Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

I suggest a increase in start up funds

My proposal

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
66 replies to this topic

#1 Daenerys Targaryen

Daenerys Targaryen

    "Valar Morghulis"

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Nation Name:New Valyria
  • Alliance Name:Knights Of The Round Table
  • CN:TE Nation Name:New Valyria
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:The Misfits

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:12 PM

I'll d like to see a increase in the amount of money new nations start off with.

 

I propose $50,000,000 in start up cash.

 

The current amount is $50,000.

 

In terms of the vast amount of resources needed to build and strive in this game, the current amount buys very little. This will not only improve first impressions but also give new nations more incentive to stick around longer and explore the many wonders of the game.

 

New nations don't want to play a game where straight off the bat it feels like your doing chores such as being forced to organize tech deals to buy a improvement. I'll d like to see new nations have good benefits to play this game when it can make you feel like a penny in the ocean in terms of the size of everyone else.

 

I see many suggestions and benefits for older nations to keep playing but little for new nations. This game is guaranteed to die if its just going to be a club for the old boys.

 

 

 

 

 

 



#2 Lord Hershey

Lord Hershey

    The Messenger

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 282 posts
  • Nation Name:Lord Hershey
  • Alliance Name:Doom Squad

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:27 PM

May I suggest all new nations start off as being in peace mode with no penalties for the next 30 days? Then after that, all new nations will have an option to continue staying in peace mode (with penalties starting) or to exit peace mode? The reason behind this is because I feel like some people may re roll and constantly harass young nations and drive them to leave the game every time they start a new nation.


Edited by Lord Hershey, 26 January 2014 - 04:27 PM.


#3 Loki Laufeyson

Loki Laufeyson

    HIM Haile Selassie I

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Nation Name:Carribean Union
  • Alliance Name:Killuminati Empire

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:29 PM

I agree, although 1 mil is a better amount.

 

May I suggest all new nations start off as being in peace mode with no penalties for the next 30 days? Then after that, all new nations will have an option to continue staying in peace mode (with penalties starting) or to exit peace mode? The reason behind this is because I feel like some people may re roll and constantly harass young nations and drive them to leave the game every time they start a new nation.

 

30 days is way too long. Most players are able to start tech deals and join an alliance within a week.


Edited by Loki Laufeyson, 26 January 2014 - 04:32 PM.


#4 Daenerys Targaryen

Daenerys Targaryen

    "Valar Morghulis"

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Nation Name:New Valyria
  • Alliance Name:Knights Of The Round Table
  • CN:TE Nation Name:New Valyria
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:The Misfits

Posted 26 January 2014 - 04:30 PM

May I suggest all new nations start off as being in peace mode with no penalties for the next 30 days? Then after that, all new nations will have an option to continue staying in peace mode (with penalties starting) or to exit peace mode? The reason behind this is because I feel like some people may re roll and constantly harass young nations and drive them to leave the game every time they start a new nation.

I agree.



#5 Hime Themis

Hime Themis

    Hime Themis

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts
  • Nation Name:Dulra
  • Alliance Name:The Order of the Black Rose

Posted 27 January 2014 - 01:47 PM

Gentle Persons

 

 I am fully suportive of enhancing the beginning postion of newer nations as I did with my suggestion for a free wonder as part of the birthday bonus. However if you start a nation with 50 mill then they will use it to immediately bounce ot a lower mid level and will never be able to actually grow the nation through tech selling as they will have passed beyond without having a reserve. This will enhance the start but reallly harm the mid game for most. In addition if I may ask how do you compensate the nations who have plugged along for the last year or two , who now enjoy watching brand new players bounce past them with this little bonus. Do we really give a huge boost to new players who may or may not stay while punishing those who have actually hung in for some time and actually supported the play here on Digiterra? What also prevents a player coming in a wasting away his nation then just rerolling. Where is the advantage to a long term committment?

