my 2 cents

[willymchilybily]

I've read round 36 discussion and read a few other discussion topics that may be old. as i aint been on the forums much but, its late, im tired and grouchy and therefore this is the best time to write a load of arrogant nonsense. but dont know if im griping or wanting a discussion. so meh. posting it here

but to me the game dying and spies are all the same problem and contactablity. i may have just been too new or the game changed. but in round 8,9,10, etc etc i never saw anyone give out a phone number. irc was all that was needed.

i think stealth, rushing, bounty etc. caused a need to be contactable. this need to be contactable then caused people that wanted to win to need to spie, or powerblock other contactable alliances. else they would never take them down (or so they felt. one thing i have noticed is in this game if you are playing it actively. three days can be enough to break and destory any allaince or for any alliance to take a win. time is meaningless. so if you dont crush an enemy within a week you give up. if a resistance doesnt succeed once or twice in the first 2-3days it gives up. anyway back on topic)

so this need to spie was at first welcomed by azzer. it bought excitement. but now i feel it causes allainces too much stress and forces them to play 24/7 contactable or not at all.
i think since this playes began to leave. this in turn gave less targets and the whole problem spiralled out of control. and so now i think power blocks are a thing of the past (if slightly recent). as there arent 5-6 FTW allainces. as FTW requires far to much effort for new players, first of all to be accepted in to such an allaince. and then to want to commit to a phone number and being contacted when asleep etc.. and as old players get families jobs degrees. and are no longer school children with alot of time on thier hands they become less contactable. and new people probably think why commit to a text based game when you can get more visually interesting apps on your phone.

in short i think spies kill the game more than power blocks, i think its encouaged by the tactics and game mechanics. and i think, except this round with BT, new players arent given a chance to get into and enjoy the game because they cant play near the top without needing phone numbes etc. and at the bottom its bash central. rank 20 is a target for 10 people. rank 400 is a target for 200 people. you do the math. i think because of this people dont get addicted as much, as they dont get really into the good points of bushtarion. and i am blaming spies, and certain game mechanics. and this causes oldies to leave as they have rl stuff they need to commit to. and new players dont give bushtarion enough of a chances to see its hidden qualities.

although i do like the game mechanics i can still blame them.
[/babble]

 

[CFalcon]

Spies have nothing to do with the general decline in the game. It has everything to do with the game being by now a fairly out-dated format and being designed in an age before 24/7 smartphone internet access.

Read this post if you want, it gives a much better picture of why this, and indeed most games, go into decline: http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/showpost.php?p=32481&postcount=19

 

[Dax]

Spies have nothing to do with the general decline in the game. It has everything to do with the game being by now a fairly out-dated format and being designed in an age before 24/7 smartphone internet access.

Read this post if you want, it gives a much better picture of why this, and indeed most games, go into decline: http://www.bushtarion.com/forums/showpost.php?p=32481&postcount=19

Such a sad ending for what has been {and will be until it's eventual death} one of my favourite internet games for years.

 

[Zaheen]

[/babble]

It's always been mobile phones, smart or not - it ripped the fun out of the game, and now it's become less fun to play in an alliance due to the mentality of "contactable only, prank everyone too".

That replaces any need to defend, and any need for strategy in most cases. Now it's all about who is the biggest, who has the least life at the start to take the lead and be able to hold it.

It takes NO SKILL at all to be contactable and run, none what so ever. Definitions of a "good player" have changed somewhat from previous rounds to now, but only in the minds of those without any skill.

 

[Iamsmart]

in your opinion

 

[No-Dachi]

I was around in round 8, 9, 10 and earlier. I gave our my phone number to ViruS in round 7. Not because I was afraid to die, but so that my members could get hold of me if they needed help to arrange defence, or just needed more troops. IRC highlights were the preffered methode of contact, but pranks were needed when you're out of your home.

Whereas rushes was a nice addition to the game, and a good way of helping the resistance take down the top, it has indeed kicked the need for contactability up a notch. The amount of incoming you can receive without being able to send decent defence is astounding, and makes being contactable a must when you're faced with an active resistance. We used to have stealth "rushes" appearing at eta 1, but unless you spent a lot of time rolling that stealth attack, and/or send a lot of fakes, it's usually quite easy to defend against, without having to prank the target awake.

