Casual world?

Oggami Itto

Lochagos
This being new type of world, I’d like to anyone’s input on how it will be played, advantages, disadvantages, end game, and so on. For example, one can’t lose whatever city one chooses. So if you land a cs on an enemy island, and make it the protected city, no matter what your enemy does they can’t boot you from that spot.
It seems to me that this world is basically a training world for new players, and any veteran players should take the time to teach them to play. I remember a time when we would take time to train the noobs, now every alliance only thought is winning at all cost. No one wants to let noobs join their alliances because they only want veterans on their team. I learned to play in US21. All the vets had great input and even had mentoring. I think this world can open that opportunity to the vets that willing to teach. Anyway looking forward to hear more opinions.
 

Bloodtyrant

Philosopher
One thing that should be adjusted is the amount of time before ones inactivity causes them to ghost, which unless they are in VM should be like 7 days max.
 

MarkASp

Peltast
This will only be a training world if enough veterans join to guide the new players, and prevent bad habits. When I started in US21 (seems to be a popular starting world), I got into an alliance that taught a great deal about how to play, tolerated my mistakes, and broke bad habits before they got ingrained. What is the incentive for veteran players to play here? It will be more frustrating dealing with the attack limits than whatever benefits you get (other than maybe from gold trading).

The win at all cost mentality has developed, in my opinion, because we have too many groups with too much history with each other, and groups reliving slights from many worlds ago. There is no incentive to take new players, other than replacing players that have quit. No incentive to alliances to help develop new players. And the new domination end game discourages player development even more. The short duration and limited anchor points doesn't leave alliances any room for anyone but the veterans.

If the goal is to get new players, I'm not convinced that this will do it. Breaking the pay to play perception (real or imagined) will go a long way to encouraging new players. Seeing a player comment that they spent more than $200 to protect a city just highlights the pay to win aspect that has taken over the game. This probably means getting rid of insta-complete, dropping gold form many events, etc. Maybe looking at some worlds with limited gold. And giving alliances some incentive to take in new players (extra slots for new players?). Protecting a city can be problematic, especially as long as there are ways around multi-accounts. It has some benefits, but as has been pointed out, it can also be exploited.

So, this is an interesting attempt, but doesn't do much to bring in, and help integrate new players.
 
This will only be a training world if enough veterans join to guide the new players, and prevent bad habits.
Drasherk is planning on helping to train the noobs. If the training program takes off, I'd be willing to help train them and would try to get my crew, who are fresh off a win in Apollonia where they beat the world into submission, to help the noobs as well.
 

H3LL-Hunter

Taxiarch
There is no endgame at all right now.

As for the 20% point difference, I passed on an idea to @Ryvirath about relating the 20% to cities as well so that early game you can still attack people. Not being able to hit someone over a 500 point difference is painful and every vet knows it.
All in all the idea is terrible. Having a city that cannot be conquered or even stone-hailed should be more than enough....this world barely has 300 active players in it as of this very moment and that is absolutely pitiful.
 

Bloodtyrant

Philosopher
Well finally took the time to read the wiki on Casual Worlds and I must say I quite like it. The only thing I would change is the amount of time that inactivity leads to ghosting and an eventual anchor shows up. I think 7 days should be the minimum amount to ghost and perhaps 3 days more and then an anchor should show up. So 10 days in total.
 

cthulhubryan

Newcomer
Is there a reason that there are no anchor points on islands with villages? Is this another move to get me to spend more money?
 

MarkASp

Peltast
Sounds like they are using the domination settings where an anchor point was only opened when a new player started, so there were very few anchors not on rocks. Previously, many more were generally available, at least in the generally active areas, at least opening all anchors on most islands.

It doesn't make much sense to have very few anchor points when everyone's home city is safe. The only way to expand will be onto rocks, or wait for people to ghost.
 

drasherk

Citizen
Drasherk is planning on helping to train the noobs. If the training program takes off, I'd be willing to help train them and would try to get my crew, who are fresh off a win in Apollonia where they beat the world into submission, to help the noobs as well.
tis true. want to train them on how to do ops with the help of experienced players- they run ops on us for BP, then give us feedback, and do the same when we run ops on them. City Builds for different nukes, etc. So, if you know any baby greps, send them my way.
 

Oggami Itto

Lochagos
This may be called a casual world, but after looking through the grepolisscore ranking, there is a lot of top veterans here. Out of about 600, I rank at 282. a paltry score compared to players in so called training alliances. This is going to be interesting.