English German Italian French Spanish Polish Czech Portuguese Brazilian Portuguese Russian Slovak moonID.net - Please discuss stuff about moonID here → Discussions → Knight Power & Server merge implications

Figured I'd fire off yet another thread about world merging - because all that read the forum can see how emotive a subject it is.

There 3 factors to a knight's overal power:

1. Gold Spent on Stats
2. Items Equiped
3. Knight Level

• Item 1)
  A player has the right to chose how to distribute their gold and there's pluses and minuses to go "primary stat" vs "secondary" depending the build

• Item 2)
  This is simple Premmie over gold is so much an advantage it's laughable - esp rings and amulets. the power advantage of these items is huge in terms of "gold equivalents" on item 1. (let alone the damage/def numbers too).

• Item 3)
  Level - there somes a point where a "camper" (old pre-BG knights that were strong all camped and took huge -ve XP hits as this was the best way to gain gold at some point in their knight's career) has to level up if they want to go up the leaderboards / be safer to take more risks on their banking strat. You can have X hundred in your stats, but if a higher level can crack you open like a tin in one shot RNG will not keep you safe.

The age of the server would be a "sensible" merge criteria imo - those that are Pre-BG and created at the same time under RMS (prob all the national numbered servers EG UK1, DE1, SE1 etc) because any-one who started on a world even if they created an account on the oldest world, has had the same opportunities.

Then there's all the Post-BG worlds - I think they are only the INT worlds but I'm not sure.

What we as the players want is just to have more interaction - more PvP and less PvE (cos hitting zombies is not "fun" - but it is necessary under the current game meta).

I see 2 possible approaches to getting this moving forwards - both require dev time/effort and are not "simple" but could resolve things:

• If all accounts were thrown into a single "world" - but retained a flag to represent where we came from, the HS lists could still be filtered on our "legacy" rankings. We all to play in the same pot and any-one is fair game regardless where we started.... MAJOR NEGATIVE: multi knight users have a huge issue with this due to the current 1 knight per world restriction.

OR

• We still keep our "born on" flags, but a graduated merge; based on "power" rankings. A smaller pot of players, but those merged are more closely aligned.

Option2 Extension

• Cratr implemented a "league" type system with promotion and relegation - be active, win lots of fights and gold (scoring TBD) you get promoted; lose lots of fights/gold you get relegated.

Personally I'd rather see the new battle system released vs a server merge in order of priority - I'd also rather see the BG as it stands scrapped completely. (but "something else" implemented to take it's place that may negate the need to merge if all players can fight any-other on there etc)
I'd also rather see "deadwood" accounts that have been dormant for 3+ years culled entirely as part of any re-alignment (or shoved into a "graveyard" world where they still exist if a player comes back, but would have to be "reborn" into an active world)

Let us not all loose sight of the fact this is an "old" game; the lights are being kept on and the game is still being developed by a very small team - many newer games have not lasted this long with much better support and much bigger budgets.
I know I have been quite negative in some of my posts in the past 12 months or so, but we shouldn't overlook that this is not a simple game to manage due to the legacy tech debt - when CRATR bought the IP from RMS we were lucky to still have KF and MG then, and as an extension that continues to today.

The game accounts and the servers all belong to CRATR - and I do accept that if we all start to beat the negative drums too loudly they might just go "fuck it I'm done" esp if the financials don't look to be positive; and then the game is gone for us all. I don't want that, but I'd understand if it ocured under the modern gaming environment, this is really really "old school" and I like that - but It's unlikely to get vast numbers of new/young players in as it stands currently.

The battle server generates the majority of the revenue, and quite consistently at that.

Without the battle server, this would be impossible. A game like this has to be self-sustaining, and that's precisely what the battle server is for.

Whether I'm beating up zombies on the battle server or competing against other players in PvP, it all boils down to the same thing: I find a suitable opponent, click "Attack"—done! ^^

Whether it's a zombie on the battle server or in PvP makes no difference, although the probability of getting gold is higher on the battle server.

But you're right—this game is definitely "old school." It's easy to set up; you don't have to download anything, just log in and start playing. ...

The gameplay is limited, so you have to decide how quickly you want to level up and, since you understandably don't have any rights to your character, how much you ultimately want to invest in it.