Improved Team Up! Event

I'm Namibia, and since all neighboring countries turned inactive, I will have to research aircraft carriers just to get my airforce somewhere. Sometimes being a frontline country has its benefits.

Oh yes, and because most players quit in the first few days, my most competent allies in every continent are under constant attack (except South America). Now that practically all the African mainland players are inactive (except me, Egypt, and Tanganyika) this is gonna drag on for quite a long time.

I think in the future, when allies go inactive, there should be an option to attack them and take their land, because for the first time, I feel having an airforce is useless.

in summary, this is what everyone has said:

the 50 v. 50 stinks because players go inactive making you the only one left with 20 other teammates to defeat the other side that apparently has all active players. so with that said, can we pick up the shattered pieces of your life and move on?

K.Rokossovski wrote:

Oh come on, please don't!! This event is bad enough as it is, with over 80% of players going inactive... fighting for provinces that subsequently get returned to inactive "team mates" is even more frustrating than it already is!

I enjoy this event.

For the two maps that I joined I picked a time that I was going to join, and invited a lot of people that I know to all join my team. So for each one we ended up with a robust blue team of around 15 people that I have played with before, and of course the random players that joined. It was a great experience in cooperation and communication.

I do need to remember to line up some competition for the red team next time to make it more interesting. All of you people who want to do an alliance vs alliance battle on a 100 player map this event is for you.

As always every event may not suit every player, but with a bit of planning ahead this event is great for a group of people to play together on a larger scale than is normally possible.

For the next time this comes around, would it be possible to put a level 1 airbase in every city? This certainly isn't enough in some places until planes get researched to a higher level, but it will improve the access across our teammates land. Certainly it would be ideal to have active teammates who follow directions, but that is harder to guarantee

As an alternative or perhaps an additional suggestion, having research unlocked through day 16 would allow longer ranges of planes, and access to higher speed units which are key when you have to defend an empire spanning an entire continent, or assist your allies on the other side of the world. Typically in a 100 player map it is day 16 to 24 when you start venturing to the far ends of the world, and you have high speed units, aircraft carriers that are capable of carrying Tactical bombers (day 24) and a well developed economy.

The other side of the coin here is that planes are largely useless in this event game. We are seeing various combinations of tanks and infantry units on a large scale, which is interesting. One of my games I am finally about to attack a target with my planes for the first time here on day 9, yet the game will be over by day 15 in my estimation. That means I was rather foolish to build planes and spend the time and resources getting airbases across the continent, just in time to watch my allies break through from the other side.

So if we skip the airbases in every city idea and simply unlock research to day 8, that will enable more variety on the battlefield. Tank destroyers, Medium tanks, Railroad guns, and Motorized infantry would be interesting to play with in a plane-free environment.

Another suggestion that might be worth discussing is country choice. I don't know how to solve the issue of the game starting when full if the last few people don't want the remaining few countries, but if that technical hurdle could be overcome I think that this would lead to fewer players who join, get a random country that they don't like, don't want, are scared of their neighbors, or aren't near their friends, and immediately archive the game never to log in again. Since there is no limit on joining any number of games (within reason of course, there is a hard limit of 50 games that anyone can be part of at any one time) there are players who will join several until they get a country that they like. This leads to a less fun experience for the active players when there is a high level of inactivity. (this suggestion also applies to the 73 player "all in" historical event)

I joined two 50v50 event maps and enjoyed both. Here is just my thoughts and comments based off my experiences. Of course these ideas may or may not be feasible:

As Vor said I strongly believe all players should start with ABs in cities so that planes can be used. If players are next to inactive players then planes very much become unusable or heavily one sided if one teams planes can reach but the others cannot and thus giving the more active team and even larger advantage.

Additionally, being able to attack inactive team mates would solve this issue and potentially limit the consequences of mass numbers of players leaving. Alternatively which I believe would be a better but more difficult solution and whether it is feasible Ido not know, but being able to "inherit" an inactive players land could very much solve this issue but could lead some players becoming unfairly powerful or unbalance the game. This could perhaps be done by having each province "revolt" to the player on the same team with the nearest capital. Furthermore, the troops in those provinces should join the player whom the province joined. Of course this may make the game unbalanced but could solve the issue of 10+ players leaving but would also make it that going inactive means being unable to rejoin the game - but personally do not wish for players who go inactive to remain on my team so do not think that much of an issue.

Another idea is to allow players to select the continent they join. Not the specific country but just the continent like how selecting a continent currently works but without being able to choose the specific nation. If players wish to play with friends or fellow alliance members or even to compete directly against another alliance, this could allow for that. Alternatively, perhaps some maps could allow this and others not.

However, this could lead to some maps being dominated even more by larger alliances. I know in one game I joined, we had at least one of our core members in each continent but one - which happened to be the only continent we lost and thus demonstrating that this could lead to further unbalance which is why perhaps some maps could be more solely focused on larger scaled alliance vs alliance or even a groups of alliances vs another groups of alliances in that alliances must "register" to play - I do not know.

I found the 50 vs 50 a very nice experience. It was something else than I'm used to. For the next event there should be considered to make sure that both teams are balanced with the level of experience. Another remark is that players turn AI fast at the start of the game or as soon as they see that their team will lose. It might be a good idea to set a minimum experience level 20 for example.

As this is a fast game and your enemy not close it's difficult to include an airforce. This way there's not a lot of troop variaty until day 8. It would be a good idea to have more access to more diverse troops from the start and buildings on level two.

attacker101 wrote:

I don't like how you start with war on all of the other team. you should start with peace