United States Battlegroups combined for 'Winter's Gift' Campaign
-
- Caenarys
- Archmage
I agree with you, Godu, about having a decent opportunity to help new players. You need a smaller BG to do this in team chat. No doubt about it.
One could, however, just keep posting a link to some forum here, for new players to read. ?
One could, however, just keep posting a link to some forum here, for new players to read. ?
-
- Caenarys
- Archmage
I like Nofreemilk's idea about alternating BG groups...
in the US, for example, keeping State/Local areas, then,
switching to "first come, first serve" every third or every other.
I actually don't mind the switching, always having different people in a BG.
I just want them to be smaller. Team Chat is worthless with 1000 people.
500 seems difficult to manage, really, when constantly changing the
interactions.
in the US, for example, keeping State/Local areas, then,
switching to "first come, first serve" every third or every other.
I actually don't mind the switching, always having different people in a BG.
I just want them to be smaller. Team Chat is worthless with 1000 people.
500 seems difficult to manage, really, when constantly changing the
interactions.
-
- Khamos
- Staff
LadyEllesmere
Yes I have horrible grammar, lol.
And I am enjoying this new bg so far, due to MY OlD BG being apart of it.
It's comforting to see old faces. I am being deadly honest with this, an I will quit if this is a permeant thing.
Regional is a hell of a lot better then this cluster f***
plus it would add in new faces along with old ones.
Just some ideas u may want to consider sc.
Edited by LadyEllesmere (today 05:46:47)
The Regional battlegroups is one of the options we have previously considered as many of you have seen here on the Forums. And it is one option that is still on the table. As said this week's battlegroups are something we wanted to try out - especially give all US players an equal opportunity to play the game as a part of a larger battlegroup.
There are a lot of aspects to consider, both community and gameplay wise. We have read a lot of your feedback and carefully monitored gameplay during this week. This gives us good basis to decide how to go forward next week.
Thank you once again for all the feedback you have given, sharing both your positive and negative experiences regarding the change!
Edited by Khamos (Nov. 25, 2011 13:03:44)
-
- LadyEllesmere
- Scholar
I really hope u guys are, cuz otherwise. You will lose over half ur mages from this.
-
- Turrean
- Visionary
When I log in, how do I know what battlegroup I've been assigned to? I couldn't remember the top scorer from my battlegroup for round one, so I can't even tell what group I'm in.
-
- Mordican
- Awakened
I absolutely love this idea. It seems necessary after playing in the KY bg. The player base is extremely small here, as a result, I've seen so many people quit because of this deficiency.
I hope the change isn't reverted; if so, I severely hope it's considered to group state bg's together.
It's childish to demand changes with the ultimatum of quitting if they don't get implemented; if you truly like the game, you'll keep playing. Many people are simply complaining in order to have their way.
The Ky bg is in a severe decline and is losing the player base as a result. Thanks for all the work that has been put into this game!
I hope the change isn't reverted; if so, I severely hope it's considered to group state bg's together.
It's childish to demand changes with the ultimatum of quitting if they don't get implemented; if you truly like the game, you'll keep playing. Many people are simply complaining in order to have their way.
The Ky bg is in a severe decline and is losing the player base as a result. Thanks for all the work that has been put into this game!
-
- Treia
- Master
US Wide BG.. no its just horrible. i dont even bother playing, along with most of the NJ BG that i know of. people gave up. whats the point. Now if your state has very little members then Yes i do agree that your state should be implemented into a larger BG but as this...what ever this is.... stands, hell no. horrible idea. also when people say they will quit its because what other reason is there to stay. whats the point of gaining anything with out the moral support of your friends. ive met so far 2 people in the "super" BG, one who was treated horribly and another who happened to know another friend from NJ. Im here for the friendships i made, and giving moral support to my NJ teams then looking up how we scored with the rest of the worlds BGs and work harder. but if they keep this crap, Yes I AM LEAVING there is always facebook and i can meet them there and find some other game that we might all be able to enjoy together. am already looking around hoping they might enjoy it.
PS: its kinda sad to see how no one is really playing. when my statuses have pretty much stopped....still have some from 8 hours ago with responses as early as 7...yep...so many people playing
PS: its kinda sad to see how no one is really playing. when my statuses have pretty much stopped....still have some from 8 hours ago with responses as early as 7...yep...so many people playing
Edited by Treia (Nov. 25, 2011 15:15:35)
-
- sheepman
- Archmage
I hope there can be a compromise. NYBG and NJBG and I know many others are suffering from this change. Please solve the problem of small states by merging them with neighboring states: it would maintain the regional importance of shadow cities gameplay while keeping player pools large enough.
-
- Turrean
- Visionary
It's not even just missing my old companions. It's missing the loyal opposition, too. Even if Comicy wiped me out in battle (the usual result) there was always the chance I might get him next time round. Now, I'll never know who my team will be (currently, I'm not in the same battlegroup as my husband or kids!) let alone who I'll be fighting.
-
- ffg
- Archmage
Mordican
It's childish to demand changes with the ultimatum of quitting if they don't get implemented; if you truly like the game, you'll keep playing. Many people are simply complaining in order to have their way.
The Ky bg is in a severe decline and is losing the player base as a result. Thanks for all the work that has been put into this game!
Is it childish to ask that gamebreaking changes be _reverted_ in BGs that were perfectly fine with the previous split? "if you're having underpopulation problems I feel bad for you son."
Am I childish to ask that my MI BG not be broken, needs of the many / needs of the few-style?
Am I childish to state that "not fun game is not fun"?