At what point is there not enough players?
Been away for a while, thought id pop in and have a look about and it seems the playerbase has declined even more.
So it got me wondering, how low can the signups/paid planets go before the game isn't viable to run anymore? Think I counted 440 planets this morning, 12 hrs before round start, seems very low for what was historically the most active round of the year. Would be interesting to hear feedback, even to hear how Many alliances play now and tag sizes. Like are most of those 440 'active' and 'tagged'? Have the randoms completely gone now? |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
It was more players R64 than in R54.
Where does your "data" start from? |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Last round was pretty good as far as player numbers go, actually. A 4-round high! Woo!
How many players does PA really need? Who knows. As long as PA Team doesn't kill the game, it'll keep going. If "that other game" is any indication, 100 players can be enough. Enjoy gathering feedback, though. Hope it helps. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Cheers mz, kinda ignored butchers reply as it had no relevance to what was being asked.
I didn't realise 'the other game' was doing so badly, hadnt even thought to check. My presumption is that as long as the game breaks water, or even operates at a minor loss they would keep it up, purely for nostalgia. Im glad the game had a revival in rd64 but then does this mean rd65 is gonna suffer for it and lead to further decline, I guess only time will tell. Maybe Appoco or Lunar will comment. I know they won't give out figures but maybe can explain it better |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Well the question would be when did you quit then? Since its been declining that much planet count would suggest it aswell?
Now people might claim that the player count swings seasonaly, so one must compare the "pa season" towards last years |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I actually think the extra 'Xmas round' has contributed a lot to the decline of the regular playerbsse.
Pa operated on a busy winter quiet summer programme and now the push to get 3 rounds in at winter is causing burn out. When you add to that that night launching is not something the majority can keep up over an extended period of time. This is why part of my initial question was about the amount of players 'tagged'. 'Tagged' players are largely regular signups and that is then boosted by randoms. If there is little to no randoms anymore and as stated above 'tagged' players fall away slowly over time will there ever be a sustained upward revival? |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I do think that not having stealers don't die apon didnt help much
I'm glad the idea isnt perma mothballed but needs a bit fo work |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Please don't derail the thread with stuff debated in two other active threads thanks.
That said it's also possible the massive variations in stats puts people off as well. A few rounds of unfavourable stats will kill morale and as I found once away from the game for a few rounds it's very easy to stay away completely |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Oh, you may not know of this.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
Hell yeah, thats what we need! You must be the savior of the universe... Really Kaiba, and i say this in a totally not personal but only topic related way: GET LOST!!! Other then that - good too see an old face - enjoy your retirement :bunny: |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
So now we're all required to refrain from mentioning that the player base is shrinking?
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I guess not, but there might be a point somewhere in m0's post(if you elect to read something into the tone and motivation of Kaiba's post). Why would a retired player care if people elect to play with +-700 players(which has been fairly consistent lately)? I dunno the awnser, and i wouldn't care to speculate. To give some personal awnser to the initial question(which has little to do on AD, but i guess since PD has been dead for 30 rounds..): I'm enjoying this game as much as i did 4 rounds ago, or 40 rounds ago for that matter, probably more so. The variations isn't that big from round to round and there is usually several strong alliances competing which helps make things interesting. In respect to how big a playerbase this game needs; in my personal opinion the game is as good or bad as it has been since r10 and i don't experience much difference between 2k players and 700 players during the course of the round except for politics being slightly more restricted. Out of the box thinking from HC's and alliances disbanding and others forming or reforming keeps pols somewhat fluid tho.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I was pretty surprised at the low planet count as well. Honestly, having 5 weeks between rounds (Dec 4 - Jan 8) is terrible - havoc and the christmas round aren't taken seriously by many people (myself included) so I'm sure the holidays pull people away from the game.
I don't see why we can't just move havoc to havoc.planetarion.com and decrease the downtime in between rounds, and for christmas just pause the game for 1-3 days. Alternatively plan the rounds so that you have 2 weeks for the Christmas round and have it go from Dec 18 to Jan 1 (2015 example), pausing only for Dec 25th. To help with that, start using different round lengths - shorter rounds are better for war/roid swapping/xp, longer rounds are better for fencing/value play. Perhaps we would see more versatility in strategies with 5 week vs 8 week rounds? PS. m0, it seems Kaiba is showing genuine concern for the game and is trying to get a discussion going, I don't see the need to tell him off for that. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
Many are quitting this game because nothing new happens and it's the same old repetitive play-style. PS: I can't be bothered with your constant trolling Butcher. It's getting old and tiresome, so unless you're going to grace us with something constructive, then please don't act like an imbecile with one of your usual responses. I'll probably check your response next week. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I think it is less to do with numbers and more to do with how people behave, although more numbers make the game more competitive. If you want to have an open round you'll have one. If you want to maintain tedium and focus on lengthy grudges then it won't be as good.
