1. Games
  2. Login
  3. Register
  4. Support
  5. 23:10:23
  6. en

moonID.net - Please discuss stuff about moonID hereAnnouncements → KnightFight: Second Delay – INT7 Launch

cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 2:30 p.m.

Dear KnightFight Community,
First of all: our apologies!
Yes, it’s been too quiet on our side over the past days – mainly because we were still hoping to make it without another delay. Unfortunately, there’s no way around it: we need to ask you for two more weeks of patience before we can launch INT7.

Background

KnightFight is all about the battle system – but it’s not yet final.
The last two months have been intense: we thought we were done, then hit setbacks, then even had to restart parts of it. We’ve come a long way since, but there are still three edge cases where we need to define proper exceptions before we can go live.

Our Vision

Once those are solved, we’ll have a fully deterministic battle system – similar to classics like StarCraft – putting KnightFight back at the top of its genre.
On that foundation, we’re also preparing the largest marketing campaign in our history, to bring new life and energy into KnightFight and INT7.

The New Plan

In Germany we say: all good things come in threes
👉 September 12 = official launch of INT7.

As a thank you, and a little token of appreciation:

  • Everyone who has already created a character, and all new squires until 12.09, will receive 1,000 MoonCoins at launch.
  • If you’ve changed your mind, of course, we’ll refund any prior investment.

And one more thing: We didn’t just announce a new world – we also prepared a new design, which is being rolled out starting today.
Thank you for your understanding, patience, and trust. This time we’ll keep you updated more closely – and we can’t wait to open the gates of INT7 with you on September 12.

⚔️ Yours, the KnightFight Team

Show comments (1)
Trambus
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 3:25 p.m.

Are you kidding me?

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 3:53 p.m.

No, not kidding – totally understand it might sound frustrating after all this time. We’re serious about improving balance, even if it takes a few steps to get there.

GarlWar
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 3:18 p.m.
Edited by GarlWar Aug. 29, 2025, 3:19 p.m.

I read this post literally 1 minute after creating the thread. I really don't know what to say... ;)

Therefore, I have two questions and I'd appreciate your answer.

  1. Will there be any changes to weapons?

I've written many times about the absurd advantages of 2h knights 1 h knights. The reason for this is the complete lack of balance resulting from the damage and defense of various items.

  1. Will you remove the "minus X points to dexterity" penalty for two-handed weapons and replace the "-" with a "+"?

-> This penalty has no rational justification whatsoever. 2H players don't wear armor and shields because they are 2H players! This "minus" on 2h weapons eliminates the possibility of playing 2H + armor. Such a knight at higher levels has no chance against regular 2H or even a 1H.

-> We want to have reality choose in DIFFERENT types of knights. Currently, we only have two: 2H and 1H. We want a third type: 2H + armor. For this purpose it is necessary to remove the error in the form of subtracting dexterity for swords 2h

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 3:52 p.m.

Thanks a lot for putting the effort into laying this out so clearly.

Right now, the main focus of changes is not to alter the weapons themselves, but to increase the battle efficiency of 1H warriors, so they can keep up in the mid- and endgame. That way, we aim to make 1H a more competitive choice without taking away from 2H.

The point you raise about the dexterity penalty on 2H weapons and the idea of enabling a third build (2H + armor) is very interesting. That would open up more diversity in playstyles, which we agree makes KnightFight more fun.

We’ll take this input into the balancing discussions – can’t promise an immediate change here, but it’s definitely on the table for review.

⚔️ Thanks again for the detailed feedback – it really helps us refine the direction.

Show comments (4)
GarlWar
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 4:31 p.m.

Thank you for your answer. However, I have a question and would appreciate an honest answer.

-> What is the real reason for the imbalance between 2h/1h and 2h + armor?
-> Is this a very costly change for you financially (e.g., complex IT work), or is it a simple change that you don't intend to implement?

I'd like to know the real answer.

As players, we appreciate your willingness to make changes to the balance between 1h and 2h in the mid- and late-game. However, this isn't a complete solution, only a partial solution. The most interesting part is the beginning of the game, not the middle and end. Furthermore, the vast majority of players quit early in the game, after 2-3 months. Late-game changes don't make much sense, as most players have already finished the game.

