Quark Games forums

Right now it may be 2 alliances fighting together, but that won't last long. Soon they will fight and very few players will survive. The surviving players will band together and only about 10 guilds will remain. Those guilds will end up fighting and the few players will get in a guild and be in peace for a few weeks. Then they will get into a fight over a stolen city and a final war will happen. Only one or two players will survive. Eventually they will fight and a winner will finally emerge. It may take a while but a winner will emerge.

It may take a while?
So wait your trying to tell me that I play for months with my guild and all my allies on my side and once I destroy everything else around, we have to turn on each other? That sucks.

No it dosent!!!then it's a bigger war cause you know how everyone plays.

That's stupid to think that after all that time playing with your guild you would turn on each other. This game is about playing and working together in a guild, after a while you become friends like the people I play with in w22. We play still because we have fun chatting and planning together. The winner should be a guild not one player, that's just dumb.

To win a world it should be determined by how much % of the world your guild controlls in every region. If not all regions then a x number of regions.

The game does need an end and i really like the idea of a portal to a new world. Once you get over 100 cities
It just gets ridiculously slow. I spend so much time watching the refresh wheel spin I justt lose interest
If i were to try and manage my whole kingdom as someone mentioned i would have to spend 6 hours
Just to scroll through and level upcities. It doesnt take any skill to manage alot of cities. It takes no job,
No girl, and no life

Maybe it could be the last alliance standing. Limit the number of guilds that can be part of a real alliance. That would depend on how many members a guild could have in that world.

Yes, I had over 100 cities as well, and the game was just so time consuming that I had to quit. I came back, but once again quit after I got over 100 cities again. I just do not have the time in my life to spend hours every day playing a game. Ending the world will keep the game fresh by moving players out of a slow environment and into a newer one.

I think there could be tiers of prizes which would carry over into new worlds once you attain the prize. And these prizes would be accumulative, so people would keep playing in newer worlds.

Top 20 when the world ends: Summoning Sphere, gives one royal guard per day. (Or maybe adds a fourth tier of research for guardians in forge.)
Top 40-21 when the world ends: Town Totem, has minor link with other world, giving you an extra 250 of each mineral per hour.

Being a member of top guild when world ends: Summoning Circle, summons two royal pikemen per day (or maybe adds a fourth tier of research for
Being top 20 Offense when world ends: Adds a fourth tier to your forge for Berzerkers in forge
Being top 20 Defense when world ends (even if you are wiped out before it ends, you will be notified) adds a fourth tier to sentries in forge.

something like these are awards given when world ends. Also people get medals as if they won a competition.

Okay the idea for awards isn't that good, awards should be handed out in gold, but an insane amount of gold.
And let's say in the future of a world, there will be many active players, each with 100's of cities. Let's assume 50 players. So that makes it 5000 cities in total of all the players. If the end needs to be with one person winning, then there will be a huge battle between two players before that. So that's two players with 2500 cities each in a war against each other. You people have lost your mind.

Nikhil21. The point of the battles would be to have extreme wars. It would take the top two and let them duel it out. Just think of the stories! As far as the awards, the ones mentioned with bringing in troops just seem bad in my opinion. Sorry but everyone is complaining about how it's unbalanced. Adding new troops to a choice few would make it more unbalanced making more people complain even more. Maybe a gold reward. Like every 20 cities you have, you get one gold piece. And let me explain the ratio. Using the above example, 5000 cities divided by 20 equals 250 gold. Nothing to sneeze at. One city per gold is absurd as is five cities per gold .And anything more than 20 isn't worth it. Maybe 10-20 cities then. Thanks for reading everybody!