 

Respectfully

Dame HIme Themis



#6 Vespassianus

Vespassianus

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 770 posts
  • Nation Name:Battlecruiser
  • Alliance Name:DBDC

Posted 27 January 2014 - 03:01 PM

Gentle Persons

 

 I am fully suportive of enhancing the beginning postion of newer nations as I did with my suggestion for a free wonder as part of the birthday bonus. However if you start a nation with 50 mill then they will use it to immediately bounce ot a lower mid level and will never be able to actually grow the nation through tech selling as they will have passed beyond without having a reserve. This will enhance the start but reallly harm the mid game for most. In addition if I may ask how do you compensate the nations who have plugged along for the last year or two , who now enjoy watching brand new players bounce past them with this little bonus. Do we really give a huge boost to new players who may or may not stay while punishing those who have actually hung in for some time and actually supported the play here on Digiterra? What also prevents a player coming in a wasting away his nation then just rerolling. Where is the advantage to a long term committment?

 

Respectfully

Dame HIme Themis

 

 

Good points, 50 mil would instantly make a nation to skip low tier and tech selling and it would be not so fair against people who joined earlier. 

 

Now with the increased aid limit the nation growth is accelerated at lower tiers, i think decreasing the wonder clock for 20 days would help more to them.



#7 Azaghul

Azaghul

    Baruk Khazd! Khazd ai-mnu!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,103 posts
  • Nation Name:Belegost
  • Alliance Name:The Order of the Paradox
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Wienerville
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:the Warriors

Posted 27 January 2014 - 09:11 PM

A lot of new nations don't know how to spend their money well and in many cases end up wasting a lot of it.  The situation now gives them more a learning curve.



#8 Believland

Believland

    BEazy Unchained

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Nation Name:Believland
  • Alliance Name:MI6

Posted 27 January 2014 - 09:31 PM

A lot of new nations don't know how to spend their money well and in many cases end up wasting a lot of it.  The situation now gives them more a learning curve.

What's the worst they could do with some more money? Buy infra? Buy Land? Buy tech? There's not that much they can screw up on.

 

Though we should probably make it 5 mil, not 50 mil...



#9 Azaghul

Azaghul

    Baruk Khazd! Khazd ai-mnu!

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,103 posts
  • Nation Name:Belegost
  • Alliance Name:The Order of the Paradox
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Wienerville
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:the Warriors

Posted 27 January 2014 - 10:16 PM

What's the worst they could do with some more money? Buy infra? Buy Land? Buy tech? There's not that much they can screw up on.

 

Though we should probably make it 5 mil, not 50 mil...

Land and tech have marginal utility when you are that small.  So yes it would be very wasteful for a small nation to spend most of their money on that.  They might end up using it on a wonder as well.  Any nation who doesn't spend most of their money on infra will be way, way behind their peers who do.

 

There's also the issue of them spending all that money before they've figured out to get trades and improvements to decrease the costs first.


Edited by Azaghul, 27 January 2014 - 10:16 PM.


#10 Caladin

Caladin

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 707 posts
  • Nation Name:Kaitain
  • Alliance Name:New Pacific Order
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Caladin
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:Ordo Paradoxia

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:02 PM

If we make it too large nations will skip the lower tier and also probably not realize the need to join an alliance.

 

If we don't make it large enough it won't make a difference to game play, and I don't believe there is a middle ground; as such, I don't believe it should be changed.



#11 Believland

Believland

    BEazy Unchained

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,966 posts
  • Nation Name:Believland
  • Alliance Name:MI6

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:04 PM

Land and tech have marginal utility when you are that small.  So yes it would be very wasteful for a small nation to spend most of their money on that.  They might end up using it on a wonder as well.  Any nation who doesn't spend most of their money on infra will be way, way behind their peers who do.

 

There's also the issue of them spending all that money before they've figured out to get trades and improvements to decrease the costs first.

