Just dipping my toes back in....

Hi
It's been a while but I dipped my toe back into the game.

There has been a few changes to the game.
I am not in a position to say if this is good or bad.
The extended research tree looks ok.
There seems to be lots of new stuff.
But it seems the diminishing world populations seem to be the biggest problem still.

1. Change the map, this bulls eye map system seems self defeating to the game, a more random map would seem to offer a chance of a better game.
A. spread players all over the map but give them the chance to move home base if they enter a new alliance.
B. Alliance zones these can form when any 2 players from the same alliances have bases/outposts in the same area say a max number of zones apart.
C. The greater number of players in the zone the bigger the zone gets.
D. Offer defensive bonuses to players in the zones offer auto defence options players can offer up a pool of units for group defence and a pool of commanders the game can auto move these units to defend from capture attacks.
E. Resouces should be randomly spread around the map including rare resources but these can still deplete as normal.
F. Alliance zones offer a buffer from teleports they offer a 5 min travel time this can be do by just a base increase in travel time not based on travel distance so no restriction on teleport locations but just on travel times, maybe the bigger the alliance zone the bigger the travel time restriction so to stop bully's going into feeding frenzies in these zones. A big zone is a big lunch to big players.
G. Possibility of shared buffs in the alliance zones. Maybe an extended capture time, stackable boosts the more alliance members in the group the greater the advantages. If enamy build or capture a base in a zone it weakens the zone the bigger the zone the harder it is to maintain If one rouge base held by a enamy weakens the full zone but this could be by distance so bases at the edge are allways the weakest.
H. The list is endless other players can suggest there own.


Player movement.
If the world maps changes and resources were more random and all bases, Are supers then any base can become a players home base then it's a players last base that is their home base.
So I want to fill the whole map with supers like the outer edge is. The game locks out the same number for players as now. But the rest are up from grabs by enacting alliance zones system players will naturally group up, Within this system. This will then lead to alliance wars as players group up they make them selves richer targets from possible reward systems run a bit like league rewards in clash of clans strong alliances give higher rewards to attackers and in events rewards for stronger alliances against weaker alliances is again a good balance this only effects events not game play.
I can see a vast amount of new events that could be run with this new system.

Then let players move worlds lock stock, let entire alliances move worlds this is not a clone just a move. They get base upgrades to the level they had in their old worlds if a player moves from an old world where they only had small bases they they just get that number of zones upgrade.
So a player with 11 supers gets 11 bases (which are now all supers) but at the same upgrade state.

New forms of attack.
I see tactical attacks being fun.
Normal attacks.
These have random effects,
1. You steal resources as now.
2. You steal plus you downgrade the building level, this can happen even after its destroyed you no longer get resources from attacking it but you keep down grading it.
2A. If a level 14 building was hit 14 times it can reduce a building to rubble, Where it produces nothing. After each hit the building produces half the resources as normal but only at its reduced level after each attack.
2B. Even fully destroyed buildings can be rebuilt as they were but, rebuild times are 10% duration for each level until it's fully rebuilt to the last upgrade level but it rebuilds to the same level it was even if total destroyed. The resources it produces also ramp up as in rebuilds if it's attacked again during the rebuild it stops the rebuild then follow up attacks start the down grade again, from the point it reached. ( you may need to relax to rules on the number of rebuilds that can be done at once.)or offer a pause button so they can rebuild lots of building basicly fast but they only get the resources of the level it's rebuilt too.

I would like to see fuel play a greater and lesser roll in the game.
Greater as in players units can be disabled by lack of fuel tactically.
This could be done with a supply chain system that works in a fully auto way we have now but, that can be disrupted By attacks or captures.
I am not fully sure how and others can comment how this may work.

Lesser as in the destroying of units we have now.
I would like to see disabling of units at random this can be durring attacks and defensive battles, but I see the biggest effect being in attacks if a player attacks in fuel shortage a random % of units don't fight and are at higher risk of being destroyed.
This then can make attacking that destroyed fuel production very tactical.
I would like to see a sliding % coming into play
100% of unit work if your in plus fuel and you have some in storage.
Now if production drops below demand then % effects come into play the higher the negative your in the bigger the effect up to 25% if you go into negative with storage. then the % increases past 25% if you have no storage left and are in negative, maybe by as much as the % you are negative by.....
So your producing 50k but you need 200k fuel you lose up to 75%( it's random) active units in attacks and defences.
This could also be a addition to alliance zones a reduction in fuel shortages effects. When I say disabled I don't mean destroyed they just don't fight in the battle is don't shoot their weapons. But they are still cannon fodder with the rest of the units in your army, and can be destroyed in battle as normal.

