Player retention and you: brainstorming

[Inks]

I would say I strongly disagree with Armaddict. A wall of text only counts as one opinion and I feel like the majority of players want much more ability to change the world.

That being said I could be wrong. I don't think saying suck it up to everyone who disagrees with you is helpful or an actual discussion. Which is what this board is for.

[Nergal]

For what it's worth, I've made an effort to consolidate all of the ideas in this thread - even conflicting ones - and just posted a list up on the staff discussion board, which I will update if new ideas come in. That way it's a defined resource for all staff, since we want to improve the game in ways that ideally, the players will approve of. Thank you to those who have contributed to a reasoned discussion so far!

[Lizzie]

I would say I strongly disagree with Armaddict. A wall of text only counts as one opinion and I feel like the majority of players want much more ability to change the world.

That being said I could be wrong. I don't think saying suck it up to everyone who disagrees with you is helpful or an actual discussion. Which is what this board is for.

I'd agree with you that most players would love to change the world. I'd argue though that if "the majority of players" had more of an ability to change the world, then the world would be changed such that the majority of players would no longer want to play it. You can't change the world to please the majority of players, because each player wants something different. Everyone has their own individual goals, independent of everyone else's goals. MY character wants to be the first rinthi to be declared templar. But so does that other guy's, and that other girl wants HER character to be the first gemmer to be declated templar. We can't all have what we want. Someone has to be disappointed.

My idea of fun isn't the same as yours, my idea of a "changed world" that is enjoyable to play isn't the same as yours. The more people who have a hand in the change, the more muddy that change becomes. Someone has to run things, and someone has to take a step back and let others get the changes done.

I rarely have anything to do with game-changing events. I am still in the majority who would love more of an ability to get things done. But I'm also pragmatic and accept that extending that ability could be game-killing, not game-expanding. And so I'm happy to play on the sidelines, be part of someone -else's- game changing experiences when they become available for me to participate in them. I frankly don't give a shit whether that's another player or a staff member, as long as I can be involved.

[Inks]

For what it's worth, I've made an effort to consolidate all of the ideas in this thread - even conflicting ones - and just posted a list up on the staff discussion board, which I will update if new ideas come in. That way it's a defined resource for all staff, since we want to improve the game in ways that ideally, the players will approve of. Thank you to those who have contributed to a reasoned discussion so far!

I was very gladdened by your response. Thanks.

[Harmless]

Liz, your examples of world changes are a straw man. Nobody is going to support a rinthi in becoming a templar. I think what people more realistically would seek are to expand the holdings of their merchant house, build an additional door here and there, design a cloak the way they want to, put up statues or other works of art, or attempt to make a small outpost or wagon. I have never heard players say they didn't like how staff kept their elf from ascending to noble status. It is the little changes that bring the world alive and make it feel dynamic. Additionally, players should be empowered to knock down other players' sandcastles and drink their milkshake. Nobody is asking for the changes they make to last forever. They are asking for realism and competition.

The idea of adding new minor houses and subsidiary groups for PCs to have more power and control in sounds better to me every day.

[nauta]

I actually agree with Armaddict's points, one of which is that the change that at least some people want to bring about in the world isn't so much a matter of permanent marks but a matter of temporary marks that drive a story they want to tell forward.

One simple solution (depends on code, I guess) would be to add a more Save rooms.  Players can then use the arrange command to reflect the story they are telling.  Here are some examples:

Suppose I want to make a small brothel or a gambling den or a tiny little cooking business as flavour.  I actually did all three via a very tedious process of logging in after each reboot and using the arrange command on a coin to reflect this.

This isn't perfect and it might cause some abuse (hoarding), but I don't see why staff couldn't pop in now and then and virtually rob the place (not all of it, just little reminders), or send little warnings to the player that hoarding silver rings in a hovel probably isn't a wise idea, and of course griefer PCs can wreck that shit, but at least it isn't wrecked every week at reboot.

[seidhr]

Save rooms are a finite resource, so we can't just flip a flag on any given room and turn it into a save room, sadly.  We have an ongoing project to reclaim save rooms from areas of the game that have been rewritten or changed by history's events:  e.g. Tan Muark holdings, old Tuluk, parts of Allanak that have been rewritten, etc.

