Honestly, what killed FFA and what continues to hurt this server is the 15 country limit. Until that limit is lifted FFA will never be FFA.

I do not fully know the details of the server load or really any aspects of what goes on in the aspect of that... but Until the limit is removed... It will continue to be the same fluff as it as always been since Swirve capped it.

I'd like to thank all the people that worked real hard ensuring this game continued on.. but eventually your gonna have to either remove the limit... or do what swirve did kill the server.

Why are FFA players unable to follow the rules? That seems to be the meat of your argument.

I really don't feel like trying to compete with somebody who has time and will to run 10x more countries than I do.

Removing the limit won't help either, we already have 15 countries.
It is not about how many you can run,it is about finding a way to gain an advantage over legit players.

But that was the way it was long before the 15 limit... that's what you have clans for... To basically protect the lazy players like me and yourself moss. I never ran over ten when I played FFA.. hell even today I only run one..

As far as rules go... You will never stop "multis" from FFA... I'm grateful that the people that run this server do take a hands on approach to stop it. (LaE) But lets face it.. it's a revolving door issue.

So why doesn't that exact argument apply to any server besides FFA?

While it shouldn't be, it is true that the FFA server does tend to attract a certain type of player.

Personally i think it is BECAUSE you can 15 instead of one.
Those looking to circumvent the rules think it will be harder to catch amongst the masses..

i'm sure if you pay 20 bucks a month you'll be allowed to play as many countries as you want...

Huh? o.0

let me rephrase that then :P

i'm sure that if enough ppl play 20 bucks a month, the game admins will create a new server that is truely free of a country limit, as long as you play it by hand and not by bot of couse

they day you make it pay to play the player base will drop like a vanilla ice album

no, cause nobody wants to pay to play a free text game.

....



see some key words in there?


no?





see it yet?




see it now?


good!

When just being good at what you do to win isn't enough, this is what you come to.

10 years ago most of us n00bs were in school with nothing better to do with our free time...

who the fluff has enough time to run hundreds of countries nowadays?

if you are one of those people that does have that kind of time on your hands... then its not fair to ask the rest of the players to have to compete with you...

but i do agree with letting those who want to run unlimited countries (by hand), pay a fee per set to have their own server... then they can just go nuckin futz!

lol...yeah....this idea won't encourage bots at allllll......


0_o

That is what 'they' come to....not me.Play 15 and play'em str8

martian want beer.

if people paid money to play the some form of limit could be placed, but how they play them shouldn't be....

You could make it $10 a set gives u a max of say 250 and $20 gives u 500..... or something like.....

The people who would want to war with lots of countries and can afford to pay the cash would not have the time to hand run the countries....

Bots killed the server when every man and his dog had a working one,no matter how bad it was,they just ran more poorl ran countries they just had more countries..... a limit cuts that out....

still probably not workable....

I'd like to see a list of those who would like to see the ability to play more than 15 and those who think 15 is enough.

Allowing massive multis even for pay skews the game unfairly for the vast majority who are okay with 15.

15 is enuuf(tho 16 would be nice for tech ring)

if i could pay and run 500 on a bot i would play a set or two a year......

But only to have a war with someone who wanted to do the same or to share the countries so could have a fun war.....


If ppl were paying to play you would not get idiots doing silly things.....

Set up a forum and let ppl discuss it, you would not get ppl playing every set....But if i could pay $20 for a set with a max of XXXX countries i would consider it for sure...

I'm with Dragon, personally. 15 is enough for me. Heck, I probably only play 15 because I know I can play that many to be on equal ground with everyone else.

If there was no limit, I'd probably play less.

I think I shared this anecdote previously, but my last school gave every teacher 180 sick days a year, which coincidentally is the number of days we teach.

The concept was that if you put a reachable limit, like 10 sick days, people will use them all. If you give people 180, they'll probably only use them when they're actually sick, not when they're in the last month of school and they've got 2 days left and just feel like staying home.

I think the same concept might apply to the limit.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong, and without a limit, we might see everyone playing 30, 50, 100 countries.

I am not going to compete in a game where someone has the time to run 20-30 countries whereas I don't have the time nor the interest to run beyond 10.