Donated units and fuel I see them like this if the defender is in negative other players units for the first attack are uneffected by fuel but any follow up attacks then start to effect them with fuel problems as resupply is down to the defender but say a Max of 25% get effected.

You could also add a new tactical resources produced by factories, it could be added ammunition, it could have effects as fuel have above...

I will stop there lol.., later DD.

Events
If they introduced alliance zones areas of control that may or may not be visible on the map. That form when 2 or more players build bases within a set distance.
I say it may or may not be visible, as the advantages like boosts to production and any other possible boosts can get for alliances creating alliance zones, can just be shown in the players menus the only time it may be visible on the map is when a player is capturing, building or teleporting an outpost to a location close to another player in their alliance. So forming a new zone or entering a established zone.

The new events can be production based I can see attacks to damage other alliances production, based on systems from my first post and alliance zones. This especially works with the revamped maps, full of players that have moved their games into it from old worlds .
When was the last time your world had 6k plus players in it.....if ever....

Gree and for your possible income for making the changes needed to do this.
Their could be a gold cost for some more advanced defensive ability, like the auto defence system that draws on a pool of units shared by the alliance you could create a timed system that can be purchased or won from events or earned in some game system that earns you money. To stop this being a money is king item they can work like shields do now, including the blocking the defenders attacks unless you break the cover, cool off times or you can only activate it once per 24 hrs.
I see this as a cap buster item, units have no travel time and arrive in the base of the defender for any battle the player sets it for it can be all attacks or set it for the last battle before capture, So attackers don't milk this for BP.
After the battle all units remaining after the defensive battle return to the alliance pool.

I see this only working for bases in a alliance zone, solo bases of members that have some in a zone and some flying solo only the bases in the alliance zone get the cover.

On a side note if the revamped maps had 10 bulls eyes type locations that offer the max resource production this allows 10 areas on the map to be battled over I would suggest they have bases that allow 5 full alliances to hold 550 bases in or close to these areas so 2750 ish bases, In these bulls eye locations
But also put rare production in random locations so to shift the desirable locations around the map. This random location could change as the game continues so there new locations as they renew after a location is depleted it renews at a new random location even within npc bases that are vacant.

One of the biggest things I miss about the early game play from when world 8 started was players defended their bases.

Their are Obvious reasons why players don't any more as in players from far higher levels can just destroy all of your units in a few hits.

Things that can help with this, give advantages to having units in bases at the moment their are non, or turn that on its head and have disadvantages to not defending, or something in the middle, both carrot and stick.

But that will only have an effect if the defender is given more protection from over strong attackers.
Ok I don't want to block any player from attacking any other player, so I propose a system where the defenders units are treated differently by the game A few options

1. The defenders units are auto optimised for defence so if they have 10,000 units in a base but a commander with only 3000 leadership the game selects the defenders best commander and best units to defend from the attack, all the other units sit the battle out.
2. If the defender has radar of a high level and can see the attack is going to far out classes their defence they auto flee to either a pre set location or their closest base. ( I would put a proviso that only units that have a commander flee so if the total leadership is below the total units in the base they don't all flee)
3. The game can stack commanders for defenders but to only even up defence battles so it uses player level diffrence to activate different levels of commander stacking so the battles are not so one sided.
4. Alliance zones allow a pool of commanders to be shared ( this could be tactically over come with organisation).
5. If your attacked and your losses are over a set % higher than the attackers losses your units flee call it they are routed out or flee from a stronger force but the first attack drops in as normal.
6. If the player attacking is more than X number of levels above you they cannot cap you. This encourages alliances to take players of different levels so if an alliance needs to cap a low level player they need a low level player in their alliance to do it this really works well with alliance zones. Players from small alliances could build a base within a big alliances zone if they had no low level players they would not be able to capture it to destroy it, so the base would disrupt their alliance zone and weaken it....... I know their are ways around this but it means that they need freinds of all levels or alt games at all levels. This allows free attacking just not free capturing.
7. All bases cannot be destroyed so if a player captures a base created by a player on blank ground it cannot be destroyed after a player captures it all its buildings are destroyed and down graded one level but it remains then any player can capture it but npc forces defend it like they do all the other bases and zones on the map. The higher the level the base was built to the bigger the defence force. ( this is also a way for players to create a high level base to level up commanders on). If a player wishes to capture the base its treated as a npc base of its level. If the base is captured and destroyed until the cc is total destroyed so level 0, it is destroyed as before. So if you max out a small base it gets a bigger npc defence force even if it's in the outer ring of the map but the closer to the centre the more it ramps up there could also be an effect in alliance zones like empty bases within established alliance zone can have its garrison improved to increase its training xp, ability for alliance members.