There's also some code ramifications that happen that may not be readily apparent to many players, that are nonetheless meaningful, for save rooms.

[Delirium]

Having more "dungeon crawls" and outside threats that are more than "spider attack #999" (spider attacks are fun, but they do get old eventually) would probably go a long way into making the world feel dynamic. Raiders... Tuluki patriots... an upstart tribe of elves... a sorcerer hell-bent on carving a swathe of territory out for himself far to the oh wait that's been done.

Well, I guess we could go the "shambling undead" route too, that one's always a hoot. A nest of scorpions swarms the city during a particularly bad storm.

Gith are fleeing a terrifying sorcerer and decide to try and carve out a chunk of the southern deserts for themselves and start plauging the southlands until they're driven back by the trusty Byn. Then you find out about the sorcerer... but it's in elf territory, so what do you do? Let them deal with it? Ally with them to put it down before it gets stronger? Accuse the elves of harboring the sorcerer and attack them instead? Choices, choices!

It doesn't have to be elaborate. It just has to provide some hooks and some actions and be fun!

Let people change and improve the rooms they want to change and improve, as long as they put in the effort to do so. Let them fix up a stanky old tower... and if it gets attacked and destroyed, well, destroy it again. You really only have to update room descriptions in that case, and maybe adjust a few other variables. It's not a ton of effort, especially if the player does the writing for you.

Support player initiatives and work with them to find a way to help the world change and grow a little instead of being so stuck on "this is how it is and forever will be".

[zanthalandreams]

I'm with Inks and Harmless on this one.  Came here to post basically what they said.   I can come up with countless scenarios where trusting players to make changes could be a horrible idea.   Nobody is mad or disenfranchised because their idea for a flying elf furry unicorn-rider was shot down.    

I'm encouraged by some of the staff responses to the thread, even if only because it doesn't feel right now as if folks are making excuses for or arguing against the answers given (even if not everyone is seeing the same need.)   Again, looking at veteran players, you're dealing with a different demographic now than when we started.  I'd say many of us began as teenagers, either in late HS or early college, back when the internet and multi-user gaming was in its infancy.   Arm required a different level of policing, I'd argue, than it does today.  

To make assumptions about the typical veteran player demographic, I'd say you're looking at:
* Gen X, probably mid to late 30's.  Believe what you will about generational stereotypes. . .
* Likely finished with any post-secondary education, many with graduate level degrees or equivalent in certifications/training
* Spent at least 10 years in a professional environment, likely at this point to be well beyond entry level and into management/administration
* Likely a few years out from having kids old enough to play, likely with a spouse that plays
* Has spent decades now consuming literature and media related to fantasy/sci-fi fiction
* Knows intimately the mechanics of the game world and how to hurdle even a fresh new PC into a viable role
* Has made it past the worst mistakes of brand new players and survived through some very interesting times when Imms acted/reacted in very arbitrary ways

If you're still thinking of this player the same way you thought of them when they were a 19yr old college student, then you're making a critical mistake in how you deal with your clientele.  


Edited to add:

As much as I hate to suggest removing anything else (while still being raw about what has already been taken away), please kill the ever-full bags of free food-holding that are clan cooks.  Also paymasters.   GMH vending machines too.   Automating those things kills the need for characters to be recruited and cultivated into providers.  It took an entire base layer out of the food chain of fun. 

I ain't sorry for saying it.

[nauta]

I think this comment will dovetail nicely with zalanthasdreams' comment above:

I remember reading in a thread a while ago about the history of Armageddon, and one thing struck me.  I wish I could find it (edited: I found it here -- thanks google), but it was something about what made Armageddon a success: encouragement and enforcement.  One thing that staff has to do is enforcement -- they have to police things so that it is fair (eliminate twinks and griefers), they have to control quality, and they have to make people notice things about the virtual world that they might not have noticed.  But one thing that staff also has to do -- according to this old document -- is encouragement -- encourage good roleplay, collaborate with players on their stories, etc. -- I talk about this a lot, but I haven't seen very much of the latter, and a lot of the former. 