Furthermore, what you're proposing isn't a real change, but only a superficial one. Balancing 1h and 2h won't be achieved without a weapon change. The only possible solution is to introduce zombies with very high durability and low damage into the battle server, which 1h players can easily defeat (for 3 experience points), but 2h players can't. This will even out the balance, as 1h players will advance several levels higher than 2h players and acquire better weapons. However, not everyone wants to play 10-12 hours a day. Secondly, 2h players will have no chance of achieving a high position in the higscore (I mean TOP 10 +).

I don't want to criticize you too harshly, but I in fact these won't really be any changes, just a repackaging. As many people have already written, as a gaming community, we value honesty and truth, even if it hurts. But none of us likes or wants to be misled or deceived.

UnderCloud
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 6:15 p.m.

But - dexterity in case of 2h weapons actually makes sense. It doesn't matter that you have no armor or shield, you are still wielding a huge, heavy sword, how should that increase your dexterity? You are using two hands to even use it, so it's not comfortable for sure. :) That should be the case only for 1h IMO, as they are light and easy to swing with, if we are trying to go with logic here.

Lila785667
avatar
Posted Aug. 30, 2025, 7:08 a.m.

So, historically speaking, knights wielding two-handed swords were not at a disadvantage — quite the opposite. With the advent of plate armor, they were so well protected and mobile that they could do without a shield. It was an advancement in the art of warfare. So much for logic. ;-D

But of course, you’re right that in a game this can’t be a factor, since it would make the whole game design absurd, where all knight types should have equal chances.

Twenry114
avatar
Posted Aug. 30, 2025, 11:54 a.m.
Edited by Twenry114 Aug. 30, 2025, noon

Well, Lila is 100% right! From a historical point of view, it was actually much easier to wield a sword with two hands than with one! For a very simple reason, basic physics: weight distribution. When a soldier fought with a shield and a one-handed sword, he held his sword with one hand, which meant that the entire weight of the sword (between 1.1 and 1.6 kg for the most common swords, with a length of between 70 and 90 centimeters) rested on the tip of his arm. With your arm outstretched, it ends up being very heavy, especially when you want to swing the sword around in all directions to hit your opponent!

On the other hand, with a two-handed sword, both hands are placed on the hilt, which allows the weight of the sword to be distributed much more evenly. And contrary to legend, a two-handed sword was not that heavy, weighing between 1.2 and 1.8 kg, rarely more! They were between 110 and 130 centimeters long (some flamberges could exceed this size, but they had a very specific use, often to unhorse a rider or protect against a cavalry charge, not really for hand-to-hand combat with another soldier). In reality, therefore, you are much more agile with a two-handed sword, as the weight is distributed over both hands and using both hands allows for a greater range of strokes and a much wider range of movements!
If only because with a two-handed sword, you can grasp the blade halfway down to guide the tip through the gaps in the plate armor of the knight opposite you.

Our vision has been greatly altered and distorted by historical inaccuracies in fiction, whether in TV series, films, or video games, which constantly present us with gleaming knights in heavy armor with iron shields and one-handed swords. In reality, this vision almost never existed. As Lila says, knights in plate armor very rarely carried shields, for the simple reason that plate armor was already more than sufficient protection. The shield was paired with a spear in the case of a knight on horseback, but very rarely with a sword. The shield was mainly reserved for the foot soldiers (the poorly armed and defended soldiers who made up the bulk of medieval armies) paired with a pole weapon, such as a spear or halberd. Those who had short swords, maces, and other short-range weapons often carried “rondache,” small shields that were much easier to handle than the large Norman shields used by the spear-armed shock troops.

So in reality, the historical reality was rather:

  • Heavy armor (late medieval plate armor) = two-handed sword
  • Light armor (chain mail, leather armor, or thick fabric) = sword (or mace) + round shield
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 4:48 p.m.

Thanks a lot for your honest feedback and the clear questions.

Why does the imbalance still exist?
It’s not about one single flaw, but about how several systems interact (stats, armor, progression). Small changes can easily create big side effects, so we have to move carefully.

Is it a financial issue?
Not really. The challenge is technical and mechanical. Any weapon/armor tweak can unbalance the economy, PvE, or PvP elsewhere.

