View Full Version : Power Struggle

06-15-2015, 08:45 PM
Look, I get it that a company has to make money and app developers (even the free ones) are no different. Since we are lucky enough not to have any annoying ads in the game, they rely in in-game purchases. If I were playing an xBox game, that would cost me $10-20 for a game that probably sucks, $50-80 for one that I really like. So, I do not mind giving a game developer at least $5-10 bucks to play their app and keep the lights on. That said, if you want to make money in these games you need to have a few things (all player focused- you are their employees in essence).

gamers who feel, especially at lower levels, like they stand a chance without HAVING to spend money
a sense of competition driving people to out-do each other
something that distinguishes you from the hundreds of other games out there
a goal for the game for the players to achieve

The first two have several ingredients- none are mutually exclusive from the others- but there are a couple that are higher in priority than others.

If a player gets smacked around, or feels "bullied", and the only recourse is to say something in chat only to be told "quit whining, it's a war game", you will lose revenue to hundreds of potential paying players who feel like it isn't worth it (how many empty "newbie" accounts are across the map?), so removing incentive for players who might otherwise bully (or be seen as doing so) helps you and improves the gaming experience for players trying to get their feet under them
If I have no incentive to compete, but can choose to farm other players (or just play a combat version of Farmville), I will tire of the game and leave it (thus another potential customer lost). If I am stimulated to compete with players in a manner that is actually challenging, I will keep coming back to fuel my growing addiction

So, lets start with number 1, and remove some incentive to bully or to just play and not develop. Understand that this all comes with a caveat that a function be added to permit Guild Leaders to declare official War on each so that, during times of War, these can all be dropped for the warring Guilds. I recommend placing restrictions on a player's benefits for hitting someone of significantly lower power level (adjusted for level). If an attacker is too high in power above the defender, the attacker receives a penalty. For instance (and this is rough and lacking in detail but gives a basic example):

If the DEFENDER is 150K power or below and the attacker has a power level of 50-100k over them, the attacker receives diminished benefits:

Diminished resource gain
Reduced points (during events)
No "Win" tally added to their profile

If the DEFENDER is under 150K power and the Attacker is 101K+ over them, they get the following:

0 resource gain
0 Points (during event)
0 "Win" tally

DEFENDER 151-300K and attacker is 100K+ over them:

diminished resource gain
greatly diminished points (during event)
no "win" tally added to their record

DEFENDER 301- 500K, attacker 100k+

Diminished Resource Gain
Diminished points (not as much as the players in the lower category, but still significant)
no win tally

As Power level gets higher, the spread gets bigger and eventually, 75 mil power for example, it becomes "Game On". Not only would I have to play within my own level structure, but I am now in competition with other players in that same power level to get stronger and fight them more effectively, thus willing to spend some cash to gt there (and learn more about how formations and units work to better my own contribution to the gaming society).

Incentive to compete is the next one and, as I asserted before, is not mutually exclusive from the previous (as illustrated by my last comment there). I need to have incentive to compete and that means not only to be better in my own combat effectiveness with players around me, but also in what I am actually DOING in the game. So far, I have yet to see the point. There is a unique function in this game that sets it apart from other games in its genre (referring to other war/battle games like Call of Duty:Heroes). It has a cool political element (the game dynamics create that, it isn't actually integral to the game). It is not a Hit-and-Run game, it is like a digital and more interactive version of Axis and Allies (the old board game). The problem is that there really isn't a clear goal so people are just kind of freelancing it playing wild-west style and that gets really old real fast (like, in a week or two fast). Sure, some people stick around and enjoy it, but a lot more people find it too much hassle to be played like other games that are closer to the way it is currently being played so they leave. Those who like it aren't going to leave if there are a few adjustments and those new players who join because of improved gameplay will far outnumber those who do end up leaving (players will enjoy the game and you will make more money to keep developing it). So,

Create a focus. I have no idea (nor have I been able to find anywhere on the internet- Google certainly doesn't have you anywhere in their rankings) even how a ZoneVZone looks, what the dynamics are, or really the goal of them. IS there even a goal or is it just more of the same- people just attacking other people and then...nothing? It needs to be easily accessible and clearly displayed what a ZoneVZone war looks like, what the goal of them is, why to it (if it is just to keep from losing your monument and nothing else, you need to come up with something else too).

This will permit me to have an actual sense of purpose in the game and meaning for why I should take one action over the other because, I have to be honest, this whole just attacking other players and dealing with a bunch of Zone Chat drama (which is all there seems to be to this game) is getting boring. I need to know that, if I spend money on this thing, I am not going to spend a bunch of time listening to trolls in chat and randomly attacking only to end up in some ZoneVZone war that I was completely unprepared for and had no ability to defend or actually be an active member of. You won't even get $5 from me until I know my investment is going to be on something that has longevity for me as a player.

Why is the inherent political element of this thing being ignored? Do the developers think we are all lacking in patience or not smart enough to get into it? People are using the Line and KIK apps to facilitate making this work (that means they aren't being given the tools necessary to get the full potential out of the game, so they are going to external apps to do so- that gets old fast too. I have a life to live still).
Give us a goal to look toward and some means of coordinating toward it (Are we all supposed to be a bunch of banshees running around in a feudal style arena smashing the crap out of each other, or are we working toward a goal? Is it ZoneVZone? Are we trying to dominate the state in preparation for State wars? What the hell are we actually doing? The combat element sucks (I don't have to repair, I have no idea how to calculate a battle in advance, I cannot tell how my buildings and base power levels affect or impact a war vs my liquid assets that have to be replaced. What is it all? Do you even know?

To sum it up, encourage growth of game population and development through taking away incentives to powerful players bullying or "farming" smaller players (or just being jerks "because it's a war game and I can"), and bring some focus and understanding to the game.

06-15-2015, 10:01 PM
I presume you havent hit 30mil power as your uper pvp is a bit off?
But some nice toughts! Needs a lot of tweaking in my mind.