How have we lost so many people to this wonderful game?

[hitech]

There is an urgent need to DO something. If it turns out to be wrong change it back and try something else. Does that make more sense to you? 

Strange how some people are blind to the fact many things have changed in the last year. Including a new game with a new game play format.

HiTech

[Vraciu]

You are right, dozens of good ideas and hi-tech implemented them, bad ones not so much.

That's a massive overstatement on both counts.

By the way, why don't you guys read what hi-tech posts?  A little while ago, he posted that he was warming up to something similar. Why not expand on that?   Look up his posts and debate that.  I think it was 1 month ago but not longer than 6.

Semp

Like Frye, we are trying to decide if he's serious or being sarcastic.

[Wiley]

There is an urgent need to DO something. If it turns out to be wrong change it back and try something else. Does that make more sense to you? 

Ok just for fun I'll play.  Let's do something.  Let's flip the switch that makes the MA 2 sided for a couple months.  Poof.  It's now 2 sided.

So after 2 months, HT goes "Oh crap.  We had negligible new players and X% of my existing players left because of that!"  IE- it doesn't work, so he unflips the switch and puts it back.  Poof, it's now 3 sided again.

How many of the guys that left will return?  I'd pretty much guarantee it would not be all of them.  Does that make any kind of sense to you?

Whatever they try needs a reasonable chance of success.  Hope doesn't cut it and it's not like changing stuff is risk free.

Wiley.

[Vraciu]

Strange how some people are blind to the fact many things have changed in the last year. Including a new game with a new game play format.

HiTech

Well, for what it's worth, I have no interest in that.   I like what you've created in the Melee. 

What's the response been to the new game?  I honestly and seriously have no clue.  Is it gaining traction?

[Vraciu]

Ok just for fun I'll play.  Let's do something.  Let's flip the switch that makes the MA 2 sided for a couple months.  Poof.  It's now 2 sided.

So after 2 months, HT goes "Oh crap.  We had negligible new players and X% of my existing players left because of that!"  IE- it doesn't work, so he unflips the switch and puts it back.  Poof, it's now 3 sided again.

How many of the guys that left will return?  I'd pretty much guarantee it would not be all of them.  Does that make any kind of sense to you?

Whatever they try needs a reasonable chance of success.  Hope doesn't cut it and it's not like changing stuff is risk free.

Wiley.

If he rolls out the change correctly, with a request for patience and goodwill from the player base I dare say there's enough loyalty for people to stick with it for a bit.  Communication is key.

[Vraciu]

He is just trolling.  That is all he does.
It's best to just ignore him.

 

[Wiley]

If he rolls out the change correctly, with a request for patience and goodwill from the player base I dare say there's enough loyalty for people to stick with it for a bit.  Communication is key.

Maybe.  Would you risk your meal ticket on my goodwill?  I know I sure wouldn't risk mine on yours.  There's enough varied people in here the response would not be unanimous no matter what he did.

Wiley.

[guncrasher]

Maybe.  Would you risk your meal ticket on my goodwill?  I know I sure wouldn't risk mine on yours.  There's enough varied people in here the response would not be unanimous no matter what he did.

Wiley.

Naw the key word is correctly, if it fails is because it was not done correctly.

So after we switch back to 3 sides with less players, he'll come back asking for 2 sides done correctly.


semp

[CptTrips]

Ok just for fun I'll play.  Let's do something.  Let's flip the switch that makes the MA 2 sided for a couple months.  Poof.  It's now 2 sided.

So after 2 months, HT goes "Oh crap.  We had negligible new players and X% of my existing players left because of that!"  IE- it doesn't work, so he unflips the switch and puts it back.  Poof, it's now 3 sided again.

I don't know what strawman you are channeling, but that was never my suggestion.

I suggested that the code should be refactored to run either configuration, like the way you can run a 512x or 256x or 64x map.  I suggested once that was done, you could run a Two-Sided Tues for a month or two.  1 day a week.  There rest of the time normal configuration.  Then measure the player sentiment.  If it is positive, maybe you run alternate weeks or a run of a couple of months if confidence is high. My suggestions was never to throw the switch all at once sink or swim.  I always suggested you'd want to be able to run either.  If number got back about 300-400 you'd be better off with 3-sides again.

But Hitech is amendment.  It would apparently not be feasible to refactor the code anyway.  So...there you go.  I don't know about the bias part, but I can certainly understand it not being feasible to make such core logic changes from a purely practical standpoint.

But even an alternative suggestion of a 3-sided smaller test map with slightly shorter minimum field spacing and Semp throws himself on the ground flailing his arms and legs screaming we will destroy the game and we're trying to force our will on him blah blah blah.

Whatever. 

[Wiley]

I don't know what strawman you are channeling, but that was never my suggestion.