Rushes do not effect a large portion of the playerbase, but it effects the competitive scene, which in turn forces new players who want to play competitive to give up their phone numbers and sleep pattern. However, I do not think that the adrenaline rushes (the game mechanics) should stand alone to receive this blame - it's got as much to do with the pure kill mobs, and the low eta of these mobs. When playing in a mediocre alliance you will not have perfect cover at all times, meaning players might miss a tick of notice. That means an eta 4 mob sent at the end of the tick is in effect eta 2, meaning you've basically got no means of getting effective units there in time, unless you get the target online to send out and recall. I believe that this change in mentality (the random killing), which is indeed supported by game mechanics, is as much to blame as the adreneline rushes. The current player base is not large enough to sustain such a mentality for long, as the new players got no where to learn the game without constantly being bashed for no apparent reason.

As for spies - they've been around for ever, and it sort of adds to the excitement of the game. Or did. I've never liked the principle of spying, but I can see why the game admin has supported it - it sort of brings in more randomness to the game. However, I cannot see why they are to blame for the decline of the player base.

 

[Davs]

Is it just me who sees the decline in so-called "ftw" alliances as a good thing for the game? The fact that more people can't be arsed to be insanely active all the time, but are still willing to play FOR FUN is a refreshing change. The handful of players still complaining that they "have no competition" will either chill out like the rest of us or just leave, thereby alleviating the need for activity and contactability. This, hopefully, will make the game more appealing to new players so the playerbase may even grow after a while. As the playerbase increases, the competition will increase and the desire for more active play may indeed increase again.

Obviously this is entirely hypothetical and may not actually be the case, but I think people should try to be a bit more positive - rather than just resorting to "the game is dying" chants.

 

[Dimitar]

I have to disagree, Davs. People play games for the competition. Being unwilling to put in stupid hours of activity is a good thing, but it doesn't mean people with that attitude should be classed as ftf. Once upon a time you needed a mediocre activity and no contactability in order to attempt a win. And that's how it should be - people wan't to be able to be near the top without trying too hard. It was great having 2 pages of full alliances, people thought rank 600 was quite the good achievement. That's when people truly played for the fun - now people are forced into playing for the fun(which doesn't seem to be that fun actually) just because they don't fit in thee ridiculous requirements needed to challenge the top

 

[Zaheen]

Davs, I've had the same view since I started playing.

In a way both of you are right, but it doesn't really matter if people agree with me now when I say the use of mobile phones have killed it - now that it's destroyed half the playerbase. People disagree with me now just as much as they did back then. Saying things like "ah we barely played, we didn't play ftw, we only played the first 2 days" and then have your mobile phone glued to your ass for the entire round.

 

[tobapopalos]

The original post seems to be random babbling and I'm not even sure what the point of it is. Spies kill the game? No. Spies inflict short-term damage on the alliance they are spying on. That damage is easy to overcome with some patience and loyalty from your members. If your alliance disbands because you have a spy, it was probably more because you had whiney, scorequeeny members who didn't want to stick it out. Or you just had a poor leader who panicked and hit disband. Spies are only a big problem when you let them be a big problem.

Having said that, I don't like spies, I don't use spies, and I always try and help alliances who have spies (eg. if we receive an alliance mail from a spy I'll forward that mail to the alliance to inform them that they have a spy). And if I'm just a peon in an alliance which is considering using spies, or information from spies, I'll kick up a fuss about it and try and change their minds. This game is difficult enough for the average alliance without spies.

I don't think contactability is a cause for the game dying, but more a symptom of what the game has become. The game has changed over the years and contactability happens to be more important than it used to be. In this time the playerbase has also declined, but I don't see how you can draw a straight line from contactability to dying game. There are probably hundreds of reasons why the playerbase has declined over the years (lack of advertising and overreliance on an oldie playerbase sticking around being one of the biggest imo). So just saying "we have more contactability these days and less players, therefore contactability causes player loss" is just coincidental evidence which would be laughed out of a court of law.

To summarise, I agree with No-Dachi. As always Contactability is a symptom of the way the game has changed. Pure kill mobs are rewarded by the game, so more people do them, so the players who care more have to be contactable or lose all their troops on a regular basis. Blame the game, not contactable players.

This post has gone on rather longer than I intended. My apologies.