We're an older audience.  Perhaps, we might consider putting the emphasis on being proactive with encouragement and retroactive with enforcement -- in the last case, at least with people who have karma.  (Everyone should be encouraged.)  What's retroactive mean?  It means that they take a 'wait-and-see' stance on bad behaviour, assume innocence before guilt, give the benefit of the doubt, that sort of thing, perhaps even wait for a player complaint to come in, and also that they engage the player about the worry, and so on.  I've seen things on my account notes, and I've had things brought up to me after the fact, and used as evidence, things I was just surprised were even there -- nobody had discussed them with me, and they were pretty dubious.

An off-the-cuff idea would be to greatly simplify the karma system.  Have two, maybe three, levels of 'player trust': [tier one] new players, [tier two] longevity and a recognized commitment to roleplaying, [tier three] a recognized commitment to encouraging others to roleplay well and an acknowledge respect for the virtual world.  (Or something like that.  The karma system strikes me as something that a younger generation would get excited about -- oh, if I work hard I can achieve that and unlock that -- but something that I at least could care very little about, other than that it prevents new players from coming in out of chargen and ruining quality.)

At level two a lot of options would open up and at level three some others would open up (muls, sorcs).  Staff could cap the number of rarer options (sorcs, muls, etc.) allowed in the game at a given point.



 

[Norcal]

Liz, your examples of world changes are a straw man. Nobody is going to support a rinthi in becoming a templar. I think what people more realistically would seek are to expand the holdings of their merchant house, build an additional door here and there, design a cloak the way they want to, put up statues or other works of art, or attempt to make a small outpost or wagon. I have never heard players say they didn't like how staff kept their elf from ascending to noble status. It is the little changes that bring the world alive and make it feel dynamic. Additionally, players should be empowered to knock down other players' sandcastles and drink their milkshake. Nobody is asking for the changes they make to last forever. They are asking for realism and competition.

The idea of adding new minor houses and subsidiary groups for PCs to have more power and control in sounds better to me every day.

This is the ticket.

Edited to add that much of the stuff mentioned (besides the wagon) is possible right now.  Even the outpost is doable, just not an easy sell. I think we need more of this and more conflict between groups. So I really like the last part of your post, as it opens the door for increased conflict.

In my experience, even what conflict might exist between GMH at lower levels, cannot get far, because such conflict does not exist at levels above the glass ceiling.  So in order to create more conflict, we need more groups which can be pushed about possibly to the point of being eliminated. Or we need staff to forget the docs for a while and push the chaos button for a resource war between the GMH. Much better than spiders IMO.

[Eyeball]

Save rooms are a finite resource, so we can't just flip a flag on any given room and turn it into a save room, sadly.  We have an ongoing project to reclaim save rooms from areas of the game that have been rewritten or changed by history's events:  e.g. Tan Muark holdings, old Tuluk, parts of Allanak that have been rewritten, etc.

There's also some code ramifications that happen that may not be readily apparent to many players, that are nonetheless meaningful, for save rooms.

Why are they a finite resource? They worked well enough in 1996 and computers nowadays are about 100 times more powerful and spacious.

EDIT: Is it the sheer amount of junk that people store in them?

[TheWanderer]

I made an account long ago (couple years before my current - I don't even remember the passwords, username, character name, or email I used) due to the urging of a friend and his great stories, had, like, eight hours played, and then left.

Some of my reasons were:
- I started in Tuluk (heh)
- There was a distinct lack of anything going on as I wandered aimlessly, searching the streets for another soul. That was primarily due to my inexperience with the game (I wasn't even aware there was a GDB).
- I was playing at -another- friend's house (who had also started to play) and then a staff member was quite brusque when he or she popped in and announced the decision to flag the account due to suspicion of multi-boxing or something. I was on my laptop, he was on his computer. The way the interaction was done felt needlessly hostile, but I was an angsty youth and unaware of the IP notification you had to submit, so...
- Trying to get my bearings and locate meeting spots was a little overwhelming.
- I struggled horribly with syntax and there are a few inputs you have to learn IG instead of on the website.
- I eventually joined the Legion and came to find that sparring everyday was not as enjoyable as I thought.

To sum up, it was an overwhelming experience and I could have really used a sense of direction. I also didn't have any inclination to deal with the seemingly uptight nature of staff when I had far more enjoyable things to do during my spare time.