Why focus more on mid/late-game?
Because that’s where balance differences affect rankings and competitive play most clearly. But you’re right: the early game is crucial since most players drop out within the first months. That’s something we also want to put more focus on.

Ideas like “durable zombies” for 1h players:
We must be careful not to create forced grinding or a one-way strategy, but the idea of using PvE mechanics to help balance progression is worth exploring further.

We don’t want to sugarcoat things: balancing is never just “pressing a button,” it’s an ongoing process of trial and error. We’d rather share the honest reasoning with you than wrap it up in shallow answers.

Thanks for keeping us sharp and for caring about the game’s direction.

UnderCloud
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 6:18 p.m.

All good if it means better balance in the long run and more players to have fun with. But I hope we won't see similar post to this after 2 weeks. :)

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 12:16 p.m.

definitely not

GarlWar
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 6:28 p.m.
Edited by GarlWar Sept. 2, 2025, 1:12 p.m.

I wrote a rather long post, so I'll leave it below. I'll be brief here.

This game currently pathologically rewards 2h players. They're 20-65% stronger. Changing this requires only one day of work, and it's very simple.


CVD, thank you very much for your reply. We're discussing very important issues that have been troubling many players for years. I believe that such honest answers from you build trust with the entire Cratr team and also give the player community hope for a greater enjoyment of KnightFight.

I would like to expand on the points you raised. First, I'll comment on the points you raised, and then ask questions.

IMBALANCE BETWEEN WEAPONS

Of course, I understand that every change carries risks. Therefore, changes should be made after a thorough and comprehensive analysis and testing of various solutions.

Let's be honest – this isn't (as the Americans say) "building a space rocket." These are very simple things, although they require several hours of work. A calculator and a list of weapons from Wikipedia are all you need. I recently ran a 1h vs. 2h fight simulation from level 11 to 80. It took me 2.5 hours. If I ran simulation number 2 (after the changes), it would have taken me another 2.5 hours. A total of 5 hours. Let's say you always have to add 1 hour for unexpected problems. A total of 6 hours. That's how long you need to make changes to this game. I don't have a monopoly on knowledge. Origin or Emrys, for example, could do the same.

You say you don't want to break anything. But face it. This game is already broken. 2h players have a 20-65% advantage over 1h players. These are facts, because they're based on calculations. The math doesn't lie. To put it simply, a 1-hour player doesn't stand a chance against a 2h player. Do you think this is fair? I think it's pathological and deeply unfair. In practice, it only offers players one possible way to play: two-handed weapons. Otherwise, they'll be punching bags.

APPARENT CHANGES to INT 7

Why am I writing about zombies with increased stamina on a battle server for 1h players? Because it's something you want to implement on INT 7, which will further ruin the game.

Currently, you're proposing that 1h players will get 3 XP targets on an INT 7 battle server, and 2h players will get 1 XP targets. I think this is even more unfair.

Yes, I'm sure you have such a plan. Why? Because there are only two ways to increase 1h players' chances of fighting 2h players:

  1. changes to weapons, armor, and shields – you've already ruled that out.
  2. increasing the level of 1h players so they have a few levels ahead of 2h players. Since you've completely ruled out the solution in point 1, only point 2 remains (deductive reasoning).

The latter method is terrible because it denies 2h players the opportunity to achieve a high ranking.

Furthermore, it forces 1h players to play intensively on a battle server, while 2h players don't have to because they are, by definition, stronger.

Now let's move on to the realm of emotions, not just facts. CVD, Patti, have you ever played KnightFight for a long time? Do you know how a 1h player, or a 2h player with armor, feels if they ALWAYS lose to a 2h player? A 1h player has to do 3,000 battles on a battle server, while a 2h player only does 400 because they win anyway.

How do you feel when you play 7 hours a day as a 1h player/2h player with armor, and your 2h opponent plays 2 hours a day and ALWAYS wins? They win because you give them better weapons.

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 12:15 p.m.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to write such a detailed post — I actually had to read it all the way through 🙂.

