2,5 months of HTML 5!

NOTE:
1 * (star) = minimum
5 * (stars) = maximum

---

Hi lads

2 and a half months passed since Admins implemented HTML5 version to us.

Did you adapt from SL to HTML finally?
What are your summarized views about it?
What are its best and least good sides?

I have given it 4 stars (* * * *).
I was not playing for almost 2 months, but last 15 days which I am playing actively like before, I can't say much against it. It is not 5 stars because it has still some unsolved bugs during gameplay (unit not moving from a walled city, etc..), but the rest is really, really well done.
For doing a turn, especially starting expansion, I need to spend same time as in SL version, what is great difference if we compare both HTML versions. Also, there are much less server problems and issues than it was in SL.

I won't go in every detail of my opinion, but if you sum up all, I think now we can say that HTML is better than SL.
Sure it still needs some fixes and polishes, especially with bugs, but I am sure we will make it perfect soon.

As an extra motivating thing I need to mention activity of admins (especially Sun Tzu), moderators and supporters.

Why I asked this poll here is because here are coming the most conpetitive and active part of community and not everyone who opens atWar like it is case on its homepage.
Please vote your rate of HTML5 or comment your opinion.

Cheers,
Croat

Написао Zenith, 19.12.2015 at 08:30

Shit happens when you copy-paste

Total failiure for me, too much lag, too many bugs, random DCs + SL looked and responded nicer........a lot nicer.

I bought a monster of a pc and now html works great... but i lost the addiction for AW long time ago im afraid

3 stars is the best vote i believe for html5's. current position.

Nice work! html 5...dc are killing me in middle of games...either reload or back to lobby...and lose all my moves...happens alot now...otherwise, i like it

*

1 star for me.....
barely see any cws these days. barely active in the game as such. I see that some players haven't given up. But lets be honest it hasn't been remotely the same atwar we knew since the switch.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 02:17

1 star for me....
barely see any cws these days.

Dude, what are you talking about?
Just yesterday there were 5 clanwars what is equal to the number of CWs in SL's best days.

Написао Croat, 20.12.2015 at 08:54

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 02:17

1 star for me....
barely see any cws these days.

Dude, what are you talking about?
Just yesterday there were 5 clanwars what is equal to the number of CWs in SL's best days.

this activity is intermittent.

Написао Xenosapien, 20.12.2015 at 09:05

this activity is intermittent.

I would rather say prevouis inactivity was intermittent.

Since I was that one who calculated number of CWs in Silveright per day and per coalition, I can confidently say that last 20 days of HTML's clanwarring are equal to the average SL clanwarring days.

I just cannot understand players (I am not referring this to you) who still shit on HTML with arguments 'It is bad', 'Many bugs', 'No CWs' ...
And these shit arguments are posted by players who:
- played only 2 games in HTML
- weren't helping with finding and realising HTML bugs (they had a chance)
- played last CW before 80 days with inactive clan (it was still in Silveright)

How can player with that profile allow himself to say a word against HTML?
It is funny how their best argument is low number of CWs, but they played only (!!) 7 clanwars last year.
If we dont include that 7 CWs, their last CW was before 320 days (!!!).

Only conclusion there is that players werent caring and playing CWs neither in Silveright version, but look, now they use low number of CWs in HTML as argument against it.
Just wtf...

If that was said by Eagle, I would understand, but by some players who were inactive even in SL...... I don't and I won't understand that.


This community is missing some respect
#JustSaying

Написао Croat, 20.12.2015 at 09:35

I would rather say prevouis inactivity was intermittent.

Since I was that one who calculated number of CWs in Silveright per day and per coalition, I can confidently say that last 20 days of HTML's clanwarring are equal to the average SL clanwarring days.

I just cannot understand players (I am not referring this to you) who still shit on HTML with arguments 'It is bad', 'Many bugs', 'No CWs' ...
And these shit arguments are posted by players who:
- played only 2 games in HTML
- weren't helping with finding and realising HTML bugs (they had a chance)
- played last CW before 80 days with inactive clan (it was still in Silveright)

How can player with that profile allow himself to say a word against HTML?
It is funny how their best argument is low number of CWs, but they played only (!!) 7 clanwars last year.
If we dont include that 7 CWs, their last CW was before 320 days (!!!).

Only conclusion there is that players werent caring and playing CWs neither in Silveright version, but look, now they use low number of CWs in HTML as argument against it.
Just wtf...

If that was said by Eagle, I would understand, but by some players who were inactive even in SL...... I don't and I won't understand that.


This community is missing some respect
#JustSaying

First off in the peak sl cws we easily had 10 cws a day going strong for months.When I was in mystics I remember playing Mystics playing 7-8 cws single day I don't know where you got the numbers from. But just for arguments sake calculate the total cws played in html compared to cws played in sl for same number of days to get the idea. I don't know where the numbers are available though.

