Jump to content
  • entries
  • comments
  • views

Giving back to Planet Bob

Lord Hitchcock


I want to acquire some ideas for an initiative Monsters Inc is planning- and one that gives back to Planet Bob.


Our members are in the lower tier and fortunately for us, we pack enough wonders to war forever while having fun. And we do care about the community.


Members here, whether it's a micro or sanctioned alliance, color dominate or neutral, we all feed off the community to some extent; and we all know the numbers in cyber nations are dying. I can't tell you how many threads (Dajobo had a great discussion on this, except the lack of specifics really made it hard to fully suppor) / discussions / ideas have been tossed around and to no avail, there haven't been any significant results.


The Apathy Report made a great informative piece on this matter a while back and here is a cliff-noted summary:


1) Less number of new players joining.


2) The number of new players joining are not staying.


Now the second one is one that really gets me, if you think about it, of 20 new nations joining, I'd dare say maybe 1 sticks it out for a year. Based on this, there are things that we can control, things that we should control. And Monsters Inc is going to attempt this very initiative by protecting new, unaligned nations from raiding. Now of course, I understand that larger nations raid for land, and alliance ghost bust; and those actions serve a purpose. It's the three week old, no war chest noob eating nukes that is the concern. So here's where it currently is:


Criteria for protection from raiding:


1) Nation is less than one year old- make it here a year and it gives a ruler enough time to understand and enjoy the mechanics that we all love.

2) Nation is equal to or less than 15k NS- 99% of unaligned nations are below 10k, if a nation unaligned makes it to 15k and less than a year old, then they have an idea of game mechanics.

3) Nation is unaligned or in an alliance of 5 or less (majority of those members being less than 1 year old).


And I think these are all reasonable circumstances. Of course there will be an argument of "that's what alliances are for" or "our alliance will make our own rules" or my personal favorite "if m inc wants to give back to planet bob, disband immediately" (haha petro, beat you to it!).


On a more serious note, this would work. In the sense of improving the compounding decline of player retention. 


A couple more ideas: Having larger alliances support the initiative, not monetarily per say, but pledging not to ping new nations, and make it a community movement. And by making it a community initiative, I even thought about if anyone wanted to make a google doc, something we could pitch out to the victims, explaining which alliances are which, difference between neutrals and non, and perhaps even a welcome to planet bob.


I am completely open to thoughts and suggestions on this matter. There is plenty of time before the end of the current war and lots of time to really make this a community voice and I look forward to working with you. Cheers!


Recommended Comments

Interesting idea. It will probably lead to a big war.

I would add a few exclusions:

1) exclude the nations in protected AAs or AAs having treaties (let their protectors or allies deal with the raid);

2) exclude the nations selling tech (tech buyers should take care of protection of their tech sellers);

3) exclude the nations with any military wonders.

I also wouldn't interfere in unaligned vs unaligned fights, unless the attacker has military wonders.

Edited by murtibing
Link to comment

It's not raiding that drives new nations from the game, it is when people get out of hand with it and punish people for fighting back. Raiding can be good for game activity if conducted responsibly.


When I raid, I don't immediately launch attacks... I send a PM asking for a reply to prove the new nation is active. If the reply comes, I don't attack. I do start a conversation, but peace out at some point, whether they accept my recruitment offer or not.


This is much different than a situation in which a raider nukes the !@#$ out of a noob for no reason.


Ultimately the fault lies with game mechanics that are inherently unfriendly to new players, simply because you have nations like Methrage "spawn camping" with 30 wonders and 100 improvements. How do you address the fact that nations like his push new nations to quit the game through "official" alliances wars?


I do think the real fix must be a mechanics based one... for example, weighing wonders and improvements stacks as being worth more NS than they currently are. If a nation like Methrage's is always at a minimum of 20,000 NS (for example) you won't see him acting the same way when he is in range of a larger pool of nations with nukes and higher activity.

Edited by Immortan Junka
Link to comment

Yes. I too agree that raiding in itself don't drive new nations back, its the way in which they are attacked. I always make it a point to stop the attacks if the other nation makes a request or send me aPeace proposal. If a nation don't respond to any sort of messages or try to fight back then I consider it a field day/week for me but I always try to let something remain so that should the ruler chooses he can comeback and grow the nation. Basically what can/should be done is responsible raiding and a bunch active micro alliances focused on recruiting new nations and turning up the heat in the micro level.

Link to comment

Most alliances are still trying to establish themselves, m inc has done pretty much everything we wanted to do. We don't need a protector- and this would be a fun project that benefits everyone. It's a win-win

Link to comment
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...