I would also Like the same system for npc bases if a player upgrades it to level 15 if captured it drops to level 14 if abandoned, but not reverted to the base it was...... The system we have now Is a double slap for the player who was booted and it's not real world.
It also makes them worth more so players will naturally fight more over them also a plus for players of all levels they can also get larger npc defence forces and possible a secondary tag so level 18 a-o or (1-15) or a power rating based on its buildings upgrade level so a number let's say from 1-105 would cover it for small bases a point for every level of every building in the base so I think the current max is level 15 so 7 buildings so max of 105 min of 1


Now these are just ideas its up to you to say what you like and don't and gree to implement them if you do.
Now I for one think a system that forces you to keep units traveling around and not defending your bases is stupid it's bad for game play and not real in a real world if your out numbers or out classed you strategically retreat or put up the strongest defence possible then run, so option 1 and 5, If you still lose......and defending give you perks for doing so.
On a side note this could be also be used to stop players milking alt accounts for events points or easy BP if the system was auto.....implemented by the game..... No vast 10 million point hits by hitting bases full of units that have no commander if the game auto moves units..... Auto defend units limit the amount of BP the attacker can make per hit ( depending on how it's set up) It would reduce alt accounts to farming for resources...... It would make BP events fair as they can only hit players at their level for big BP........

Capture attacks if abandoned, or the player hasn't the cores to own more.

This covers, Player bases Built on blank ground, these are now rare but if things change, and NPC bases.
As in my last post I would like to see them resist player capture attacks.
I would also like the same system for npc bases and player built bases, if a player upgrades it to level 15 if captured it drops to level 14 if abandoned, not the current system its destroyed or it reverts back to what it was...... The system we have now Is a double slap for the player who was booted and it's not real world.
It also makes them worth more so players will naturally fight more over them also a plus for players of all levels.
They can also get larger NPC defence forces and possible a secondary tag so level 18 (1-105) a power rating based on its buildings upgrade level so a number let's say from 1-105 would cover it for small bases a point for every level of every building in the base so I think the current max is level 15 so 7 buildings so max of 105 min of 1 this can be added to every base on the map weather its ex players bases left after a capture and abandoned or ex NPC base that was captured from a player and returns to NPC. The number would tell players at a glance what it's worth.
Vari NPC defence forces to denote their extra worth....

Or a new single number system that can adjust for the variation this system would create. So a level 18 base full ungraded becomes a 30 same for a level 2 if fully upgraded. I am not a fan of this as much of the second number system as this doesn't take into account resource production in the base.

As above this new system can increase a bases worth for training commanders up on, and could be done anywhere on the map.
I think it could be one of the perks for alliance zones that the alliance controlling the zone can create training bases within zones of a certain size to make them into purpose built training bases their could even be new building types that allow for this.....

Maybe a command training school that players can send commander to, the building level can limit the max level it trains to.
Other systems and building could be built that can be used to re level imbalances in the game.
Maybe a star power school that can slowly fix poorly made commanders things that smaller player often suffer from. Maybe you get items you can win or earn from the 30 day reward system that you can use to repair poor commanders with less than perfect star power, upto max.
The list can go on but a change in the current system should not be that hard, and would be a big boost.

Some of these ideas could be added to alliance bases we have now....

Resources

Ok I have been thinking about my last post and how it maybe a way to widen the resource map let players also improve resource production in any outpost/base the effect will be on its value like my last request for bases to retain their upgrades and get a new score to show this, I want to add on a production score as well or build it in so the max score can be over 105 if we could include resources and score them 1-10 which is I think the range they come in.
If the resources can also be improved like buildings can, then new strategic system of game play open up. If a mine production can be increased and just as important decreased...... then you open up a whole new ball game. If I can hit a players base and not only down grade a building but also the resource under it that has to be repaired or rebuilt over time all the map is equal it just takes longer to upgrade in the outer ring. Then your battling over bases with high value not just location. Again these high value bases can be setup as training bases by players or alliances as the NPC base defending these bases ramps up with the base value regardless of where it is on the map. It would be possible to max any base in any location on the map and its value would be the same the only diffrence would be if it had 2 or 3 resource zone in it.
Player built bases on Bare ground could also have the same value.

