Jump to content

Recommended Posts

[quote name='kongland' timestamp='1327156874' post='2904175']
matt, StevieG is a decent and objective person. He might have a slightly different approach to the game than I have, for example, but he's a true blue, trustworthy and consistent bloke - doesn't matter what others are saying.

You may know a few people, who have double standards and mouth up and twist each situation the way it suits them. They are always good guys and those who disagree with them - bad guys;
when they are discussing something - it's a serious analysis, when somebody else is doing the same with a different view - they call it whining ect.. a complete circus. Too many clowns here.
I'm afraid you are getting used to those faulty standards, mate.
No disrespect meant, my friend
[/quote]


Spot on. This is paul711 in a nutshell.


I also agree with the 7 day peace at the beginning of the round, it may help give some newbies time to acquire interest in the game itself.

Edited by Confusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='King James XVIII' timestamp='1327130858' post='2904111']
Completely agree. Some time ago I wrote a post about this. When I came in TPC we were an alliance that raided a great deal and it was encouraged. Now we (for the most part) don't raid and I definitely think larger alliances raiding new comers instead of taking guys in hurts the game. I think over time however alliances have pulled back on raiding.
[/quote]

This happened naturally in LE, too, we just stopped raiding, not as a mandatory thing, just something the guys did on their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disagree with 7 days peacemode. Unsure of better solution, but def.disagree with the 7days peacemode. there has to be a better way of doing it that helps only new people, and not veterans who try to take advantage of rules.

7days peacemode: only gives people who know what their doing even more time to prepare for war without giving a damn about their own defense in the process. 7 days (as it is) is enough time for smart builders to acquire 3 nukes, while the new guy who joins will still be flopping around at a weak strength, as he *probably* wont have a trade circle, nor will be able to build as fast as everyone else as a result. (Look at new nations. How many of them buy factories first? or at all?).

A solution I see would be to have alliance leaders/gov more aggressively recruit from 1man AAs and None. By giving these guys a slew of invites and putting them in an alliance, it at least gives them a chance to build until they get wrecked in their first war. It's putting a huge load of work on AA leaders though.

Edited by Therm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Therm said. The problem is the learning curve, and a forced period of peace just gives veterans time to outpace the new and/or inexperienced nations. A nice idea, but won't work as intended.

Increased recruitment to AAs, so we can turn inexperienced nations into veterans, may make things better. But a lot of the major AAs in TE have an 'elite' mentality; if you're not already a veteran, you are not welcome. That exclusionary atmosphere will do a lot to drive away new nations. And since there aren't enough places for new nations to learn the ropes, attrition dominates, and we see the stagnation and decline in the graph of nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1327174323' post='2904290']
What Therm said. The problem is the learning curve, and a forced period of peace just gives veterans time to outpace the new and/or inexperienced nations. A nice idea, but won't work as intended.

Increased recruitment to AAs, so we can turn inexperienced nations into veterans, may make things better. But a lot of the major AAs in TE have an 'elite' mentality; if you're not already a veteran, you are not welcome. That exclusionary atmosphere will do a lot to drive away new nations. And since there aren't enough places for new nations to learn the ropes, attrition dominates, and we see the stagnation and decline in the graph of nations.
[/quote]
Very well said. I would also like to add that some are or will hesitate to accept new people because some exploit the acceptance of new people to plant spies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Therm' timestamp='1327170345' post='2904267']
Disagree with 7 days peacemode. Unsure of better solution, but def.disagree with the 7days peacemode. there has to be a better way of doing it that helps only new people, and not veterans who try to take advantage of rules.

7days peacemode: only gives people who know what their doing even more time to prepare for war without giving a damn about their own defense in the process. 7 days (as it is) is enough time for smart builders to acquire 3 nukes, while the new guy who joins will still be flopping around at a weak strength, as he *probably* wont have a trade circle, nor will be able to build as fast as everyone else as a result. (Look at new nations. How many of them buy factories first? or at all?).

A solution I see would be to have alliance leaders/gov more aggressively recruit from 1man AAs and None. By giving these guys a slew of invites and putting them in an alliance, it at least gives them a chance to build until they get wrecked in their first war. It's putting a huge load of work on AA leaders though.
[/quote]

Some people are still trying to sort out their trade circles etc on day 3 to 4. Many slightly less experienced players are still weakish around day 3 to 4, while only the veterans have everything in place. This will help veterans, and AAs as well. It will also help rerolls not get attacked for their first week, and have time to get a decent collect in before they could be under attack. Perhaps that would mean they need to wait the 7 days as well to get back in the fight, or maybe they could choose to forgo the 7 day new nation grace period at any time, being able to attack nations, and be attacked in return.

