CN Player Numbers

[Mustakrakish II]

around 40k would be sweet. even bigger, but too big is always bad...cause then you can very easily lose some of the uniqueness of CN

@Alterego: Or that we just ended one of the most destructive wars ever in CN and people are just deleting. But you can choose.

Edited June 24, 2009 by Mustakrakish II

[Matthew Conrad]

The myth that NPO were driving people away has been busted.

Yeah, apparently if you say it and post a picture it's automatically true.

[Necromancer V4L]

The bigger the better.

I think simplifying the Treaties and the Treaty web, changing it up so that a war can happen without it resulting in one side being severely outnumbered, and just allowing the micro alliances to do what they want without fear of being raided would help a lot.

Raids are great and all, but they don't help retention.

[Necromancer V4L]

-snip-

Yea, no.

As an Academy Professor for Pacifica, we are not perfect, we are not that good. We definitely shy more people away from the game than we help to retain due to our high standards.

Anyway, moot point, since no one alliance or department of one alliance is going to change the minds of 5k people.

[WcaesarD]

Yea, no.

As an Academy Professor for Pacifica, we are not perfect, we are not that good. We definitely shy more people away from the game than we help to retain due to our high standards.

Anyway, moot point, since no one alliance or department of one alliance is going to change the minds of 5k people.

The way I look at it is that there have been a significant number of reformed alliances since NPO has been attacked, that alone should say something. I would never presume to put all of the blame on any one group outside of the game as a whole, there are plenty of people and things that cause lower retention of players, but I'd say NPO was one of the largest destroyers of communities in CN.

[SunnyInc]

Yea, no.

As an Academy Professor for Pacifica, we are not perfect, we are not that good. We definitely shy more people away from the game than we help to retain due to our high standards.

Anyway, moot point, since no one alliance or department of one alliance is going to change the minds of 5k people.

My post addressed the accusation that Pacifica was responsible for declining player numbers. I responded to this claim by pointing out that Pacifica had done more than its fair share of nurturing new players into active and knowledgable players who were much more likely to stick around than other players. The Pacifican academy may not churn out the highest volume of graduates but it does produces more quality players than most other academy programs. I never suggest Pacifica was single handedly keeping new players in the game. Anyhow, you should take a look around at the other academies and application systems on Bob before you sell your own short.

[Starcraftmazter]

Given that NPO and cronies have been removed from a position of power, I predict many players and communities coming back into the game.

[Bordiga]

The decrease has been largely from the ranks of the non-aligned I believe. Didn't there use to be a much larger number of them during the Great War period? Some 1/3 of players used to be without an alliance I'd thought.

Though there could be a number of reasons for that decrease, I imagine a lot has to do with the fact that those residing outside of an alliance are often slaughtered by tech-raiders.

[Glen MoP]

The decrease has been largely from the ranks of the non-aligned I believe. Didn't there use to be a much larger number of them during the Great War period? Some 1/3 of players used to be without an alliance I'd thought.

Though there could be a number of reasons for that decrease, I imagine a lot has to do with the fact that those residing outside of an alliance are often slaughtered by tech-raiders.

If only there had been an alliance that would protect completely unaligned players from tech raiders....

[SpoiL]

D

Make a commercial

[Francesca]

I personally don't give a stuff about inactive people. I would like to see a lot more quality players in this game, activity levels rise and interest soar. I think that all this can be achieved with a new, interesting political situation, and lots of big wars. I've not seen this sort of thing in my entire time in CN, but I think it's quite possible that this is headed our way over the next few months. CN is going to become awesome.

[Bordiga]

If only there had been an alliance that would protect completely unaligned players from tech raiders....

A pity Walford's project was always ruthlessly hounded then.

The NPO's effort to establish a hegemony in the red sphere was not an effort to provide a safe haven to unaligned, who for the most part are not a part of the political scene enough to even know the Revenge Doctrine ever existed.

[WcaesarD]

I personally don't give a stuff about inactive people. I would like to see a lot more quality players in this game, activity levels rise and interest soar. I think that all this can be achieved with a new, interesting political situation, and lots of big wars. I've not seen this sort of thing in my entire time in CN, but I think it's quite possible that this is headed our way over the next few months. CN is going to become awesome.

While it's true that a lot of people do enjoy this, large scale war in the game actually tends to drive people away, rather than keep them around.

[Bordiga]

I personally don't give a stuff about inactive people. I would like to see a lot more quality players in this game, activity levels rise and interest soar. I think that all this can be achieved with a new, interesting political situation, and lots of big wars. I've not seen this sort of thing in my entire time in CN, but I think it's quite possible that this is headed our way over the next few months. CN is going to become awesome.

And "inactive" people aren't harming you either, and for the most part represent a pool of people who can become active, not to mention as trading partners. When I started CN I was so new to computers in general it took me months and months to join an alliance and that was in rather exceptional circumstances.

[Francesca]

And "inactive" people aren't harming you either, and for the most part represent a pool of people who can become active, not to mention as trading partners. When I started CN I was so new to computers in general it took me months and months to join an alliance and that was in rather exceptional circumstances.

As a matter of fact, inactives did a great deal of harm to my former alliance, and thus to me.

[Francesca]

While it's true that a lot of people do enjoy this, large scale war in the game actually tends to drive people away, rather than keep them around.

I hadn't noticed that, perhaps you are correct though. I think however that it would attract large numbers of quality players.

[WcaesarD]

I hadn't noticed that, perhaps you are correct though. I think however that it would attract large numbers of quality players.

Yeah, it tends to weed out more of the "sit and buy infra" players than anything else, although I'm not sue you meant good players or active alliance members, though I assume the latter, which I think most people would prefer to see more of.

[Francesca]

Yeah, it tends to weed out more of the "sit and buy infra" players than anything else, although I'm not sue you meant good players or active alliance members, though I assume the latter, which I think most people would prefer to see more of.

I'd like to see either really.

[Bordiga]

As a matter of fact, inactives did a great deal of harm to my former alliance, and thus to me.

Indeed, I read your speech. I was mainly reading into your suggestion that it was an attack on what I said about the decrease being among the unaligned. The growth of new members (and hence unaligned) harms no one. If an alliance is silly enough to recruit on the basis of no activity then you get MCXA and GGA.

[New Frontier]

The players we actually want here are going to find it by themselves.

[WarriorConcept]

Given that NPO and cronies have been removed from a position of power, I predict many players and communities coming back into the game.

I believe many have already.

[Lord Boris]

Given that NPO and cronies have been removed from a position of power, I predict many players and communities coming back into the game.

I'll have to disagree with you there. The vast majority of people who play CN are not politically active, and a great many really couldn't give a flying frack who's in power. To assume that swapping out NPO for some of the sub-factions within Karma will magically change that fact seems to be a heavy dose of wishful thinking.

While some dead alliances will (and have) come back, the bulk of membership tends to be derived from people who still played even after the initial fall of those groups.

Edited June 24, 2009 by Lord Boris

[Matthew Conrad]

The players we actually want here are going to find it by themselves.

Not necessarily. This would assume they are actively searching for a nation simulation game. CN is not talked about much in the general gaming scene or political discussion scene which is where we can get many more contributing players.

[Magnum T. Gundraw]

Things peaked during Great War III with around 40,000. Back when Legion had 1000 nations under its belt. Those were better days, but I don't believe total member number will reshape politics.

[Drai]

I'd like at least 40,000 again and then from that point I can see if I'd rather more.

Definitely at least 40,000 again though.