If the score was live so after a hit I can see a drop in the score from the damage I just did, double good. This live value will make game play far more competitive the ability to disrupt production and fuel production and get live feed back by showing the bases value drop..... Will open up strategic attacks to the players. It will make them feel they are having an effect which for the first time is shown and can be seen by others.
This new power score system could also be extended to other factors in the game.
I could see spy units that can infiltrate on scout missions posting Intell to who ever the person scouting it wishes just them, their alliance, the world......... They could scout an enamy and leak Intell that it's not defended to the world.......via the score overlay on the map at the zoom level we normaly get player name at. Players could just post the Intell into chat. The Intell could be live until the players kills the spy....a base with no units cannot kill the spy... A base with units gets a chance every 30 min to kill the spy it's just a random chance the more units the greater the chance it's found.....

My suggestion is that the mine level is limited by building level so you cannot upgrade the mine zone to max until you upgrade the iron mine to max.
All this can be done on existing maps the game would just have to track the mine values just like it does building values.
The biggest change will be the ranking system for bases to show their points value for every level of every building in the base.

If the new value system was visible over all players bases this then also increases competion as bases with a high value where ever they are on the map, will be battled over. In a way this will create a varied map without the need for you Gree to create it the only thing missing would be upgradable outposts so they can all go super.

Drifting death you should have a job at GREE with the ideas you have ����

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 50_Cal

Drifting death you should have a job at GREE with the ideas you have ����

---

Thanks, 50_Cal
I just hope they discuss ideas before they dump them into the game so players get their say first.
Involving players early helps iron out bugs and hopefully weeds out bad ideas or poorly implemented ideas.
If they short listed ideas they like, then ask players what they think it would be a good start.
I can only suggest things from my point of view, but the big players need to put their penny's worth in, so they keep everyone happy.
And if your reading this Gree a big stack of in game gold for every idea you use would be a good incentive for players to offer ideas. Post a message in game not a pop up (we hate them)a message in our inbox.
When you want ideas or opinions on ideas. Offering rewards for voting on ideas, on the forum, it can be a prize draw so everyone who votes gets a chance of the prize or prizes...

Ask players for suggestions Gree
Their top likes and dislikes about the game.
Then use the info and create a vote, so the things get put into priority for players so you can see what to fix or add as a priority.
Messaging players in the game will show your still there Gree and get their attention. You have nothing to lose Gree, and everything to gain.

I have been playing again for a little while, mostly just getting back up to speed rebuilding stuff, after doing so I think I know what the game needs first.
This is not to say any system to merge worlds is not top priority. But changing the map system and possibly bases should be high priority.

I am not competitive yet my commanders are still poor my bases are all small ones, my commanders need levelling up, all these things need accesses to the central area to do but. If I put my new bases their they will get scouted and cleaned out at regular intervals.
What I need are greater production ability and greater factories output both I am not in a position to get, so it's catch 22.

So here is where my suggestions for 2 new map changes
1. Allow resources zones within outposts to be upgraded so any mine anywhere on the map can be upgraded.
2. Allow any base to grow in size to super base size ( this will paint a target on it from other players) I suggest a upgrade fee or reward of some type allows this.

Now I am not ruling out supers that we have now can be expanded as well.
And if base expansion is hard to code because of game bandwidth or graphics then it could be done off map so a bit like the new alliance base we get virtual maps of each of our bases that show the expansion and give us control of upgrades to the iron and oil upgrades.

Finally if expansion is not on the cards yet then just the change to resources zones so we can upgrade any bases production so we can do 2 things increase our production to at least match the central zone that we can not compete in, and give us the option to create training bases this is possible if you make these upgrades persistent after a player leaves a base as I have suggested before and ramp up the NPC defence forces based on its new upgrade state, so if I max a base then abandon it gets defended like a base of its value, this would be based on building level and mine upgrade level so a 3 resource zone base at full max would be higher than a level 30 base now if all the building were level 15 so it's NPC defence if I left would be higher than a level30 base, also it's base value number would reflect that so we could have level 30+ bases anywhere on the map.


On a side note it would be a possible use for base cores in players inventories having these unlock the expansion upgrades different types allow for bigger sizes or different areas on the map for bases to expand, so the common cores allow expansion in the outer map the rare cores allow it near the centre or supers to expand. This could be one additional zone Add one buildings worth per core. Or a combination but if you allow it expanding supers needs to be expensive...

