Pls don't remove mods, it's excessively long I know, but someone had to do it and you only get one idea per week.
Don't JUDGE A Book By It's Cover: Make All
Criticisms AFTER Understanding Content,
And READING MOST OF IT
Also, think of how long it took me to write this.
Additions are sort of like armor; it covers up your fleshy bits, but it can't make the soft parts go away. That is why we need to make adjustments before additions, to build a solid foundation for the brilliant ideas of the future that you will make, and Rezoner might implement.
Therefore, I'm proposing suggestions to make the game more rewarding and open that optimizes the least amount of additions to the game as possible, instead putting more emphasis on reorganization and a restructuring of the player's in-game interactions.
Oh God I sound like a snob.
First of all, nothing in this is chronological, or purposely arranged to emphasize certain ideas, and all misleading phrases are meant to be. Still, read right to left like any normal person.
Thirdly, please put up with my terrible and often insulting mannerisms and just look at the suggestions for what they are and not how I say them, it's your own opinions sirs and madams and others.
Secondly, I'm glad you understand.
>>>>>>>Out-Of-Wack Population Densities In Game modes: (Skip to Skip Marker if intimidated by words)
It has come to my great regret that I see 80% of the population stranded in the "most popular" game-mode, Forts, and a mere 20% divided across the other 3 competitive modes, where only a third of those people are actually in queue to participate in arena, bro wars, or football.
The current distribution at the time is around Fort 25 people: Arena 2: browars 3: Football 1
Arena is ok, since the two people can play, but there basically just fighting the same person over an over, with similar results every time.
Browars is missing just one person, and it could be many minutes before someone joins.
Football is, well lacking the 9 extra people to play it, and that might not happen for at least 5 or ten minutes of waiting or one person, often up to 30 minutes; ridiculous!
But you have to wait, since there is that quest to get a goal that you can cancel, but then you're losing a quest of the day.
Looking at those pitiful numbers and harrowing wait times, most people would just go to fort, but then what is the point of those game modes the developer spent so much time on?
The ratio across servers is pretty much the same too, and the situation too, people just aren't willing to confront the wait times and just give up.
It's not their fault either, since the ones who do are mostly more experienced, desperate, and or worse to the point of being no fun.
It's a cycle that needs to be addressed, and is a major complaint of mine, seeing 25 people in a pro dominated mode while a few struggle to stick to their favorite modes, both issues that will lead to the eventual loss of players.
My remedy to this problem is simple, not more quests that involve the modes (you can just give up on them...), but a way to pull more players out of the safety of the quicksand, the Fort, and get them to conquer their fears and do the less popular modes.
a major factor in this is that the numbers are too depressing to warrant a try, I mean, 25 people in Fort and the rest in the other modes, any first impression would be that the other modes aren't worth trying, and those who do try just can't wait that long for each game (kudos to those that do).
Quest rewards are obviously not enough incitement for them to try either, so what should we do? I imagine it would be better if there were more players, but there aren't enough to keep the balance.
\* Recap: People are basically playing milking Fort mode dry of it's fun, not willing to try other modes because of underlying fears, creating a cycle of Fort mode onlys being farmed by fort mode pros, and then they all leave the game without being able to try the funner modes*/
I would recommend a system called "Forcing Players to do different modes because THEY don't know what's best for themselves."
How do you force players? If you enforce with punishment, it'll only make things worse than they already are! Quests don't work, and the reward for winning can't make it up to the losing players. Random placement could be hijacked by reloading the page and trying again, and gentle persuasion doesn't work from experience.
Example of Persuasion:
I had a quest related to football and didn't want to cancel it
(my country) chat >>>>>
me: Hey guys, let's play football, if there are enough people, we can have a real match!
me: there's 1/10 people right now, let's make it 10/10 guys!
1 minute later
me: 3/10 currently!
ignorant person1: why?
Ignorant person 2: yep
Saint_of _imagination: Stop it ignorants, some people like bad game modes....
drops to 1/10 people in queue, I lose confidence to speak, feel alone, crying etc.
During the next 10 or so minutes, the ratio never rose to above 2... :-:
Basically, none of those methods work.
If you look at a more successful game in this sense with little players, how do they handle it?