The best planetarion has been and gone, because to make the game really interesting, it takes numbers, commitment, and geography. That doesn't mean you can't have a good game, but for players who have gone the distance it might be a bit of a disappointment if they come back as a casual player and realise there is no one to carry them, because quite a few people are doing the same. If you're enjoying it, keep going. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
The pace of the game feels way higher now, than ever before. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
One of the things i like...
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
I remember when I worked nights (finishing at 2am) that I found this game awesome, but when i switched to a 7am start it was vastly less enjoyable and more stressful, which resulted in vastly more conflict on irc |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Okay any more cheating accusations are off limits unless there's been actual planet closures. Get personal and I won't take kindly to it either. Don't particularly want to be hefty with the moderating but little option. Please continue.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I like the idea of a flexible end of round. Meaning the End of round is announced at pt 979(1 week out from a 7 week round[standard])as either being 7 weeks, 8 weeks etc....
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
This game struggles to keep people interested for 7 weeks as it, the prospect of av random 8th or 9th week with havoc bolted on the end would severely damage signups, just like the gap between round starts has here. If you want to randomise the end then the overall round set up has to change. Maybe having 4 weeks of 1 hr ticks and then 1-2 weeks of 30 mins ticks would be better, like rushing to a conclusion and allowing lots of changes in the final part of the round |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I like variable round lengths, but if they're introduced, they need to be determined by events in the game. If there's a neck-and-neck race, the round can be longer. If an alliance is 50% ahead from tick 400 onwards, the round should be shorter. This should be determined algorithmically, without human intervention.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
But then you get the issue that if two alliances are neck and neck and the rest are cut adrift that we get an extra two weeks then maybe 75% have given up, with 2 weeks of havoc bolted on and a week of signups that's a potential 5 weeks between active play for the majority, and we get more ppl not sign up because they went and found something else in that 5 weeks
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
What do you mean by 'cut adrift'? If you mean they can no longer win, that is always the case with all but 2-3 of the alliances playing. If you mean they've stopped playing, then I'd need to know why.
I am in favour of cutting down on the amount of downtime by either removing havoc altogether, or (Patrikc's suggestion) overlapping it with signups for the next round. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
With your non human regulator of round length we could end up with a round that runs 8-9 weeks yet nothing happens conflict wise, those alliance could be napped and roid farming 3-6 alliances whilst staying within 10-15 mill of each other. Having a potential 800 ticks of dead game for the majority, along with a minimum downtime of 2 weeks would push over 1100 ticks inbetween some people's active play. That is not good no matter which way you slice it |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Why not just havoc the final week.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Honestly, a game in which you can reliably plan for 900 or 1300 ticks in advance doesn't sound very dynamic (ie good) to me. :(
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
PA should not be so straightforward that your plans always work, though, and certainly not 2 months in advance.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Yeah, well, if you think I'm just going to let that kind of thing slide, you've got another thing coming.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
213 players
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
as long there is 200-400 HONEST players I will still consider playing planetarion.
I do think a radical approach is needed to change how Planetarion is today. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
The choice PA Team makes is between 2 alternatives:
1) Keep going as is, do nothing, accept the slow decline until the player base suddenly no longer supports the game and it collapses. Risk-free and cheap. 2) Do something radical, gamble that the changes will revitalize the game. Risky and expensive. I don't blame them for not picking option 2. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
PA is on what is called dying ground a move is needed to get off dying ground and imo your option 2 is the only choice left.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Only if you really want to save PA. Badly enough to invest tens of thousands of insert-currency-here.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
I guess PA's biggest problem is the lack of information. No players get told what is actually going on in terms of development, nor is any information provided for whats going to happen going forward.
Lunar Lamp should as "caretaker/owner" really write up a bit informing about whats going to happen forward. Im playing another tick based game that recently has been taken over by some of the players playing the game, and they are really good with keeping the community up to date and informed about the deveolopment of the game, this has lead to a surge in interest and new players and hopefully a more enjoyable game for everyone. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
I personally wouldn't buy a credit if I didn't know when the round starts how long that credit will be valid. I usually don't play in a top ally anyway so what goes on in the top part of the ranking means very little to me. |
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Easy: 1 credit pays for 7 weeks worth of round.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Pay for 9 weeks. Round ends after 5. You now have 4 weeks left.
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Quote:
|
Re: At what point is there not enough players?
Well, you'd always have to have 9 weeks worth of credit before you could upgrade in any given round, otherwise, what happens when your credit runs out before the round ends?
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:07. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018