One other thing for expansion again this needs to be persistent to the map with possible systems in place ( I have mentions these in my other posts above) but if I capture a base with expansions, I keep that expansion they should be a effect for my capture on the base you cannot attack without it having a negative effect on the base, But the expansions are retained.

So my guess is, if you use base cores that we have now, we burn them from our inventory when we expand a base so collecting new ones is needed all the time. They are persistent to the map not us so if I get my expanded base captured from me, by a player that captures it to keep it, I have to either capture it back or start to rebuild in a new base by collecting new cores and starting to upgrade a new base.

Captures I mentioned these in the posts above, but I would like to add a little menu to the dialog when a player try's for a capture,
We currently have we auto capture any base if we have cores to allow us to build a new base, we have captures that once victorious we drop the capture and leave for insufficient cores, I suggest we need another option, swap base system this is set at the launch of the capture attack. So you are committed to it, that allows us to capture the base by dropping one of our current bases, automatically.
We can select which one we lose if the capture is won. Units in the base that is given up auto move to the closest base.

On a side note to this new capture system it would be interesting if it was mandatory to do if you select capture attack as your attack of choice, this would remove bully capturing unless the player was willing to own the base they are trying to capture. I have no problem with a player capturing my base if that's why they are doing it, so that they can own it.....
If you think thats too strong and to limiting then maybe all its buildings get damaged, or an expansion is stolen..... And the base gets damaged.
It may be interesting if zones in current supers could be stolen...... So any base could be upgraded or down graded by attacks...... So bases can go below their normal value and above anywhere on the map..... This makes for a very fluid map.... Power base can be built and stolen anywhere.

Later DD

Awesome feedback, DD!
Thank you very much for spending the time to post here.
I'll be sure to pass this thread link along. Great job!

Gree it's been mentioned before by me and others but a enhanced player overview
This can be simple to run and cost effective.
It's a voluntary click an advert activation system or gold. Min 2 hrs for one advert, or 2 hours per advert so a player watching 3 gets 6 hrs.
This gives players a limited time enhanced overview.
1.Stackable research if they have the resources. Players can que multi research items that auto complete and auto start.
2. Enhance map view if in close zoom the map view shows factory times.
3. The game triggers the auto complete at the 5min remaining mark on applicable upgrades or builds.
4. A extra menu for players to see output of all their factories, this gives basic info like if it's producing units or not if they click the factory they get the same info as if they clicked the factory on the map.
So it's a short cut menu that a player can see if the factories are active or not. That's all that's needed very basic info, then they can click to go into the each factories menu. With a back button so they can return to the new factory list.
The enhanced menu could include all or some of these things.

Later DD.

Maps I have mentioned changes in a few of these posts, my ideas have been evolving as I wrote them down.

My final iteration of my ideas for Gree.
The map we have is ok with maybe the exception that rare resources only appear at the centre, but I want the game to treat it differently.
1. Make all bases expandable to at least super size.
2. Make all resources locations upgradable to the maps normal max for each type.
3. Make any base over the size of a standered bases 7 zones, downgradable as well as upgradable in size, so current supers can lose zones to attacks. So their are advantages to owning a super but players can steal them from you and players can upgrade any base with their spoils.
4. Let players move home base this is only possible if they own 2 super size bases if they do they can select either as a home base.
5. Home bases are immune from zone stealing.

This turns the map into a fluid resource for the game.

The game then has to track these changes in two ways.
1. these changes are remembered even if a capture takes place and the attacking Player does not need the base. The base does not get totally destroyed or reverted to a standered NPC base.
2. The new value based on upgrades, wether that be higher or lower than normal for its location on the map, the value is used to generate it's NPC garrison when empty.
So a super that was pillaged down to a normal size and has its building reduced in level from attacks could be down graded to a level 2 base and a level 2 base could if fully expanded and upgraded be given a value more than the current max for a super. As no normal super has level 16 buildings as a NPC base we have now. So I expect these to attract very high defence forces.

I see the base upgrades as rewards that can be won or earned from activity like the last day of the 30 day reward. To stop the world from over flowing with them I would suggest a system like, it takes 2 stolen zones to create one new one, so you have a slow reduction all the time so new ones entering the game are allways needed. Is see no player can hold extra expansions so when they hit 11 supers so at max they cannot steal or keep new zones, If unusable. This then keeps them one pillage attack from losing their max status.
The speed these items need to flow into the game can be monitored so if the game map is at or less than the start worlds number of base zones then extra can be added, but if the world is flush with them they become more difficult to win or earn. If players get rewards of expansion zones but cannot use them they enter the players alliances pool, where officers can give them out to other players if all the alliances players are max they can be traded for other items.