A few clarifications up front:
• The idea is not to change individual weapon/armor stats, but to improve the fighting system itself so that balance is handled there.
• There are no more or less harder zombies planned for INT7 — that was a misunderstanding.
• One of the key goals is that the battleground should be less decisive for character improvement than it is today.
• And yes, some of us have been playing KF for quite a while — so we know the feeling of being on the “weaker” side of the matchup.

We hear your point loud and clear about the imbalance frustration, and it’s exactly why we’re taking time now: to make sure the fight system itself gives every path a fair chance without making 1h feel like a dead end.

Thanks again for keeping the discussion alive!
⚔️ CVD

FrancoiseDCH
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 6:47 p.m.

Good information, i will still waiting

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 12:02 p.m.

thanks!

TragiskKo
avatar
Posted Aug. 29, 2025, 7:35 p.m.

I already shared these thoughts on Discord, but I think they’re just as relevant here, so I’ll reiterate them:

This is what many of us feared would happen, given how little had been communicated in the days leading up to launch. Another postponement is obviously disappointing, but what concerns me most is the way communication has been handled. Once again, the news only comes at the very last minute, which makes it hard for players to trust new timelines, as well as adjust their plans. Hopefully this time the promise of earlier, more regular updates will truly be kept — past postponements announced at the last minute have already affected some players’ trust and patience.

Alternatively, instead of setting new dates that risk being postponed again, perhaps it would be better to wait until you’re 100% confident everything is in order. Only then announce the official launch, so players can trust the date is final and plan around it.

Show comments (2)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 12:06 p.m.

You’re absolutely right — the way communication has unfolded around the postponements hasn’t been good enough, and I understand how this affects trust and patience.

The new world was originally planned for Q2 this year and for a long time everything really did look perfect. That’s why the last-minute issues hit even harder, and from there we had to restart parts of the process.

We’re now working through those final edge cases, and we don’t want to repeat the mistake of leaving you in the dark. That’s why we’ll keep updates flowing more regularly this time, even if it’s just small notes along the way.

And yes, you’re right that one alternative would be to only announce a date once we’re 100% sure — we’ll take this suggestion seriously moving forward. For now, September 12 remains our clear goal, and we’re pushing with everything we’ve got to make it stick.

Thanks again for holding us accountable — your feedback makes us better!
⚔️ CVD

TragiskKo
avatar
Posted Sept. 3, 2025, 2:36 p.m.

Thank you, CVD — I really appreciate the openness in this response. Admitting where communication fell short and outlining what will be done differently is exactly the kind of engagement players have been asking for.

Consistency will be the key. Even small updates, if delivered regularly, can make a big difference in rebuilding trust and patience. I’m hopeful this marks a real turning point in how communication is handled, and I look forward to seeing it play out in practice.

p_b
avatar
Posted Aug. 30, 2025, 12:20 p.m.

I just wanted to double check:

The changes being made are not changes on the Home world for INT7 - but only for the "Battle Efficiency" which is purely a BattleGround thing; correct?

When you say it is going to be deterministic does this mean that RNG is going to be removed? (I'm looking at you FA/PA)

If yes - why is this only on the BG if point 1 is true?

Why are these things only being considered for the new world and not for the older ones?
How will old chars from non-INT7 be affected on the BG by these changes?

I don't mean to be rude, but you really have to do better with your communication.

The messaging of what you're actually changing is not clear and the last minute nature isn't very professional.
(my job often has penatly clauses if we fail to make dates, so we communicate much earlier to mitigate that - one earlier this year had a $1M penalty clause + daily charges....)

You really do need to send out system wide messaging too, to enable all your active players to be aware of things, not just those minority that are on here periodicaly or discord.

and i know i mentioned this on discord, but 1K mooncoins for new Int7 players is a real slap in the face to older players who do not want to start on a new world - and yes I know I could create an account get my coins and delete the knight, but that's just abusing the offer....

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 12:02 p.m.

Thanks for raising all of this — and yes, sorry again if our communication hasn’t been clear enough.

To clarify:
• The fight system and battle efficiency go hand in hand — it’s not just a BG tweak, it affects the overall system.
• When we say deterministic, it means less RNG and more predictable outcomes.
• INT7 is the testing ground because changes of this scale always come with risk. Once proven, we want to roll them into the older worlds too — so yes, existing characters will benefit down the line.