There are no games like that which I recall are doing any better, so we'll analyze this together instead!
Punishment is out of the question, since it inhibit's player growth, and currently rewards are to little and losses too much. We don't want to add too much code, so no complex auto balancing systems.
In fact, the only things we should change are the layout of the menu, some easy color fixes, the variable rewards, and the prejudices and stereotypes most players have about the modes.
Minimal effort for the win!
Firstly, and seriously, the menus. Putting the Fort mode button on top of the play menu is a mistake, people will click on what they see first.
instead, put Fort mode under or above where practice mode is.
then change colors of the other game modes that will make the game more fun, make them Stand Out!
A bright red, flashing orange flames, rippling blue, nothing too fancy, but everything eye catching. Make Fort and Practice dull and grey, perhaps something unappealing like canary yellow with purple stripes and a plaid overlay of bone sprites. Perfect!, that's most of the menu sorted out.
Secondly, the prejudices, not unfounded. even if the menu changes (or doesn't, your choice, you got more experience in this), people will still gravitate away from the other game modes without even giving them a try, or lose interest in them as soon as someone voices a complaint about how good fort mode is, hahahaha. We have to Force them to try new things,
like an eagle pushing it's young off a cliff so it can fly...or DIE! Sorry about that there, ahem, so, to make players try out the other modes, and make it as appealing as possible, there should be no loss, I mean, what is the point of losing gold if it doesn't affect gameplay positively? More Gold is the answer! The increase in gold prizes to anywhere from 50-100 may make gold less valuable, and weapons easier to get, but that was a problem anyway.
Real money purchases will less frequent, but on the whole, less money made now is more money made later, as the dwindling population and all that that can be reversed, and the more things players will buy from the shop with all that spending cash, and just how happy they'll be, and how much better the game will be!
Thirdly, actually pushing players to try new modes. Gold increase alone isn't enough to catch the eye (changing the menu might), so there must be a moderation device. You know how when
a server closes when there are no people left? Now temp. close a room with too many people, for too long so people can try new things and take a break every once in a while. By room, I mean specifically the Fort, and the fort rooms, and by too many, I mean 5-15 or 3-9 players, and too long, maybe a 5 min "maintenance" every 10 minutes, which will also stop people from looking unfair, those pesky 128 bone people scaring off the newbs.
The people will try new modes in the meantime, and the wait times will be diminished as there will be a flood of players to join in. Also, they can rest their eyes and cool their tempers.
The changes recommended above aren't too drastic, and should be plenty easy to implement, just a few button changes, a few color tones to apply, and an extra conditional on the room kicking/closing.
>>>>>>>The Grind For Weapons (not as many words, woohoo!)
Many new players face the same problem, which is the weapon barrier.
I want a bow, or a staff, or those awesome claws, they think, and then when they see the price and think of all the grinding on Fort they'll have to do, a lot of the game's fun is lost. If you read my suggestions, you'll see how raising the prize money in arena and browars and football and having no loss in trying can remedy this, but, lets face it, getting a weapon wouldn't feel good after a while. (I still using the old axe here)
You see, each weapon is about the next grind, a new, overused strategy, and expensive bragging rights to poor strangers using axes ;-;. (no one is jealous here)...
There is nothing sentimental to a weapon as is, and nothing to tie players to the boat that is wilds.io. No personal meaning, nor nicks to count how many people you've shamed, no new fangled, self learning experience that brings a sense of accomplishment. Weapons should be special, an earned weapon, a tribute to your struggles, a beacon to follow for new players. Why, everyone throws their weapons away nowadays, like scrap metal and broken toy, weapons should be treasured for a rewarding experience, you should call your axe the Sancho to your Quixote, the queen to your throne, the daughter of your slaughters!
Basically, what I want to propose is that without changing the sprites animations (i really like the fluidity), the weapon balances are pretty OK now, a weapon other than the axe should be offered to a beginner, such as the hammer, and unarmed should be offered for game modes like football, or for the lols.
Weapons should not have a difference in class, rather, an equal price. I look at the weapons and my first thought is; "Well, if the hammer is 1000, and the bow and ice staff ~2400, I know which one is better. Wait, the sword and the claws... oh, what's the point!"