Secondly how many cws one plays has nothing to do with his or her opinion of the html version of the game. I also have low number of cws and there is a reason for that. I live in India and for my time period if I have to play cws I have to remain active from 12am to 6 am since most cws happen during those times which I unfortunately I can't.

For me I complain about the low cw numbers because I actually feel lower competition then it was before. In the sl days we (SM) were having atleast 3 - 4 cws a day. There was genuine activity in the clan and the desire to wins cws against clans with better cp. There was genuine discussion and desire to be the best clan of the season. Now I very rarely see that activity. I have submitted some bugs to the game and some of which have been fixed.

If you have not given up on the game its good. I hope atwar regains the same level of activity it once had. That will force me to be active once again. But please just don't tell me that I am not entitled to my opinion.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

First off in the peak sl cws we easily had 10 cws a day going strong for months.When I was in mystics I remember playing Mystics playing 7-8 cws single day I don't know where you got the numbers from. But just for arguments sake calculate the total cws played in html compared to cws played in sl for same number of days to get the idea. I don't know where the numbers are available though.

First off, you need to read my comment more carefully:

Написао Croat, 20.12.2015 at 09:35

Since I was that one who calculated number of CWs in Silveright per day and per coalition, I can confidently say that last 20 days of HTML's clanwarring are equal to the average SL clanwarring days.

I have no idea where you saw 'peak' number of CWs in my comment, because I was commenting fair enough that last 'active' 15 days of clanwarring in HTML are equal to the average SL clanwarring days, which is great step forward if we compare it with HTML begginings.
To calculate the difference between this 2,5 months of HTML and SL most precisely, you would need to know how many CWs were played in first 2,5 months of SL, also an average number of CWs in first 2,5 months of SL, which is impossible both for me and for you.
What I know is that atWar's community was a lot smaller and there was small number of CWs per day, but difference is that players then had respect to each other and to admins who implemented SL to them. They developed it together so it was later perfect for you and for me who came on this game after.

Why are you making such a negative atmosphere around HTML, I really don't know, but any of these guys who voted for 1 star NEVER gave a precise and relevant arguments against it, just old same boring sentences like: 'I dont like graphics', 'It is bugged', 'SL was better', 'This is shit, lets stop being active'.
If you ask me, who was one of the most active players in last 1,5 year, I really don't see any that hard difference between HTML and SL. Honestly.
Sure you need some time to adapt on new look and new parts of gameplay, it is same if you buy new Mercedes CLS after you had been driving Toyota Yaris for 5 years. Sure you wont adapt in 10 minutes, but in few days you will assume how much Mercedes is better than Toyota.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

Secondly how many cws one plays has nothing to do with his or her opinion of the html version of the game. I also have low number of cws and there is a reason for that. I live in India and for my time period if I have to play cws I have to remain active from 12am to 6 am since most cws happen during those times which I unfortunately I can't.

From your comment I can only assume you are still not relevant to talk negatively in the name of HTML CW scene. Sure you have right on your opinion even you are inactive, but giving it the least good rate with 2 played games on it is silly.
I would never rate or talk about somehing I am not experienced in, at least minimally.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

For me I complain about the low cw numbers because I actually feel lower competition then it was before. In the sl days we (SM) were having atleast 3 - 4 cws a day. There was genuine activity in the clan and the desire to wins cws against clans with better cp. There was genuine discussion and desire to be the best clan of the season. Now I very rarely see that activity. I have submitted some bugs to the game and some of which have been fixed.

Well, I had same lying feeling while I was inactice (right when HTML was realized), but trust me, now I feel same old feeling and desire in CWs as before in Silveright.
You have to know that each season certain coalition has a best wish and inspiration to get a top spot. Before several seasons it was Cosa Nostra, than Stalins Martians, than Victorious Secret and Shadow Aces...
Whole CW activity cannot be based just on activity of one coalition.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

If you have not given up on the game its good. I hope atwar regains the same level of activity it once had. That will force me to be active once again. But please just don't tell me that I am not entitled to my opinion.

Here is what I am talking about, certain players just complain and go inactive instead of helping and being active.

How the hell you can talk about HTML inactivity if you are part of it

As I already stated, when SL version was impelemented there was very small number of players (if we compare it with current number), but they made it perfect and improved the game and the community.
As an optimist, I really believe we can do same thing with HTML, which is already good enough, just some perfections with bugs need to be done.

I wish you to come active soon, hope we will meet each other in some CW

* * * *

Написао Croat, 20.12.2015 at 14:14

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

First off in the peak sl cws we easily had 10 cws a day going strong for months.When I was in mystics I remember playing Mystics playing 7-8 cws single day I don't know where you got the numbers from. But just for arguments sake calculate the total cws played in html compared to cws played in sl for same number of days to get the idea. I don't know where the numbers are available though.

First off, you need to read my comment more carefully:

Написао Croat, 20.12.2015 at 09:35

Since I was that one who calculated number of CWs in Silveright per day and per coalition, I can confidently say that last 20 days of HTML's clanwarring are equal to the average SL clanwarring days.