I'd counter by saying all growth is good growth as everything 



#12 John More Dread

John More Dread

    New Leader Name: John More Dread

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts
  • Nation Name:Otherland
  • Alliance Name:***WORLD TASK FORCE***

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:33 PM

This takes the fun and challenge out of the early game IMO. It would essentially "skip" the early game where improvement choice really matters. It may seem more appealing, but it would launch new players into a rather sluggish midgame in which there is really no reason for them to log on, and reduce the pride people feel in having built up from nothing. If you're going to do this you might as well just start everyone at 10,000 NS because that is about where you'd land, and the only thing having the money instead would allow new players to do would be screw up and be behind experienced players on the first day of the game. There needs to be a learning curve

 

This would ruin the early game, and make buying economic improvements a mere formality. It would also reduce the amount of tech trades and therefore, the amount of interplayer interaction.



#13 John More Dread

John More Dread

    New Leader Name: John More Dread

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts
  • Nation Name:Otherland
  • Alliance Name:***WORLD TASK FORCE***

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:45 PM

May I suggest all new nations start off as being in peace mode with no penalties for the next 30 days? Then after that, all new nations will have an option to continue staying in peace mode (with penalties starting) or to exit peace mode? The reason behind this is because I feel like some people may re roll and constantly harass young nations and drive them to leave the game every time they start a new nation.

War isn't the deterrent to new nations. Boredom, complexity, and a cerebral feel to the game without (no offense) an apparently cerebral feel to the community, are the deterrents.

 

Noncerebral players are turned off by the lack of visual graphics, cerebral ones by the apparent triviality, insularity, lack of and indifference or at times willful resistance to real world political knowledge (although there are plenty of OPINIONS), poor grammar and spelling, and childish argumentative tactics used by the community.

 

In fact, I imagine a player of either type being MORE likely to stay if attacked early on, because it is an exciting challenge.Those who have little do to do with other nations in game, and only see the boards, or no community at all, are more likely to leave. When developed, this game was very popular and new players stayed. The rules changes put in place subsequently have not changed the basic structure of the game, and a reversion certainly wouldn't solve the problem. One can therefore prove that it is not the rules which are driving new players away but something else. In case you are having trouble following this, what I am saying is that the game was far more popular before, but it had essentially the same rules as now, and those that changed were a. minor and b. not a cause of or a solution to disinterest. Therefore, it follows that minor rules changes would not return us to 40,000, players. If they did (which, again, they didn't) cause the disinterest, then the most logical step would be to revert the game to the rules it had when there WERE 40,000 players, rather than inventing new tweaks that with no sociological research some players have decided might be appealing to new players.

 

But again, the reason we lost 75% of players had nothing to do with rules tweaks. If you really want more players, we should recruit more players instead of trying to invent a Rube Goldberg machine by which they can be gently encouraged to continue playing. Tell your RL friends to play the game. The average person has about 100-150 people who know some basic info about them and with whom they can comfortably converse. half of CN players convincing 5% of people they know them to try it, and having half of them stay would get our membership back above 25,000.


Edited by John More Dread, 28 January 2014 - 12:02 AM.


#14 Scourge

Scourge

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 48 posts
  • Nation Name:Bosthirda

Posted 27 January 2014 - 11:50 PM

An alternative would be for CN to provide tool tips, or something similar, to nations who first begin the game.  These tips would walk them through the core concepts of the game: buying infra/tech/land/military, making trades, buying an improvement, joining an alliance, and more. 

 

Instead of being given an arbitrary amount of money, new players would be given enough money to purchase infrastructure (w/o trades) up to the level necessary to purchase a harbor, purchase enough soldiers to maintain 20% of their population level, and still have enough money left over to pay 10 days of bills at that level.

 

This would provide an easy, simple way to introduce new players to the core concepts of the game while laying the foundations of their nation and providing them with ample time and resources to find trades, an alliance, and so on.