By giving weapons different prices, there is immediately that gap and mental barrier of: "that weapon is better than what I can afford" , and "there is no point in trying", and "why is it so unfair to new people?"
if you were to give all weapons the same price (everything costs 2000, maybe?), and made it easier and less risky to pile up money, then the mindset would suddenly be, "well, I started out with <x> weapon, but I can see that all weapons cost the same. Therefore, my weapon is just as good, and it's my very own =D" Then they would be happy and be more willing to try out new weapons, and buy them with moneys. This is unfair to the old players who grinded for the cash, but, it's would be unfair to all the new players too, so suck it up, you're veterans of the game, have some sense! More players = better experience. (most of the time). Also more players= more people to look up at you. (get out your bragging rights! "back in my day, this cost so much more, and did I remind you we only got 10 gold per match?" "oh wow grandma, you're so cool!")
Balancing issues already present can be revised later, and less will complain if they aren't victims anymore.
Also, maybe add weapon skins in a future update, or weapon name tags. Oh Sancho Panzo, when will you be textual, and not imaginative?
>>>>>>>Alliances, Team work, and friends (This is more of an addition than a modification)
Guilds. Oh sweet sweet guilds. pretty much a broken child in this game, just a little line of text under your name, and a place to get info on how to play, and, for some, a place to gather your students, meet teachers, or rave on and on about donuts.
Like many other games, too many people are all about making guilds, and not joining guilds, resulting in something I like to call, The Glass Partition .
A Glass Partition represents all the players in the game you push it down and it shatters. The more active players, the larger the glass, and the more guild makers, the more rigid it is. After it shatters, you blow away the bits with a leaf blower; what's left is the active player base. The total amount of pieces is the guilds, the size is the size of each guild, as the more rigid the glass, the more people make guilds, and thus, the more smaller the big piece becomes upon breaking.
If you have too little guild makers, then the glass just melts into a big pool and the purpose is defeated.
If you have too many guild makers, then the glass pieces are so small they just sort of swish around with the wind.
Of course, more active players is a must, but here, it's ok, as long as there are less guilds. But waaiiiitttt, is that a lot of guilds I see? What should we do? I should go to sleep for one, but time is of the essence!
That glass is falling now.
You feel it in how little are playing every moment (400 on at a time across all servers? Out of all humanity waiting to be monetized? To be given entertainment? 400 is pretty impressive though) that leaf blower is pointed straight at this glass partition ohh yeah. Well, maybe it'll take 50 years, but better late than never aye? What I want to say is that
The Community Must band against each other, we must make ourselves the common enemy!
Active guilds will be given a chance to choose between a few alliances based on your choice (the developer), and such alliances will change the color of the guild name! Non-changed guilds will be presumed dead and be put in the "none" alliance for the time, they can always pick later, but their members will join new alliances with different guilds. Also, you can't change your alliance ever; it's a one time thing, and new guild creators will have to pick a new alliance not on who's winning, but which one suits them; kinda like a Sorting Hat from Harry Potter ordeal.
By making alliances, alliance chats, and so on, people will have a larger social interaction, meet more people, have more fun, and best of all, compete more!
There could be whole game modes built on this, a weekly alliance storm the Castle event (or fort if you really want it), an alliance Cold War event, an alliance tournament arena event (could be stretched to take place over a month somehow), alliance merchandise, alliance themes, alliance skins, alliance warfare, inter-alliance affairs, inter-alliance economy, monopolies, alliance battle themes, maps, large battlefields and challenges, heroes, the possibilities are endless!
Basically, rather than having many insubstantial small guilds, have them unite under a few (3-6) large guilds (alliances)
I'm getting a little ahead of myself here, so I'll just stop now.
I know I'll be roasted like a boar in the comments, and probably laughed at for making so little sense, and trying to push you all around with my claims and attitude, and then down voted and scorned for trying to say what I thought was appropriate, and trying to change the world one game at a time, but who even cares. I mean, do you? I do. Very much. About the effort put into this game and not wanting to see it go to waste, and overreacting because the developer is probably just doing wanderers.io now and doesn't care, not now at least.
I'll make sections in the comments if you want to add anything, just reply to them so we can have some neat lists, and I'll even have a section for the complaints!
Customer support service by UserEcho