Reducing the Number of Player Orgs

1131416181921

Comments

  • I still want to say that a straight delete sounds the worst to me.

    If an org has to go would much rather see a merger into something new styled than just a straight your orgs been deleted suck it.
  • Goping back to the very very original post, how many players do you think is necessary to support the number of cities?

    So how many would support 4? Or 3? Or 5? or 6?

    Rather than a big bang, what about taking one city/commune away first and see how that goes - resounding success or unmitigated disaster. That could then inform the rest of the process
  • Kistan said:
    Goping back to the very very original post, how many players do you think is necessary to support the number of cities?

    So how many would support 4? Or 3? Or 5? or 6?

    Rather than a big bang, what about taking one city/commune away first and see how that goes - resounding success or unmitigated disaster. That could then inform the rest of the process

    They did that in Imperian.

    They deleted one org as a tester first. Unfortunatly it didn't really go that well. Most of the players just quit so it didn't really consolidate the number so much as just reduce them. A small number stayed and moved to other others for sure but quite significant numbers just left.

  • edited April 2019
    But if that happened here, you would want to know rather than it happening when you delete 3 orgs at once? And then there is a barren wasteland where all those players were?

    If there is no apetite and everyone leaves, that isuseful information either way as to whether to proceed or backpedal?
  • edited April 2019
    Kistan said:
    But if that happened here, you would want to know rather than it happening when you delete 3 orgs at once? And then there is a barren wasteland where all those players were?

    If there is no apetite and everyone leaves, that isuseful information either way as to whether to proceed or backpedal?

    I mean yea that makes sense I guess.

    Can't really falt that logic.
  • Deichtine said:
    I still want to say that a straight delete sounds the worst to me.

    If an org has to go would much rather see a merger into something new styled than just a straight your orgs been deleted suck it.
    Merger would be better in every possible way. Especially if the old org still has some seperated culture they can keep developing. It also doesn't give the advantage to the remaining org. But alas we all know where this is going.

    Kistan said:
    But if that happened here, you would want to know rather than it happening when you delete 3 orgs at once? And then there is a barren wasteland where all those players were?

    If there is no apetite and everyone leaves, that isuseful information either way as to whether to proceed or backpedal?
    So what org would you sacrifice for the experiment. 
  • Shaddus said:
    Orael said:
    I believe so, unless people would rather it be a surprise.



    At no point in this game has it ever been acceptable to just blow up an org in the middle of the night and surprise players with it. Ever.
    I mean, Sciomore pulled it off pretty well. I was impressed.
  • RancouraRancoura the Last Nightwreathed Queen Canada
    Keahi said:
    Shaddus said:
    Orael said:
    I believe so, unless people would rather it be a surprise.



    At no point in this game has it ever been acceptable to just blow up an org in the middle of the night and surprise players with it. Ever.
    I mean, Sciomore pulled it off pretty well. I was impressed.
    Thankfully that wasn't permanent. Seconding Shaddus' remark, please do not make whatever decision is made a surprise.

    Tonight amidst the mountaintops
    And endless starless night
    Singing how the wind was lost
    Before an earthly flight

  • Keahi said:
    Shaddus said:
    Orael said:
    I believe so, unless people would rather it be a surprise.



    At no point in this game has it ever been acceptable to just blow up an org in the middle of the night and surprise players with it. Ever.
    I mean, Sciomore pulled it off pretty well. I was impressed.
    I wouldn't say it was successful. The amount of hatred that came out of that event was phenomenal. 
  • Estarra said:
    One thing I was thinking of was just preserving the current name and then renaming the character. Let's say Joe wants to migrate as Moe. A dupe of Joe would be created ONLY with name, family, org and a few other things that make sense to preserve and show up on honours. Then, we'd rename Joe as Moe and remove family, org or whatever else to create a fresh start and fully refund all lessons in class skills. Moe essentially is Joe with all ownership of everything Joe had (gold, credits, lessons, manses, ships, etc.). In other words, the mechanic would be a simple renaming. If Joe's old org becomes active and Moe wants to return to Joe, we'd just switch the process. Simple?
    I'd like to clarify that none of this is a done deal, we're all just speculating. Frankly, I'm still on the fence and leaning towards not reducing orgs for at least a few months, but we are still listening and taking in what you have to say. NOTHING IS DECIDED! Also, please remember that we want this thread to be a productive discussion and inserting agendas that are not relevant or counterproductive will be frowned upon.
    I like this. Other stuff, like my custom demigod descriptor and stuff, I don't care for. 50 credits here, some gold there. Mostly care about the big stuff like pet, cubix, wonder items. And this is fine for that. Some of the honours wouldn't make 100% sense but that's what laurels are for anyways!
  • ShaddusShaddus , the Leper Messiah Outside your window.
    Orael said:
    Shaddus said:
    Orael said:
    I believe so, unless people would rather it be a surprise.