About the 1k MoonCoins: we get that it can feel unfair to long-time players. The idea is to make INT7 attractive enough to bring back lapsed players and grow a prosperous new world. We’ll also be sending out a system-wide newsletter so that everyone, not just forum/Discord users, is informed.

We’ll keep improving our communication, promise. Thanks again for your patience and your feedback — it helps us sharpen both the game and how we talk about it.

⚔️ CVD

Ostaszewianin
avatar
Posted Aug. 31, 2025, 8:29 p.m.

CVD: You're promising a specific date, but again, you're speaking in generalities—no details.

-What extreme cases are you talking about? Details?

A new design? Could you please provide details? What stage of development are you at with this? What stage of development are you at with this?

-Are you making language packs? Will it be like this, where parts of the game aren't translated into other languages?

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 11:54 a.m.

Thanks for your questions — I’ll try to cover them quickly:

We can’t go too deep into technical details here on the forum, but what I can share is this:
• The new mobile-friendly design is already in rollout now. Step by step you’ll see more of it live.
• The edge cases we mentioned are specific battle system situations — that’s what’s keeping us from calling the system 100% final yet.
• On languages: that’s a really good point. Parts of the game still need better coverage, and we’re actually looking for help here. If you (or others) are interested in supporting with translations, please DM me — we’d really appreciate it.

Thanks again for raising this, and for pushing us to be clearer.

⚔️ CVD

GarlWar
avatar
Posted Sept. 2, 2025, 8:43 p.m.

I'd like to point out one thing: @CVD responded to everyone who commented here and made a question. I think this is a very good step towards improving relations between players and the entire CRATR team, which (as seen on the forum) could be sometimes really bad.

CVD, thank you for your openness, regardless of whether we like your answers or not. In my opinion this should be universally accepted practice.

Show comments (2)
p_b
avatar
Posted Sept. 3, 2025, 11:07 a.m.

Seconded - do really appreciate the individual responses.

TragiskKo
avatar
Posted Sept. 3, 2025, 2:14 p.m.
Edited by TragiskKo Sept. 3, 2025, 2:15 p.m.

Well said, I agree. Seeing CVD take the time to respond to every comment and question here is a big step in the right direction. That’s the kind of consistency that helps rebuild trust. I truly hope this becomes the standard going forward. Thank you, CVD.

cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 3, 2025, 11:15 p.m.

That’s really kind of you to say — 🙏

It’s true, not every answer will always be the one people wish to hear, but I strongly believe that open and direct exchange is the only way we can move things forward together.

The passion and criticism from you show how much KnightFight still matters to so many — and that’s the best motivation we could ask for.

Let’s keep the dialogue going, even (or especially) when opinions differ. That’s how trust grows, step by step.

GarlWar
avatar
Posted Sept. 8, 2025, 8:02 p.m.
Edited by GarlWar Sept. 8, 2025, 8:06 p.m.

There are only 96 hours left until the new server launch. I hope I'm wrong, but in my opinion, another delay is already a fact:

  1. There was a promise here of "the largest marketing campaign in our history." What kind of campaign can be launched in 96 hours? Now there's only time left for guerrilla warfare, not a large, planned campaign;

  2. What about voting on the server name? Silence.

These two unresolved issues are the litmus test for the server launch. That's why so many people knew there wouldn't be a new server even before your announcement. It was the same the first time, and it was the same the second time. The signs in the sky and on earth are visible to everyone. Your delay totals over 30 days, and that's already a very long time.

This isn't a complaint on my part; it's just information for those who have reserved their time for Friday and are waiting.

Dante tells you this (in Italian):
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 3:57 p.m.

Understand your concerns — after the delays, skepticism is more than fair. But this time the launch is on track: the marketing push is prepared, and the name vote is live at moonID.net. We’ve still got a few days, and we’ll make the most of them. Thanks for staying with us through the rough patches.

Viking
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 2:29 a.m.

If server 7 does not open as planned on Friday, I will delete my character and ask for appropriate compensation (200,000 mooncoins). 🙂

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 3:58 p.m.

We really understand your frustration. After two postponements, expectations are high and the pressure is on us. But this time the plan stands — INT7 will launch Friday evening as announced.