They're all easily solved by:
- Consolidating the playerbase (check).
- Maintaining cordial and professional interactions with -all- players. If he or she had just said, "Hey, we've noticed there are two accounts tagged to this IP, and we do have a strict policy against playing on multiple. Are you sharing an IP with somebody? If so, please request--" blah, blah. You get it.
- Introduce clans that newbies and even veteran players can pop into immediately (I wanted to join the Byn, but couldn't find a sergeant in Tuluk ). This isn't a new idea, and has been expressed multiple times by others. Mentors get boots on the ground and helpfully guide players on an OOC level via syntax issues and errors with the documentation and customs.
- I find sparring is somewhat enjoyable with more PCs, so... that may have solved itself. Taking a look at the soul-tearing grind is something to indeed put on the burner, though.

Those are a couple of things that could have been done to retain me on my first go of things as a newbie. I eventually decided to give the game another go when my Xbox broke and my laptop was far too shitty to handle anything more. Thanks, Xbox and horrible laptop!

Far as retaining veterans? I'd go ahead and vote for the suggestions to have the game in motion at all times with a progressing story; staff-run plots and/or assistance with player-created should always be in the spotlight. The Black Robe plot, for example, was excellent and I'll always wish I didn't jump in at the end of things. 2013 seems to have had the highest number of players in the last six or so years, and that was undoubtedly because of the HRPT.

[Delirium]

2013 seems to have had the highest number of players in the last six or so years, and that was undoubtedly because of the HRPT.

I will be (tactfully, I hope) blunt and qualify this. People were excited about the HRPT because it seemed to be leading toward a period of open warfare between Tuluk and Allanak, with Luir's and Tan Muark in the middle. They were excited for bloodshed, for battle, for raiding parties and sorties and espionage. They were excited for a shakeup beyond the norm, for ongoing conflict, a culmination of those days spent scheming and sparring.

Instead, they got what has been infamously termed the "laser light show" - a lot of "stop, wait, and watch" rather than "go forth and do!" I've already touched on my thoughts in more detail in another post (see here), so I won't repeat myself, other than to say that this is a prime example of a failure to comprehend what players really find enjoyable, and what they want - we want to DO things, EXPERIENCE the hostile creepy craziness of the world, create glorious insane memories so we can chew over them during the quiet lull times, or maybe die gloriously, but it's okay, because we died doing something epic, not because Amos's girlfriend got jealous.


edited because I forgot a link.

[TheWanderer]

Yes. The reasons above are precisely why I thought the Black Robe plot was excellent and a great leap in the right direction. If players can't influence the outcome of things, like that HRPT, there's an empty feeling to the experience.

I'm certainly hoping the decisions made in the Black Robe plot come to play a role in whatever staff has been planning during the months since. It makes the game feel organic and alive.

[Nyr]

2013 seems to have had the highest number of players in the last six or so years, and that was undoubtedly because of the HRPT.

I will be (tactfully, I hope) blunt and qualify this. People were excited about the HRPT because

I think the above is a reasonable assessment to make for its own reasons, for sure.  It should be discussed for its own reasons, as well.

However, I'd still bang the drum that a better case can be made that a more direct cause was voting.  We started looking at this and promoting it in FEBRUARY of 2013.  There was no word of a new website, there was no word of an HRPT, there was just "the game as it is."  The data points far more to voting (not to mention a snazzy website) than it does to an HRPT.  Here's the first thread discussing measures to improve.  To quote something I noticed then:

We currently have 288 "in" votes for the month of February.  February has had 7 days so far.  Fewer than 40 people voting once per day could have gotten us to where we are now.  Let's assume that's about the case, then.  If those 40 people voted twice per day, we'd be at 560 by now.  That's #2 on TMS, at least by this month's current numbers.  40 people might sound like a lot, but we have 36 people online right now and it's off-peak.

Things start ramping up, per our stats (original thread here).  I'll quote some things and start in January so you can see the progression.

January total:  83 new accounts
TMS -- 8 (9.6%)
TMC -- 12 (14.4%)
friend/family/word of mouth/etc. -- 8 (9.6%)

February total: 123 new accounts
TMS -- 15 (12.2%)
TMC -- 31 (25.2%)

We started pushing voting HEAVILY in February to prep for March.  This paid off:

March total:  227 new accounts
TMS -- 69 (30.4%)
TMC -- 37 (16.3%)

Then it explodes for a few months, presumably at least in part because of a new website.  (The HRPT wasn't announced until a few weeks before it started.)  We held #1 on TMC after a month or two and kept it from then until recently.  We held #2 on TMS for the next several months.