 

[Dax]

It does all make sense though, so the length is fair enough. I said before in another thread, generally what Dachi says, goes.

 

[LuckySports]

The reason for so many people getting burnt out on the game is the inability to be competitive due to time-restrictions/can't be contactable all the time.

Many people don't WANT to play if they can't play competitive, and the 10-minute ticks forces people to either be super-active or contactable.

advertising would help bring some new blood to the game, but the only people that would stick around are people who can either play competitively, or be in that percentage that doesn't want to play competitively.

Its also incredibly difficult for new people to play this game due to a ridiculous learning curve. There have been steps taken to help new players get started, but its not enough. The game is TOO complicated for newer players, and there aren't enough people willing to play just to help those new players.

Even me, who has run a "newbie alliance" all round. Many of my members are experienced players. The newbies have been learning, but there would need to be a dozen alliances with a core of experienced players willing to teach new players to make a noticeable difference in the game. Perhaps if all these top alliances took in at least 5 newbie members each round, and taught them, and protected them, allowing them to learn w/o being bashed constantly. Perhaps not the R1 ally, simply because there isn't enough defense to teach them, but the other alliances would be a good enviroment to learn in.

 

[Zaheen]

Perhaps not the R1 ally, simply because there isn't enough defense to teach them, but the other alliances would be a good enviroment to learn in.

You meant to say "not enough incoming to teach them" didn't you?

You raised a valid point, but I'm somebody who helps people learn the game even if I'm fighting against them, or even attacking them at the time. Doesn't need to be restricted the only in your alliance.

 

[LuckySports]

i mean, there aren't enough opportunities for them to defend.. ^_^ The wording was a little weird, but the meaning is sound. And your right, it doesn't need to be restricted to that, but people learn best in an environment designed to help ease them into it. getting advice from attackers/targets is good too.. ^_^ but most of the advice would almost certainly come from the alliance.

 

[Zaheen]

But at the same time, some/most if not all players like to learn by themselves, I know I sure as hell did, I bet a lot of others too.

 

[MattM]

[/babble]

It's always been mobile phones, smart or not - it ripped the fun out of the game, and now it's become less fun to play in an alliance due to the mentality of "contactable only, prank everyone too".

That replaces any need to defend, and any need for strategy in most cases. Now it's all about who is the biggest, who has the least life at the start to take the lead and be able to hold it.

It takes NO SKILL at all to be contactable and run, none what so ever. Definitions of a "good player" have changed somewhat from previous rounds to now, but only in the minds of those without any skill.

Zaheen is right.

 

[CFalcon]

I don't buy that the game is difficult to learn. Difficult to master yes, but any game worth it's salt should take months/years to master. I would say, however, that the seed aspect of the game should be removed. It serves no purpose beyond a bit of maths-turbation for the pros during the first few hours, and "how do I make money" is one of the most frequent questions we get in the Request Help section, second only to "what's the best ratio?". There's no tactical purpose to having different types of acre, it only serves to confuse. Having complex options to allow players to spend lots of time exploring the game is a good thing, as long as those options aren't completely pointless.

And as to "pure kill mobs are to blame", and by extension "getting repeatedly killed for no real reason", hmmmmz, if only, I dunno, a succession of experienced players had made various suggestions down the years for how to resolve this that the community could get behind and support and not just ignore or say "I fear change!!11!"...... if only...... :s

The game is far from down and out, a few changes could easily put it to rights. But if we continue to be stuck with an absent admin and a community that, even if the admin were here to make changes, won't touch real change with a 20ft pole, then we're screwed.

Edit: And yes, phones are a problem, but they're only a problem if the game *makes* them be a problem. Rather than crying about phones, how about we accept that phones are here to stay (because they certainly are) and make changes to the game to *adapt*.

 

[Stegosaurus]

I'm for some form of troop sharing. Allow each player to nominate another player in a similar way to the nap system.

These players then have access to each others troops for defensive purposes only. You've immediately made ftw gameplay far more feasible for those who can't get online 24 hours a day, and effectively cut activity requirements in half.

Admittedly this would kinda nullify LET rushes.

 

[Dimitar]

And will also be stupid

 

[Stegosaurus]

And will also be stupid

Thank you for intelligently digesting my suggestion and providing sound feedback with plenty of facts to back your opinion up.