    At no point in this game has it ever been acceptable to just blow up an org in the middle of the night and surprise players with it. Ever.
    I'm not trying to say otherwise, the reason it was brought up in this thread in the first place was to get player input and opinions. This would be a process where player input is asked for. I apologize for not including my sarcasm tags.
    Nah, not your fault. I read entirely too much into your statement and had a flashback to the Gaudi guild event :(
    Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
  • LavinyaLavinya Queen of Snark Australia
    I like Estarra's transfer idea! The only thing I wonder about is custom items/dwellers and even things made permanent through runes (weapons/instruments/jewellery/clothing). Mostly because those items might not fit the new character, and it defeats the point of the restart if it's a clone of the first in all but name. Could say, runes be removed from items and returned, custom items be given a voucher to be modified once, beast collars returned, goop items given one free reskin (where applicable), etc? So the value is retained but the flavour of everything can be changed? For example I don't think a new character would want to wear lots of Ouroborian themed things if I'm not in the DisOrder and living in Celest.



  • Esoneyuna said:

    Kistan said:
    But if that happened here, you would want to know rather than it happening when you delete 3 orgs at once? And then there is a barren wasteland where all those players were?

    If there is no apetite and everyone leaves, that isuseful information either way as to whether to proceed or backpedal?
    So what org would you sacrifice for the experiment. 

    I don't mind - one we decided which two/three were to go, I would go with the biggest to get a better feel for it
  • Kistan said:
    Esoneyuna said:

    Kistan said:
    But if that happened here, you would want to know rather than it happening when you delete 3 orgs at once? And then there is a barren wasteland where all those players were?

    If there is no apetite and everyone leaves, that isuseful information either way as to whether to proceed or backpedal?
    So what org would you sacrifice for the experiment. 

    I don't mind - one we decided which two/three were to go, I would go with the biggest to get a better feel for it
    Of course, this is all just a plan by you to get Dys to move to Serenwilde. I see it now!
  • Abelor just made a suggestion to me and it sounded entertaining. Make it an in game competition as well. Have it as a sustained war with roleplay and event foundation.

    Maybe its a bit too hard to do but it sounds fun, very interactive.
  • I might have missed it in the text maelstrom, but a few new thoughts came to me.

    What about org credits? I'd assume we'd just be encouraged to divvy up what's left before the big one, which seems reasonable enough. Unless there's some plan to scatter them otherwise?

    What about city/commune shops? I suppose this one is a straight lost cause, but I'm pretty partial to my city shop. I sank gold into expanding the stockroom rather than buying credits with it, and I like it a lot more than my aethershop. Seems pretty lame to lose it to an org nuke rather than a consequence of my own decisions, but I suppose it's not necessary "mine" in the absolute strictest sense. Meh.

  • You want to ideally be moving as few people as possible. The logistics of this will be a nightmare as it is. So leaving Mag, Glom, Celest really seems the most efficient way of handling this.
    When did Celest get big?
  • Kistan said:
    You want to ideally be moving as few people as possible. The logistics of this will be a nightmare as it is. So leaving Mag, Glom, Celest really seems the most efficient way of handling this.
    When did Celest get big?
    It happens randomly. We average 5 (which is huge in Lusternia) all the way to 15 in peak sometimes. It's freaking nuts and spooky. I'd love to see population numbers overall and find out who really is the biggest.

  • Deciding by the largest orgs is a bad system as well. Sure it displaces the smallest amount, but they're just going to be shuffled into a place of subjugation if posts are to be believed. There really is no good way to go about it without an org feeling absolutely invaded or without a say.
  • Lorina said:
    Kistan said:
    You want to ideally be moving as few people as possible. The logistics of this will be a nightmare as it is. So leaving Mag, Glom, Celest really seems the most efficient way of handling this.
    When did Celest get big?
    It happens randomly. We average 5 (which is huge in Lusternia) all the way to 15 in peak sometimes. It's freaking nuts and spooky. I'd love to see population numbers overall and find out who really is the biggest.
    Yeah, it was mentioned recently that Serenwilde might actually have a relatively large population it's just that currently the forest has issues with combatants (training/retention) which means the visible conflict objectives make it look in a worse state than it is.

