king, if you're growing in the beginning way faster as your current king.


    And in general in the future we'll close the registration for a world, as soon the world wonders appears.


    regards,
    Sarge

  • I think the option to start as king should be limited from the outset. There are too many noobie players signing up as kings, and in turn players signing up as governors under those noobie kingdoms.


    Noobie players are great, but not as kings. Experience should be proven before you can choose king.


    Sorry that this post is slightly unrelated to your original thread. I didn't want to make a new one :P

  • Out of the 1600 people who played COM1, 300 players were left at the start of endgame. Let's say those 300 are all active and experienced...54 of them are currently kings. That leaves you with ~ 3% experienced, active kings per server, assuming others servers are like this one. Perhaps a bit more since I'm sure some active, experienced kings have already left the server. Even then: Obviously there are simply not enough active, experienced players (= veterans) left in the game to keep governors in the kingdom of a veteran king. So unless the devs are willing to forego part of their design philosophy in keeping people in kingdoms and allow players to remain kingdom-less, I don't think it's possible to keep most people outside of a noob-kingdom.

  • Out of the 1600 people who played COM1, 300 players were left at the start of endgame. Let's say those 300 are all active and experienced...54 of them are currently kings. That leaves you with ~ 3% experienced, active kings per server, assuming others servers are like this one. Perhaps a bit more since I'm sure some active, experienced kings have already left the server. Even then: Obviously there are simply not enough active, experienced players (= veterans) left in the game to keep governors in the kingdom of a veteran king. So unless the devs are willing to forego part of their design philosophy in keeping people in kingdoms and allow players to remain kingdom-less, I don't think it's possible to keep most people outside of a noob-kingdom.


    Your assumption that all 300 left at the endgame are experienced is almost certainly incorrect and that particularly applies to Kings. Noobs tend to choose King...


    The key problem with TK is that there are only 3 Kings per Alliance and with only 7 WWs I can't see more than 2-3 Alliances in contention in any endgame. That's 6-9 Kings max that matter. The other 45-48 are noobs, by definition... :D