Jump to content

Phelim

Member Since 06 Dec 2013
Offline Last Active Jul 17 2017 14:07

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Player Suggestions

17 July 2017 - 14:08

Nukes should be far bigger than 5x5. I think 20x20 is OK, though I'd prefer bigger. And it should do something of some use, like kill off troops.

 

Resource nodes and enemy nodes (Aliens, Dropships, Darks) should be far more densely populated, and they should re-emerge within a few minutes of being depleted, and largely in the same 20x20 sector area. Enough of these deserts where you need to travel 2 hours to gather 45 minutes and 300K resources.

 

New player locations need to be scattered throughout the map, not just in some dense center where everyone is on top of one another.

 

Have your game designers go create some "Lords Mobile" accounts, play up to about level 20 or so, and then do a critical self-examination of your game and the differences between the two: Fun, shop, ease of use, realistic balancing, etc. "Lords'" big problem is that it is dominated by Chinese players who will spend $10,000+ to dominate Kingdoms. 150 so far. The pain of being the best, I guess.


In Topic: Fix your Pay to Win Crap

06 July 2017 - 06:14

Next time put your most valuable troops in your Bunker if you are logging out. You won't lose them that way. Anyone could have killed your troops, paying for advantages had nothing to with you losing troops.


In Topic: Crazy Pricing Variations

25 June 2017 - 09:46

Thanks for the reply. I just wanted to further clarify some points.

 

If player A is offered a sale for $19.99 that is of "1,800%" value, and player B is offered a $19.99 sale, but it's only in the 400% range, do you not see the advantage player A has?

 

SImilarly, if player C gets a $99.99 package with a great "1,800%+" value, but cannot shell out $100, he is at a great disadvantage to player D, who was offered a $9.99 package of "1,400%" value, as he can make the purchase easily.

 

This "fear of missing out" model of F2P business models is, in itself, one of the least consumer-friendly models there is to begin with. But to implement it on a highly competitive MMORTS game is just wrong. If I can buy troops just before a war, and you cannot, simply because software semi-randomly deems it so, that is truly anti-competitive.

 

You should look to other MMORTS games and see how they do it. I'll give you a hint: give the store away. You incur no real costs when you give away these virtual goods, and increased flow of them increases activity, combat, etc., which drives demand for more cheap, high value packages. You want people to stick around for a while and keep buying and re-buying. You should not just try to condition them into making one low-value purchase of a price of your choosing when you want it to be purchased.

 

You guys are doing this all wrong, and every day you make it impossible for little guys to stick it out by offering them little $3-5 options regularly. You should also give whales the choice between multiple high-value packages vs. trying to browbeat them into thinking that what you are offering has value, only because you have all these dummy sales previous meant to increase our fear of missing out.

 

FOMO may work in some scenarios, but here it hurts the game and pisses off players. We can all see the empty, abandoned bases littering the map. And we know why.

 

You need to be consistent between every player, and encourage folks to make lots of purchases at their preferred price point. Some days we can afford a $99.99 package, but most days most of us cannot. We can however, be convinced to purchase $5, 10 and $20 packages at a steady pace, and sometimes even spend MORE than that $99.99.


In Topic: PC Without Steam?

22 June 2017 - 18:48

Thanks for the timely and well-written replies, unfortunate as the answer is:(


Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: