Quote from Chemilla

no vanmoris I say that when damoria makes a event that and normal that everyone can participate otherwise it and an injustice for some players and that and a benefit for others while damoria must be neutral with everyone

Quote from Chemilla

so damoria find normal that some player is the rights to bonuses and not others ???

the player who has surrendered by force has lost a lot of castles and troops and I find it normal that he can attack the bandit camps for gems to heal their troops

if damoria does not allow attacks on the bandit camps then that means damoria favors some player in damoria and this is not legal, it becomes an injustice, damoria must be neutral and each player must be entitled to the bonus from damoria

Then if there would be a new event with new castles (like Halloween/Easter in the past) capitulated players should also be able to attack those?
And what would happen then if someone takes over such a castle right before the capitulated player does? His attacks continue?

All I am saying is that you choose yourself to capitulate, you knew the consequences (NO military actions the upcoming 6 months).

The capitulation feature is there to help you survive when you had big losses. It is your last savior before being completely destroyed.

Quote from pairsn

yes it is not fair that you cant be allowed to be part of the event when you cant attack bandit camps

If you say that it would also not be fair being unable to attack people in a war game...
You capitulated to save yourself so you have to bear the consequences for 6 months :).

Quote from 08/15

I see, you don't want to loose your victims.
You like to continue the slaughter and feast
on the (now new grown) castles.

To meet the conditions to capitulate,
they have already lost a significant
amount of castles and troop - easy prey.

To restrict the production of troops only
leads to a delay of their extinction.

Display More

Sorry to say that but they made themselves into prey...
They did not think about the consequences of the attacks against BR and now they try to be the victim.
They asked for it, now they can also wait 6 months like some of our players have to.
(I do agree that there should not be any set-backs when you are capitulated)

Quote from Dschibait

Capitulation update:
You read that right! Damoria now offers you to capitulate to your opponents under certain conditions. We hope that this step will keep players in the game - who have struggled or lost many units in war. The capitulation info page can be accessed via the Military menu.

How exactly does the capitulation work?
If you lose a lot of points and troops during a confrontation - now you get the opportunity to capitulate. Assuming you have not taken any castles in the last 2 or 7 days.
If you capitulated, we will automatic stop all attacks and call back all support troops. Likewise, all support troops are recalled from your castles.
You are not attackable for 6 months after activating the capitulation mode and you can’t perform any offensive actions yourself anymore.
You are publicly visible for all as "capitulated"! Each player can see on the world map, your profile or alliance pages and in the ranking that you have capitulated. (red background of row)

We hope to keep players active in the game with this first version of the capitulation, even if they lost heavily in war. Of course, we will keep a critical eye on this function in order to prevent abuse or actions, which aren’t intended by us.

Display More

Quote from Dschibait

you are not true... with the capitulation update we bring a feature in that you can capitulate if you LOST many troops.. This dosn't help if you lost only castles or only troops.
This feature is the last step before leaving the game. Its a "ok i have 6months to build me back up" feature - but many allied members are not doing this because they may want to help there mates.

So yes, you are right, we had the capitulation already in - but this other system is to protect the smaller players to get more even fights. We see that our increasement to 3billion points not working well, so we starting to doing this.

A war in damoria can go more and more months - we have veteran players and contacts to old players that we talk about this and they all say, that such a war may never ends.
So yes, maybe we could wait 6months or 12months or 24months or longer - but than there would be reactions from our community (and there are already come up - we are in some skype channels from some leading alliances) - that we dont do anything.

I am not saying that you have to satisfy me.
I am only trying to explain that this bonus does not seem fair to me.
I tried my best to do this but it seems that you have an idea and only want to see the positive sides it has without thinking about the negative sides.

I wish you best off luck with doing this.

Quote from AA-Peter

Sorry for replying in english.

You don't have to make your world 1 account grey.
You don't have to fully take your world 1 account and only a part of your world 2 account. You can do it the other way around too!
You can choose too take your world 2 account as 'main' account (take all castles and all troops) and take world 2 as sub account and only take 10 castles and 30% of the troops.

Quote from Dschibait

@Beule
du hast vanmorris nicht verstanden; der will genau das Gegenteil von dir. Der sagt, das es ungerecht wäre, Spielern auf Welt 1 KEINEN Bonus zu geben. Du sagst, das Spieler auf Welt 1 jetzt noch profitieren könnten von den 30% der W2.

Thats is not what I am trying to say...
I wanted to make clear that world 2 doesn't need that bonus to survive in the new migrated world.
I just wanted to point out that when you give this bonus to someone it should be given to everyone and not just a few lucky ones that can (ab)use it.
BUT the main solution (in my eyes) would be to give NO ONE this bonus.

You just read in my words what you want to read...

Also, I am not saying that there should be a bonus for 'younger' accounts.
All I am saying is that everyone should be equal then.
And not just let those players from world 2 benefit.

Quote from Dschibait

for a time after account creation this would be ok - but this brings NOTHING to you, your friends and most of your mates... this is just a feature for players who will start in w1 - and who are these player ? correct they one from w2 which you don't want to gave more support.

im not sure if you know what you discuss here?

Has there been an analyses of how many people that play on world 2 which also have an account on world 1 and how many of those that don't?
If not, your statement doesn't make sense.

I do understand that world 2 was not ideal, but the way this is handled makes me worry.

I am also not talking about troop speed for anyone who lost troops, but a troop/resources speed for a certain time frame after account creation.

There was just being looked at the average number of account creation date.
It should be possible to do a bigger statistical analyses about this?
Why not look at account creation time from world 1 and world 2 combined? And even take the military strength into account.
This would give a clear view about who would benefit from this bonus in world 2.
There is a lot of data in the back-ground of this game.
It should be possible to do some kind of simulation for the players in world 2 and where they will be after this 1.5 years of bonus.

If you would then do the comparison (of the combined worlds) from some of those players, it will really show what this bonus will have given those few lucky ones.

Quote from Dschibait

did you understand that this bonus (which you dont want) is for the difference of the run time ?

Players plaing W1 until 2008 - i already wrote (and you already read it) that we have find a average startime of 2011/2012 of players in W1 ...
World 2 starts in 2016 .. so the difference is about 4years ... 4years = Troops Speed *2 for 1 1/2 years.

So if you think that this calculation is wrong, its ok, we didn't need to discuss it anymore.

Stil, all bonuses from mage, upgrades etc are all the same for the next years in W1 / 2.

So, if you don't want this bonuses for w2 - you don't want to have a fair game for W2 Players. right?

Display More

I am not saying that this calculation is wrong.
But why do both worlds have to be 'equal'?
Why is this decided 3 years after the start of world 2?

There are only a few players that really benefit from this bonus to get the worlds equal and it are those people that are now very big in world 2.
All others (the majority) is going to be set back a lot when the 2 worlds migrate.

Why is it a problem for those players in W2 and not a problem for new players that enter the game?
Why don't they get a 3 year troop and resources speed to catch up with the bigger ones?

The players in W2 played on that world, invested their time and money into it but so did all players in W1. It is not because their account is younger or older that they need a bonus to survive in a new migrated world? All you are talking about is 1 average number. But in fact that says nothing. You are not thinking about those people that started the game in world 1 after 2016. They will be fed to the wolves from W2 because of their bonus?

The military protection was introduced to protect smaller players, why would it not protect them right now?

Quote from Black-Knight

Yes I've got a report in the bandid camp reports, not in the fight/batlle reports,and I didn't recieved the recources 18.000.000 stone, and I lost 891 beserkers, and I understood I can heal some troops with the fight report?

You don't receive a normal battle report from bandit camps.
Just a bandit camp report.

Also, you are unable to heal any troops that died from an attack on a bandit camp.

Quote from 08/15

I see your point.
I will make a proposal to the team
to merge both worlds into one.
You can take 10 castles of each
world and 30% troops into the new
one - sounds fair, doesn't it?

Display More

If you want the rest of the player to quit sure it does.
Why not just merge both worlds WITHOUT any restrictions?
Without having a bonus for world 2?
Sounds a lot more fair to me (and believe me a lot of other players).
The players that are the biggest in world 2 may be a lot smaller then those in world 1, but you have the military strength to protect them.