I also think this would increase retention rates of recruiting during a round. A new nation can build to near 1k infra on a 7 to 8 day collect, then collect 7 to 8 mil. They can do all of this without the fear of being attacked, and come into the game with a decent amount of cash. That may entice them to stay on IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1327185932' post='2904364']
Some people are still trying to sort out their trade circles etc on day 3 to 4. Many slightly less experienced players are still weakish around day 3 to 4, while only the veterans have everything in place. This will help veterans, and AAs as well. It will also help rerolls not get attacked for their first week, and have time to get a decent collect in before they could be under attack. Perhaps that would mean they need to wait the 7 days as well to get back in the fight, or maybe they could choose to forgo the 7 day new nation grace period at any time, being able to attack nations, and be attacked in return.

I also think this would increase retention rates of recruiting during a round. A new nation can build to near 1k infra on a 7 to 8 day collect, then collect 7 to 8 mil. They can do all of this without the fear of being attacked, and come into the game with a decent amount of cash. That may entice them to stay on IMO.
[/quote]
I agree with therm because under your scenario a several mil back collect can also be exploited to rogue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1327184508' post='2904355']
Very well said. I would also like to add that some are or will hesitate to accept new people because some exploit the acceptance of new people to plant spies.
[/quote]
Spies are a pretty poor excuse to not accept new members. It isn't really that hard to keep things like war plans under wraps until go time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='jraenar' timestamp='1327193207' post='2904412']
Spies are a pretty poor excuse to not accept new members. It isn't really that hard to keep things like war plans under wraps until go time.
[/quote]
Nevertheless some AAs are beginning to or will because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1327194381' post='2904416']
Nevertheless some AAs are beginning to or will because of it.
[/quote]

Some as in OP? Please get your paranoia out of this thread. PS: Not accepting new members isn't helping.


I still agree with Stevie and the general 7-day peace sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1327193151' post='2904411']
I agree with therm because under your scenario a several mil back collect can also be exploited to rogue.
[/quote]

Anyone can stay at 3ns and build at the end of 20 days to rouge. The 7 day grace period allows for people to actually build during this period without getting attacked. Being able to keep minimum soldiers as they make their way from sub 1k infra (where collects are crap) to 1500 to 2k infra, where they can actually make a bit of money, and play the game with a bit of enjoyment, rather then get crushed after a few days of war with no chance but to reroll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='kongland' timestamp='1327156874' post='2904175']
matt, StevieG is a decent and objective person. He might have a slightly different approach to the game than I have, for example, but he's a true blue, trustworthy and consistent bloke - doesn't matter what others are saying.

You may know a few people, who have double standards and mouth up and twist each situation the way it suits them. They are always good guys and those who disagree with them - bad guys;
when they are discussing something - it's a serious analysis, when somebody else is doing the same with a different view - they call it whining ect.. a complete circus. Too many clowns here.
I'm afraid you are getting used to those faulty standards, mate.
No disrespect meant, my friend
[/quote]

I agree with some sort of thing to help newbies but this is what i am talking about

[quote]avoid the kind of sneak attack that we pulled on LE[/quote] :lol1:

Edited by matt01867

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='matt01867' timestamp='1327204753' post='2904480']
I agree with some sort of thing to help newbies but this is what i am talking about

:lol1:
[/quote]
Yeah, it was pretty funny :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No 7 day peace. Down with stevie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the raiding is the problem. If anyone really cares they apply to an AA and then they don't get raided. I believe the main problem is the fact that their isn't enough motivation for SE players to also do TE. SE has about 15k people playing. I believe if their was a benefit to playing TE more people would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='CEO George Harris' timestamp='1327213596' post='2904534']I believe the main problem is the fact that their isn't enough motivation for SE players to also do TE. [/quote]

I agree with this. We are no longer getting new TE players (or returning players from SE.

If you look at the chart, something happened between round 17 and round 18. Prior to the start of round 18, the starting nation count for a round was almost equal to the ending nations from the prior round. The starting nation count for 18 was MUCH lower than the ending count for 17. The same was the case for round 18 to 19. This changed from round 19 to the current round. Maybe the trend is reversing somewhat.

It looks like, from round 18 and 19, many players, that made it to the end of the prior round, just did not come back for the next round. Can anyone recall what happened in rounds 17 and 18 that may have caused players to just decide not to come back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Therm' timestamp='1327253242' post='2904787']
a 1week delay before the round started?
[/quote]

Round 16 ended on 4/19

Round 17 started on 4/21

Round 17 ended on 6/19

Round 18 started on 6/20

Round 18 ended on 8/17

Round 19 started on 9/4

So the delay was between Round 18 and 19, not between 17 and 18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1327251151' post='2904774']
I agree with this. We are no longer getting new TE players (or returning players from SE.