I have no idea where you saw 'peak' number of CWs in my comment, because I was commenting fair enough that last 'active' 15 days of clanwarring in HTML are equal to the average SL clanwarring days, which is great step forward if we compare it with HTML begginings.
To calculate the difference between this 2,5 months of HTML and SL most precisely, you would need to know how many CWs were played in first 2,5 months of SL, also an average number of CWs in first 2,5 months of SL, which is impossible both for me and for you.
What I know is that atWar's community was a lot smaller and there was small number of CWs per day, but difference is that players then had respect to each other and to admins who implemented SL to them. They developed it together so it was later perfect for you and for me who came on this game after.

Why are you making such a negative atmosphere around HTML, I really don't know, but any of these guys who voted for 1 star NEVER gave a precise and relevant arguments against it, just old same boring sentences like: 'I dont like graphics', 'It is bugged', 'SL was better', 'This is shit, lets stop being active'.
If you ask me, who was one of the most active players in last 1,5 year, I really don't see any that hard difference between HTML and SL. Honestly.
Sure you need some time to adapt on new look and new parts of gameplay, it is same if you buy new Mercedes CLS after you had been driving Toyota Yaris for 5 years. Sure you wont adapt in 10 minutes, but in few days you will assume how much Mercedes is better than Toyota.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

Secondly how many cws one plays has nothing to do with his or her opinion of the html version of the game. I also have low number of cws and there is a reason for that. I live in India and for my time period if I have to play cws I have to remain active from 12am to 6 am since most cws happen during those times which I unfortunately I can't.

From your comment I can only assume you are still not relevant to talk negatively in the name of HTML CW scene. Sure you have right on your opinion even you are inactive, but giving it the least good rate with 2 played games on it is silly.
I would never rate or talk about somehing I am not experienced in, at least minimally.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

For me I complain about the low cw numbers because I actually feel lower competition then it was before. In the sl days we (SM) were having atleast 3 - 4 cws a day. There was genuine activity in the clan and the desire to wins cws against clans with better cp. There was genuine discussion and desire to be the best clan of the season. Now I very rarely see that activity. I have submitted some bugs to the game and some of which have been fixed.

Well, I had same lying feeling while I was inactice (right when HTML was realized), but trust me, now I feel same old feeling and desire in CWs as before in Silveright.
You have to know that each season certain coalition has a best wish and inspiration to get a top spot. Before several seasons it was Cosa Nostra, than Stalins Martians, than Victorious Secret and Shadow Aces...
Whole CW activity cannot be based just on activity of one coalition.

Написао minusSeven, 20.12.2015 at 12:41

If you have not given up on the game its good. I hope atwar regains the same level of activity it once had. That will force me to be active once again. But please just don't tell me that I am not entitled to my opinion.

Here is what I am talking about, certain players just complain and go inactive instead of helping and being active.

How the hell you can talk about HTML inactivity if you are part of it

As I already stated, when SL version was impelemented there was very small number of players (if we compare it with current number), but they made it perfect and improved the game and the community.
As an optimist, I really believe we can do same thing with HTML, which is already good enough, just some perfections with bugs need to be done.

I wish you to come active soon, hope we will meet each other in some CW

In 2012-2013 there was a cw every half an hour for 8 hours stright at peak time by all sorts of legendary players who have been lost to time. In early 2014 SM and and evoL had had 10 cws a day alone. Not to mention anyone else. I do believe your peak numbers are a little off, but I don't think your entirely wrong. From a analytical view of the game activity is indeed returning, from veteran players such as some if us in sm the game was already fading for us for years, and html5 put the last bullet hole in our heads. 10 cws a day by players we hardly see as compition or people who have become sort of like names on a screen is not the same as the fierce rivalries we had. The wars we once fought fade into memory and we slowly lose hope we'll ever see them again, I just sort of wish I could go back to the way thing are a charish the battles that where fought and charish sm more than I gave credit for. Because your pretty much right atwar is on the rebound but the magic faded away a long time ago.

I gave it 3 stars... mainly due to activity issues, but hopefully with recent changes and initiatives and the mentality people seem to have HTML5 can some day be on the level if not overtake what the SL version was on in it's prime

Oh man I thought it was a scale of shityness and that this was a troll thread.... don't use stars next time, it looks like you want to swear at it.

Написао Dbacks, 22.12.2015 at 11:30

Oh man I thought it was a scale of shityness and that this was a troll thread.... don't use stars next time, it looks like you want to swear at it.

lmao, what word could 1 star possibly be censoring. **** ing hell dbacks

Написао Permamuted, 22.12.2015 at 11:40

Написао Dbacks, 22.12.2015 at 11:30

Oh man I thought it was a scale of shityness and that this was a troll thread.... don't use stars next time, it looks like you want to swear at it.

lmao, what word could 1 star possibly be censoring. **** ing hell dbacks

idk man ;-; stop confusing me

I like how real is top1.
P.S stop being new clovis croat.....

It's good.