April total:  452 new accounts
TMS -- 87 (19.2%)
TMC -- 148 (32.7%)

May total: 488 new accounts
TMS -- 87 (17.8%)
TMC -- 166 (34%)

June total:  464 new accounts
TMS -- 55 (11.9%)
TMC -- 162 (35%)

July total:  406 new accounts
TMS -- 75 (18.5%)
TMC -- 133 (32.8%)

August total:  425 new accounts
TMS -- 50 (11.8%)
TMC -- 174 (41%)


September total:  434 new accounts
TMS -- 49 (11.3%)
TMC -- 154 (35.5%)

We stopped being dominant on TMS after this point and were trending downwards, but still stayed near the top.

October total:  365 new accounts
TMS -- 27 (7.4%)
TMC -- 102 (28%)

November total:  305 new accounts
TMS -- 26 (8.5%)
TMC -- 125 (41%)

December total:  250 new accounts
TMS -- 28 (11.2%)
TMC -- 84 (33.6%)

The conclusion drawn at the time:

We get a lot of new players in the door due to TMC and TMS voting now.  In fact, we get so much that it increases staff workload just to process the applications.  This isn't without rewards, either--we've seen about 20-25 players stick to the game solely due to our work on TMS and TMC this year, which is (by one method) as much as we retained total in 2010.  Voting is one of the major drivers of our player retention year over year by any method it is reviewed.

I still think that holds true.  To prove it wrong or right, vote a lot next month and see what that does to overall numbers of new players, which affects numbers of players that log in, which affects numbers of players that get and remain hooked.  Yes, other stuff should be done in conjunction with this, and I am not discounting that at all.  No, we can't hold #2 on TMS indefinitely (because when we did that in 2013, we eventually created enough of a stir that other MUDs began to compete with us solidly on TMS voting), but we've proven that we can take it and hold it for a while at least.

So, btw, vote.

[whitt]

2013 seems to have had the highest number of players in the last six or so years, and that was undoubtedly because of the HRPT.

I will be (tactfully, I hope) blunt and qualify this. People were excited about the HRPT because

I think the above is a reasonable assessment to make for its own reasons, for sure.  It should be discussed for its own reasons, as well.

However, I'd still bang the drum that a better case can be made that a more direct cause was voting.  

I'd bet it's sort of a chicken and egg thing. 

You need something going on that engages the players that do come, but staff are more excited about producing for a growing playerbase.  There's certainly no guarantee that if you build it, they will come, but I can pretty much guarantee if they come and it seems (perception is reality for someone new to the game) like there isn't much going on to get involved in, folks are less likely to come back.  Those that are hooked and stay are retained by careful timing of the "next awesome (not necessarily big) thing" to coincide with when those players are approaching a low point in their own personal stories.   By that, I mean, most players do seem to drive their own stories based off what they've encountered.  Every now and then they need another jolt to inspire fresh stories based on how the world has changed around them.

[Eurynomos]

Save rooms are a finite resource because there are ~3-4 'zones' that are save rooms, and these have X amount of rooms in them. And IIRC one or maybe two of those zones are completely full (in use). When we find a save room that is out of circulation or not being actively used, we tag it UNUSED and put it back into circulation. But it isn't as easy (as Seidhr said) to flip a toggle on a room. Some of those things are easy. Making a room 'populated', or changing its sector and city. But we would have to copy the room from one zone to the save zone. It's not hard, per se, but it isn't easy, either, or rather it isn't easy to do it as a 'blanket' command.

Um, what else. Oh! There's a lot of great ideas here, they've obviously sparked good discussions amongst Staff. I've found (so far) that EXTREME suggestions (close all the top heavy clans), even if they might have merit, will have less chance of being implemented, as they're not only daunting, but would be classified as an 'incredible change'. They'd change the game irreversibly in one direction or another -- I think more moderate examples can gain more traction, especially if they aren't heavy on code changes, because those take quite some time. Some of our current coding direction is modifying existing code, making it more efficient, so that future generations of coders can easier add on to existing code or modify it. Adding new code isn't beyond the realm of possibility, but it puts the onus on one or two Staffers, who have a very full plate as it is.