Show comments (1)
Viking
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 10:42 p.m.

Good news 👍

UnderCloud
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 11:53 a.m.

Yeah, I think I also won't play in case of another delay. We were supposed to be informed more closely about their work, but there is again 0 info. I don't think answering some comments here once is enough. :(

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 4 p.m.

I get your point — just answering comments isn’t enough on its own. We promised more regular info, and that expectation is fair. The focus right now is fully on making sure the Friday launch goes through as planned, but we’ll also improve how we keep everyone updated.

TragiskKo
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 1:04 p.m.

When CVD took the time to reply to all comments here, I felt a glimmer of hope for CRATR. In hindsight, that hope may have been misplaced. Replying to comments was a step in the right direction, but it’s no substitute for real updates on the situation. The frequent updates that were promised are still expected — and so far, there has been nothing.

I’m with you. If there’s another last-minute delay, I may quit too, and I’ll demand my money back.

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 3:55 p.m.

You’re right — forum replies aren’t a substitute for real updates, but I will answer it anyway. We’re focused on launching on the new date without surprises. If anything changes, we’ll communicate in time. Thanks for the reminder — your trust and patience matter.

Trambus
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 1:10 p.m.

The start of a new world is approaching.
I believe that this time there will be no more delays

Show comments (1)
cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 3:49 p.m.

Yes, this time things are really different.
We’ve mastered the remaining challenges and the preparations are complete. The new world is scheduled to launch on Friday evening, and we don’t expect any further delays.

Thank you all for your patience — now it’s really time to get ready for battle! ⚔️

And don’t forget: you can still help us choose the name of the new world here on Vote on moonID.net

Rafael1996
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 3:41 p.m.

You must have something wrong with your head to invest money in something that doesn't work yet, bravo!!

Show comments (2)
Trambus
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 5:19 p.m.

Maybe you're right, my friend, and maybe I'll ask for a refund.

cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 3:52 p.m.

Understandable point — nobody likes to see delays. But to be fair, no one has been asked to invest blindly. Premium time will be synchronized with the actual launch, and everyone who already created a character will receive extra MoonCoins as compensation.

The game itself works — the new world fight system just had a few edge cases that we needed to fix properly before launch. Better to take a bit more time than to throw players into a half-ready system.

Do you working on paid Windows system? 🙂

Show comments (2)
Rafael1996
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 6:44 p.m.

I'm talking about players who bought skills for real money, and in your opinion, is it a wise investment to put money into a server that isn't working yet? You know, for you it's a goldmine.

cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 7:17 p.m.
Edited by cvd Sept. 10, 2025, 7:17 p.m.

We’re just trying to bring this game’s best moments back to life. Well, it’s not really about making an investment — it’s more like backing a project you want to see take off. If you’re cool with the risk and just want to enjoy the ride, then go for it. Anyway hope you’ll join the new world as 1H and support KnightFight ⚔️

NocnySokol
avatar
Posted Sept. 9, 2025, 11:48 p.m.

why again? ... WHY?!

GarlWar
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 7:33 p.m.

@CVD, could I ask if you've made any changes to the game that will be coming to INT 7? Or are you still in the planning and testing stages?

If the changes are ready, I'd appreciate more detailed information. I'm not asking because I'm being nosy, but because many players need this information to make the right decision about their INT 7 career path and playstyle.

Show comments (1)
NocnySokol
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 9:08 p.m.

And will those changes apply only to int7? or is it an update affecting old worlds too?

cvd CRATR.games
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 10:37 p.m.
Edited by cvd Sept. 10, 2025, 10:39 p.m.

Thanks, GarlWar,
for helping to make this crystal clear:

On Friday we’re rolling out two big things:
1️⃣ A mobile-friendly responsive design for all worlds — with a few nice extras along the way.
2️⃣ The launch of INT7, with an updated fight system (only on int7) designed to bring 1H and 2H fighters closer together.

We’ll share this announcement tomorrow across all channels, including ingame, so everyone’s in the loop.

⚔️ Time to sharpen your blades!

Show comments (1)
GarlWar
avatar
Posted Sept. 10, 2025, 10:47 p.m.

Thank you.

Page:  1
You need to login to add a post.

Connecting... Connecting