    There's also the multitude of other factors, like what orgs tend to attract more newbies as well as, issues that cause people to leave, etc.

    Cause like... if you have orgs floating around similar population levels but there's some which have fixable issues that would be dropping their populations (say lack of combat synergy) then keeping those orgs would likely be better because they're maintaining their population despite those issues.
  • edited April 2019
    I would also like to know what metric people are using to determine "largest org". There is a lot of "deleting the largest org is bad" going around. What actual proof do you have that you are the largest org? I mean I have seen 15 Seren on and 0 - 2 Gloms on, and 5 Gloms on with 1- 2 Seren on at times. Peak times are different in each org and just because you log on at a time when you have 6 people does not mean you are "the largest org"

    Just judging by Favours and Org Credits I can safely say there is at least 15 - 20 Active Seren, possibly more.

    Edit:: Going through the last 30 days of Powerlogs shows 25+ Seren bringing in power. 25 regular + 3 or 4 randoms.
  • Lavinya said:
    I like Estarra's transfer idea! The only thing I wonder about is custom items/dwellers and even things made permanent through runes (weapons/instruments/jewellery/clothing). Mostly because those items might not fit the new character, and it defeats the point of the restart if it's a clone of the first in all but name. Could say, runes be removed from items and returned, custom items be given a voucher to be modified once, beast collars returned, goop items given one free reskin (where applicable), etc? So the value is retained but the flavour of everything can be changed? For example I don't think a new character would want to wear lots of Ouroborian themed things if I'm not in the DisOrder and living in Celest.
    I'd kinda want to dump re-rollers into a limbo space where they can login but aren't actually "in" the world.

    They'd have a series of rooms they can go through which would have objects that can be used to remove runes/collars/etc, they could use the customise command for free to reskin eligible stuff, anything that needs admin work (like old progs maybe) could be stored there and will be returned to the new character when ready.

    Pop a portal in with a "are you ready?" prompt if you try to enter, maybe also with some checks like... if Halli goes boom you can't leave the portal with a permanent crystal weapon?
  • Synl said:
    Quick people, go inactive so your organization doesn't shut down!

    #outplayed
    I mean, the alternative is... quick people, just log in to make your org look more active than it is and make sure to shut down all your alts anywhere else for the next little while.
  • Saran said:
    Synl said:
    Quick people, go inactive so your organization doesn't shut down!

    #outplayed
    I mean, the alternative is... quick people, just log in to make your org look more active than it is and make sure to shut down all your alts anywhere else for the next little while.
    I figure they can just get stats from the past while and judge on that.

    How active an org has been over the past 12 months for example. Get a good long sample and judge the orgs based on that.
  • So we don't have a numbers problem, or we do? There is suddenly a whole lot of conflicting responses here. 
  • Deichtine said:
    Saran said:
    Synl said:
    Quick people, go inactive so your organization doesn't shut down!

    #outplayed
    I mean, the alternative is... quick people, just log in to make your org look more active than it is and make sure to shut down all your alts anywhere else for the next little while.
    I figure they can just get stats from the past while and judge on that.

    How active an org has been over the past 12 months for example. Get a good long sample and judge the orgs based on that.
    I'd just pull the data as far back as you can tbh. But pop still isn't the greatest metric because it's just data not information.
    You'd want to be able to see which orgs attract more first timers, map out when dips in activity have happened, figure out if an org is performing at it's peak or whether it needs fixes to get it there.

    Because you'd want to be able to work out stuff like... (this is just theoretical info you could find)

    Org A is one of the top performers in attracting new players, but they have difficulty with retention of certain player demographics, most likely because of the following issues which leaves their pop a little bit lower than Org B. If we fix up the issues they have they could retain more people and grow much larger.

    Org B doesn't attract as many truly new players but instead gets converts from certain player demographics, they beat out Org A for population and they appear to have fewer resolvable issues than Org A. But, if there's not much you can do to improve them and they're only just beating out Org A is it worth keeping them.


    But then you also need to weight that with stuff like, would Glom be able to do something to appeal to the "light" Nature types more than Seren could appeal to "dark" types? If Seren can attract players who are interested in darker nature than that might mean it's the more effective choice.
This discussion has been closed.