The system for stealing them from other players will have to be controlled but a new result for winning capture attacks seems like a good option maybe the player defending is able to tell what type of attack it is so they understand what the result may be.
I see player level Capps being used to control the ability to capture bases and steal zones this does not stop attacks, but blocks these more aggressive attacks. The current 5 level rule would be a good starting point or player power scores could be used or a combination of the 2.
Then throw in alliance zones, alliance bases you will see the map get carved up, power struggles for territory.

Fuel. Again I mention this above but I think it's an important change.

No more disbanding units if we run out of fuel.
In the real world if an army runs out of fuel they just cannot use them this is what should be in the game, and this makes it far more fair to players and far more tactical.

If I can destroy a players fuel supply and see a effect on their units being disabled from use.
I cover it in the posts above that the effect should not be when the player runs out of fuel but a small effect starts as soon as they go into negative fuel so as soon as their supply gets below use.
Then after that when their reserves are depleted the effect becomes fully active so if a player has no fuel in storage and they are producing 200,000 fuel but consuming 600,000 then only 33% of their units will be active, the important diffrence is they retain the units but they cannot fight so if they repair their fuel production and buy in fuel or use fuel boosts they can quickly get units back in action without the game destroying them.
So the reasons players use fuel boosts for are still their and this effect should be universal so it is in effect in cross world events, it actualy increases the need to stay in positive fuel as the effect starts when your fuel supply is out stripped by demand all be it at a lesser rate I suggested a max effect above.

This adds both a tactical element to the game and makes fuel far more like real world, it effect on wars which can be won or lost by just this one element.
Running out of fuel durring an attack can be debilitating, less so on defence as static units can still fire.
This is more complex but it would make for a more realistic effect if battles were somehow effected so units do not move if they have no fuel so instead of the units rushing forward into battle if a fuel shortage is in effect it shows in battles. In any way possible.

Gree I understand opening new worlds gives you a boost and help you pay server fees but they only serve to strip activity from older worlds so it's about time you did something new.
For the next new world you propose have the following ready.

1. Message all players in a few old worlds saying they are invited to move to a new world with all their items commanders and boosts.
Do they want to opt in to the move post a running total on a world, post a icon which tells player what % of players has agreed to move. Same for alliances show % of members that have voted to move.
2. Once you have a majority of players say over 50% tell players all active players will be mandatorily moved into the next new world.
3. update the map with the following changes.
A new system for resources I suggested.
B. New system for bases I suggest all bases are ghost supers, only when highlighted are zones active so the maps the same but all base have a ghost super outline showing its max size and the colour outline changes to show the growing base, as the base is expanded by the player.
C. The new attack system needs to be active so players can steal expansions and damage resources.

This move can be done on the map as it is, but this enhanced system will be a big carrot to move from old worlds. To try the enhance version of the game.
It's a win win for you Gree as this will still create a gold rush for you but it does not undermine old worlds but rather creates one strong world from a few failing ones. and running one new world rather than a few old ones should cut server overheads.
If you have players that were inactive in these old worlds after the move takes place if Gree you didn't move them with everyone else, which I suggest you do, but if you didn't then if they become active you allow them to move into any active world.
I would suggest you take players from as meany worlds as it takes to fill the new world at least 75% full.

As all players will be starting from a home base is see no big problems it will be like all new worlds it will be all about gold the players willing to spend will build army's and get into supers very quickly to try to dominate.

The only diffrence will be they will have commanders and cores and research in place so they will be rushing builds in factories and army builds to so they can get into the supers.
This would be good and bad in a normal world but it's effect in my enhanced world would be far less negative.
Power will always settle into the strongest players hands eventually gold can only help a rise not fully sustain it against a world with veteran players from multi worlds.
Expansions will be the prize of choice for most players as will instant mine upgrade items, commanders have saturated the game so these new items will be highly battled over. As will fuel boosts if the fuel system is in place.

Later DD.

Ok Gree I have one more idea that I think will put this game back into the top 10 in the AppStore.
PM me I want to cut a deal. Up to now my ideas have been free but this is so massive and game changing and its potential to make you money is so vast I want some insentive to tell you it. My CV is in my posts....
I want a job if my ideas are good I want a cut in the revenue my pay can be a % of what my ideas generate in app for you..give me free in game cash and I will look at your other games as well.

Thanks DD