#15 John More Dread

John More Dread

    New Leader Name: John More Dread

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts
  • Nation Name:Otherland
  • Alliance Name:***WORLD TASK FORCE***

Posted 28 January 2014 - 12:03 AM

Or else we are going to butcher this game dressing it up like a whore in order to attract people we will never successfully get to play.



#16 John More Dread

John More Dread

    New Leader Name: John More Dread

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 126 posts
  • Nation Name:Otherland
  • Alliance Name:***WORLD TASK FORCE***

Posted 28 January 2014 - 12:04 AM

Scourge, a walkthrough is a great idea! I don't see any need to change the amount of money, but there should be more of a walkthrough than a simple spreadsheet.



#17 Daenerys Targaryen

Daenerys Targaryen

    "Valar Morghulis"

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Nation Name:New Valyria
  • Alliance Name:Knights Of The Round Table
  • CN:TE Nation Name:New Valyria
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:The Misfits

Posted 29 January 2014 - 04:18 AM

OK, 45 mils my final offer? Take it or leave.

 

I want my chance at getting a WRC to, not by building for years and then a global war puts me back to square one. I like war as much as DBDC so I want to roll other alliances to and not hide in PM or in neutral alliances.

 

I could be wrong but I have a strong feeling all these older nations shoot my start up fund initiative down because they simply don't want to have to deal with me and my dragons in the near future. I don't blame them but I'd prefer admin considers my proposal while ignoring those who'd rather stop a real threat in its infancy.

 

The fear of new nations surpassing older nations in NS is to also give them 48 mil to a specific NS limit. This'll also help the low to mid range nations who're mostly struggling as well.



#18 Auctor

Auctor

    Gone Crabbin.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,027 posts
  • Nation Name:Wyrdgar
  • Alliance Name:sudoku
  • CN:TE Nation Name:Unknown Sender
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:Specify Other

Posted 29 January 2014 - 05:50 AM

It's not a lack of having 50mil up front that's limiting you though, you can have all those things by growing smart and participating in economic programs with the rest of everyone else. Taking the challenge out of it and removing the incentive for nations to interact with more established nations when they're new doesn't do much to improve game play, and I doubt many of these nations that don't join an alliance are going to stick around and improve the community.

 

The other side effect this will have is increase the incentive for attacking newb nations for some of that money in the microtiers, which raises the possibility of having guys like this guy being virtually unstoppable.



#19 Neo Uruk

Neo Uruk

    Oh, it's damn true.

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,420 posts
  • Nation Name:Neo Uruk
  • Alliance Name:Doom Squad
  • CN:TE Nation Name:babyswag

Posted 29 January 2014 - 05:56 AM

OK, 45 mils my final offer? Take it or leave.

I'm almost convinced this is a joke, but in case it isn't: no, that's far too much to give to a brand new nation. 10 million is plenty in starter money, as that puts you up to a possible 40m if you get an alliance's support. I would actually say 5 million is more appropriate, even.

With 45 million and no alliance, the average newbie is going to splurge, get wrecked after their grace period, and then quit.

Edited by Neo Uruk, 29 January 2014 - 05:56 AM.


#20 Daenerys Targaryen

Daenerys Targaryen

    "Valar Morghulis"

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 681 posts
  • Nation Name:New Valyria
  • Alliance Name:Knights Of The Round Table
  • CN:TE Nation Name:New Valyria
  • CN:TE Alliance Name:The Misfits

Posted 29 January 2014 - 12:18 PM

Neo Uruk don't troll my suggestion thread and say its a joke. Yes, I like to have a little fun with a little humour but I'm dead serious about my proposal. I know it'll be considered high at 45 mil but I find nothing wrong with raising the bar high and giving new nations like myself a decent start up fund. Your really trying hard if you think this'll make new nations quit after they've spent it all, majority of nations are quitting after spending the current $50,000 start up. The rogues aren't going anywhere and I don't see much of a problem with them If your in a alliance. Even rouges with 50 mil can be put down in fact I've seen rouges with billions get demolished so using this for a reason is really just a poor excuse.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users