Also, why are those players so big there? Because there is no active competition/war against them.
All they can do is grow at a rate that is not possible for anyone else.

Why are smaller players in W1 that started like a year ago not receiving this bonus?
Why only those players in W2?

EDIT: In your proposal the player in W2 still get the bonus?
You think I am talking about the fact that you lose 70% of your troops, which I am not.
I am talking about being able to create that much more troops/that much bigger castles because of the bonus.
Having one main account that you completely migrate and your secondairy account (other world) with only 10 castles and 30% of the troops is totally fine and fair.
The problem is that what happens before the migration (upcomming 1.5 years)

Quote from 08/15

IF "someone" managed this in the past 3 years on world 2,you can do it in the remaining 18 month too.
How long did you needed for this task in world 1?
I think you have to redo the math.

I didn't take the building time into consideration...
I just calculated the amount of troops you gain if you start now and produce for 1.5 years.

The point I want to make is not about the amount of troops you can create it is just an example to show that this bonus is not fair.
You introduced the military strength rules to protect smaller player but you now decide to give a few players who were smart enough to invest hugely in world 2 (time and money) an advantage over those who invested all their time and money in world 1.
Every player should be treated equally so every player should get the same bonus (if you want there to be one) on every world or no one should get it.

Quote from 08/15

you already read the report - check it yourself

Banditen-Camp: 877:285

31.05.2019 16:53:31

I thought I had the same problem yesterday.

I think when you receive a battle report, the icon is not shown that you have a report waiting for you (on your main interface top right).

If you want to make this fair, then give smaller players this bonus until they reach a certain amount of troops/military strength/points/castles/...

But don't just give a few players an undeserved advantage because they spend a lot of gold in world 2 at the start and remained very active (while others saw this world was going no where and quit playing it)

Suggest someone plays only in world 1 and has to start building in world 2.
It will take a few months to get to a decent building level to build troops.

But there are some players that are very active on both worlds.
Consider this scenario.
Someone is active on world 1 and has 25 castles with all productions at level 71 and uses all troop bonuses.
This means: 131.050 troops per day per castle or almost 1.8 billion troops in 1.5 years.
Now this player is also active on world 2:
There he gains the same amount of troops times 3. This means almost 5.4 billion troops in 1.5 years.
Now suggest he takes world 2 as his main account to transfer.
This would mean that he is able to transfer 5.94 billion troops he produced in those 1.5 years.

I do understand that some players are bigger in world 1 then these players in world 2 but wasn't this new protection system (military strength) made to prevent them from being fed to the wolves?
Right now you are just giving those players a 4 billion troops advantage over players that just started world 2.
It seems to me that the shut-down of world 2 is just to give those few very active players a very big advantage when the two worlds will be migrated, while you forget your smaller players in world 1!

Quote from Ptorrijosj

It would be nice if with a single click you could change the world

You can

Hover with your mouse over the name of the current world (top left of screen next to the language selection.
Click on the other world in the new interface that opens
Tada you are in the other world

Quote from Haartje998

normally i could build up to 9 new castles next to my main, without having to have rubies!
has this been changed?
If so no one that has a main castle that produces other gems than ruby's can ever build a secondary castle!

The problem that you cannot build a castle without having rubies might be that you still have a lot of deeds.
You would first have to destroy them in order to be able to build a 'free' castle.

Sorry to reply in english but I don't speak German (If anyone could translate that would be great).

while I do understand that W2 is behind W1, the bonus that is given there makes it unfair for people in world 1.
It is true that most of the accounts in W1 have about a 5 years head-start but does that really mean W2 needs to be equal to that?

1) W1 didn't have the Magic spells (Pay-to-win)
2) When buying premium and other packages the effect of those is also doubled right now.
3) Strategies that are used now where not known some years ago in W1.
4) W2 has far less wars (There is one strong alliance that rules everyone). This means that the only ones that benefit are them.

I understand that you want to make the worlds equal but what you are doing now is only making those people in W2 stronger then W1.