If you look at the chart, something happened between round 17 and round 18. Prior to the start of round 18, the starting nation count for a round was almost equal to the ending nations from the prior round. The starting nation count for 18 was MUCH lower than the ending count for 17. The same was the case for round 18 to 19. This changed from round 19 to the current round. Maybe the trend is reversing somewhat.

It looks like, from round 18 and 19, many players, that made it to the end of the prior round, just did not come back for the next round. Can anyone recall what happened in rounds 17 and 18 that may have caused players to just decide not to come back?
[/quote]
Pretty sure that's just an artifact of the data.

18-Apr 1,391
20-Apr 1,397
21-Apr Start of 17
22-Apr 1,002 <---- 1 day gap
26-Apr 1,199

18-Jun 1,169
20-Jun Start of 18
20-Jun 765 <---- 0 day gap
22-Jun 926

11-Aug 996
4-Sep Start of 19
12-Sep 1,039 <---- 8 day gap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='StevieG' timestamp='1327149661' post='2904152']
I think a 7 day cap on war for a new nation, especially in a 90 day round sounds pretty good. This would also give alliances 7 days to get their AA in shape before a possible war, and avoid the kind of sneak attack that we pulled on LE earlier this round. In my opinion, this would also keep more players that are recruited from SE.
[/quote]

I think a week long peace mode being available is a good idea. Gives people a chance to think about which alliance to join, gives alliances a chance to get set up and I think it would be helpful for new alliances.

People not only raid non-aligned, they also raid small alliances. Even if new alliances are being set up and the leader is encouraging players from SE to come over, it's hard to get 10 or above players to move over all in one day.

If nothing else, maybe TE alliances should tighten up their raiding policies to not allow raids on alliances with 3 or more members instead of 10 - which is actually a challenge to reach if you're starting new - and certainly not within 24 hours.

Edited by White Chocolate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do NOT agree with a week long peace mode. However, next round I am thinking about not raiding for the first 5 days of my alliance. There doesnt need to be peace for big AAs, if someone wants to declare on the second day or w.e that option shouldnt be taken from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Stelios' timestamp='1327275678' post='2905039']
I do NOT agree with a week long peace mode. However, next round I am thinking about not raiding for the first 5 days of my alliance. There doesnt need to be peace for big AAs, if someone wants to declare on the second day or w.e that option shouldnt be taken from them.
[/quote]
That's where the problem is. While we are discussing, how to keep newbies from leaving TE, you and a few others are concerned with rogueing, early/late wars for the alliances.

You do take care about the existing politics and TE veterans.
However, if the current trend continues, all passengers of Titanic (TE) will go underwater anyway - with all your political games soon going into the nothingness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='kongland' timestamp='1327291269' post='2905210']
That's where the problem is. While we are discussing, how to keep newbies from leaving TE, you and a few others are concerned with rogueing, early/late wars for the alliances.

You do take care about the existing politics and TE veterans.
However, if the current trend continues, all passengers of Titanic (TE) will go underwater anyway - with all your political games soon going into the nothingness.
[/quote]
Your way or the highway, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Awesome Dog' timestamp='1327291762' post='2905217']
Your way or the highway, huh?
[/quote]
Well, AD - it doesn't hurt to try, does it? People reject the idea without really knowing what happens.
We are trying to alternate 2/3 months - why not do the same with the peace period?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='kongland' timestamp='1327291269' post='2905210']
That's where the problem is. While we are discussing, how to keep newbies from leaving TE, you and a few others are concerned with rogueing, early/late wars for the alliances.

You do take care about the existing politics and TE veterans.
However, if the current trend continues, all passengers of Titanic (TE) will go underwater anyway - with all your political games soon going into the nothingness.
[/quote]
Sorry, but I don't think it's been adequately demonstrated that the reason new nations don't stick around is frustration over attacks within the first week of existence. Throwing in some anecdata, I've seen quite a few nations where rogue attacks spurred more activity, seeking of help, and overall higher involvement, in order to be on the winning side "next time."

This is all a bunch of positing, "maybe X is the problem," followed by, "maybe changing Y would alleviate X." You've put the cart before the horse. First get some actual evidence, so the first part drops the "maybe." Find out for [i]sure[/i] why people from SE do not play TE. Find out for [i]sure[/i] why former TE players decide not to come back. Once you know that, [i]then[/i] is the time to determine solutions to fix the actual problems*, instead of what we think may possibly be the problem.

[size="1"]* And knowing how people are, digging into this is sure to come up with more than one problem.[/size]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×