I was responding to Fugi, not you.    There's a lot of platitude "CHANGE OR DIE!!!" going on, but the problem with evolution is beneficial changes are what let things survive.  Everybody's got their own idea what is beneficial.

I suggested that the code should be refactored to run either configuration, like the way you can run a 512x or 256x or 64x map.  I suggested once that was done, you could run a Two-Sided Tues for a month or two.  1 day a week.  There rest of the time normal configuration.  Then measure the player sentiment.  If it is positive, maybe you run alternate weeks or a run of a couple of months if confidence is high. My suggestions was never to throw the switch all at once sink or swim.  I always suggested you'd want to be able to run either.  If number got back about 300-400 you'd be better off with 3-sides again.

2 things about that- one day a week you're not going to get much meaningful out of it because it doesn't have time to play out over the course of a map rotation.  Second, it's new and shiny so much like the WWI arena at first, there's motivation to check it out versus when it becomes the new default.  Really it's the same thing as if you had the "2 side" and "3 side" arena running concurrently that you always say is unfair.

But Hitech is amendment.  It would apparently not be feasible to refactor the code anyway.  So...there you go.  I don't know about the bias part, but I can certainly understand it not being feasible to make such core logic changes from a purely practical standpoint.

But even an alternative suggestion of a 3-sided smaller test map with slightly shorter minimum field spacing and Semp throws himself on the ground flailing his arms and legs screaming we will destroy the game and we're trying to force our will on him blah blah blah.

Whatever.

So, what exactly are you saying?  Is the DCA Mafia the majority or not?  If it is, then he can either cater to them or cater to the market today.  My question is how successful will a WT clone with worse graphics be?  I know what my money's on.

Wiley.

[Zeta]

The game is fantastic.  There's nothing wrong with it. That's not the issue.  Fresh faces is the issue (in my mind anyway).

I still think that if suddenly the word spread to the gaming community that this game was Free to all non-Americans for one year, we would be packed...and after time, that would bring in more paying customers here in America...in a very short time.  I could easily see cumulative 500 player nights in the various forums.  By the time the one year free term ended.....I could see 300 to 500 new paying customers.  The hardest part would be guarding the doors.

[CptTrips]

I was responding to Fugi, not you.    There's a lot of platitude "CHANGE OR DIE!!!" going on, but the problem with evolution is beneficial changes are what let things survive.  Everybody's got their own idea what is beneficial.

Well, the current trend line is negative.  Unless you believe the trend line will reverse itself magically, something will have to be changed to alter the output.
If the trend line continues unaltered, I don't see how it doesn't reach zero.  Slowly, or all at once one day when you reach the colony collapse threshold. 

If you don't want to call that Change-or-Die, then call it what ever your like.

The only other alternative is to believe in magic.  I do not believe in magic.

2 things about that- one day a week you're not going to get much meaningful out of it because it doesn't have time to play out over the course of a map rotation.  Second, it's new and shiny so much like the WWI arena at first, there's motivation to check it out versus when it becomes the new default.  Really it's the same thing as if you had the "2 side" and "3 side" arena running concurrently that you always say is unfair.

I simply was suggesting a careful stepwise dose testing.  I would start with one day a week:
a. to assuage the fears of the players who fear too much change at once.  Anyone can put up with anything for one day.
b. to make sure the whole thing doesn't immediately collapse. 

You shiny new object fear is irrelevant, since as I said, it should just be a configuration, if 3 months down the road you realize it was a mistake, you drop CraterMA back in and flip the config param back to 3-sides.

But  again, this is all irrelevant.  You are stuck with 3-sides.

So, what exactly are you saying?  Is the DCA Mafia the majority or not?

As I said.  He should freeze this project in carbonite exactly as-is, put it on a shelf and leave it until the last player is planted, and spend his time on new games.

[FLS]

There is an urgent need to DO something. If it turns out to be wrong change it back and try something else. Does that make more sense to you? 

That sounds like you don't understand hidden costs and unintended consequences.

[Ciaphas]

There are many different ways to handle the situation that Dale stated a few pages back. Which one is the right one? Who knows.

The interesting thing here is these types of threads always devolve in to chest thumping and stray way off course and it becomes difficult to follow posts about the original subject.

Dale stated that the key is retaining new players. It would appear that a little bit of research is needed on Dale's side with regard to the reason people have been leaving over the past few years and the reasons people download the game and the inability to convert those new players in to subs.

We can throw out our suggestions but does it really matter? Responses will just go down the path of nonconstructive conversation as they usually do.

Here is a question or two for those of you who float around the bbs but don't have a current sub:

What was the situation that made you cancel your sub?

What will it take to bring you back in to the sub fold?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Vraciu]

Maybe.  Would you risk your meal ticket on my goodwill?  I know I sure wouldn't risk mine on yours.  There's enough varied people in here the response would not be unanimous no matter what he did.

Wiley.

I’d rather do that than die on the vine. 

Fortune favors the bold.