Just something to keep in mind! There are some great ideas here, and we (on Staff) are at the very least reading and discussing them, so you aren't shouting into a vacuum.

[WithSprinkles]

I lurk more than I post, but my significant other has expressed a desire again to try and play again.
It got me thinking. In some other games, that would be easy because, well. I could just have him roll up a character and our little characters could interact a bit and I could show him the ropes as I knew them, walk him around, role play with him a bit.. that sort of thing. I get that a request has to be submitted for the same IP, and that's fine, that's not the subject I'm on.

What if there were a separate instance of the game or area just for this sort of interaction? A newbie instance? I know it's not a new idea, but think of the possibilities.

-New players could get a limited feel for the game with pre-genned characters and helpers, players and GMs could walk around in this instance when they felt like it and be available for assistance. (which could be stressful, but might give a welcoming feel that some games DO have)

-EXISTING players could log in with PRE-GENNED characters and explain syntax or an OOC question could be answered at length with a confused friend who lives in a distant place and the solution could be demonstrated in game (How do I craft this? - Have limited crafting items available for small crafting demonstrations)

-Maybe there could be rooms with training dummies or a scrab where someone new could get a "feel" for combat.

-Instead of having those big player/GM meetings over Teamspeak, they could be held in game in this instance with the actual GM characters. No Teamspeak limits and maybe more people could attend? With their pre-genned characters, of course.

-Leader characters could have meeting spaces and could either use pre-genned characters or their real characters (since it would be an OOC forum to collaborate and get times and events down) A GM could even HELP them set up RPTs in this way.


I'm sure perhaps people could think of other ways this might be beneficial? Or maybe reasons why it wouldn't be. I just know that it might help to have a place that I could help someone learn to play.

[Jihelu]

Nah but really though I want to use a sword.

The 'let people buy more shit' idea sounds good.

[Narf]

However, I'd still bang the drum that a better case can be made that a more direct cause was voting.  We started looking at this and promoting it in FEBRUARY of 2013.  There was no word of a new website, there was no word of an HRPT, there was just "the game as it is."  The data points far more to voting (not to mention a snazzy website) than it does to an HRPT.  Here's the first thread discussing measures to improve.  To quote something I noticed then:

Voting seems like a good source of new players logging in to check the game out, but based on what people have been saying about their first experiences with the game having the HRPT running while these new players were checking the game out for the first time probably made all the difference.

I imagine we'll see soon if that's the case. People started really getting votes in this last half of the month. We'll probably have some new players from it, but I don't think we'll keep them for more than a session or two if there's nothing visible going on.

That aside, I haven't actually paid attention to the MOTD for a while but is there a chance we could put up a link to the existing maps of Allanak in preparation for an influx of new, horrifically lost players?

[Eurynomos]

I've noticed a marked increase in logins -- Oddly enough, from players who haven't been here for a while and have logged back in again. COINCIDENCE? Or is this very visible thread having some sort of effect?!

[Delirium]

Fix the whole "point Tuluk" thing in character generation. Too many lost newbies get stuck in Morin's which is a very newbie unfriendly place.

[BadSkeelz]

I'm sure perhaps people could think of other ways this might be beneficial? Or maybe reasons why it wouldn't be. I just know that it might help to have a place that I could help someone learn to play.

Honestly, I think the best course of action would be to guide him towards joining the same clan as you, at least for the first character. Arranging a situation where you can both play together is not the same as colluding. The letter of the rules might say not to do this, but unless you two are in a room pick-pocketing each other or something, I question that it would be that big a deal. RL Couples have played more closely together before.

Maximize IC interaction and activities and provide the helping hand OOC. Do clan stuff, hit the world running, get him exposed to Armageddon. This can have the added benefit of making your clan look more active, which draws other players. What was once an ad hoc tutorial can then became just good ol' Armageddon with a new player or two following along learning the ropes.

It's not all that different a situation as new players being encouraged to join the Byn because it's a newbie-friendly environment that gives a lot of introduction to skill, code, and RP.

[Molten Heart]

Fix the whole "point Tuluk" thing in character generation. Too many lost newbies get stuck in Morin's which is a very newbie unfriendly place.

I like having the Northlands as a starting location (more options are better). The Northlands could be disabled for new characters (like other areas) or even a note in parentheses by the name in the hall of kings that says "(very low player density/population)" or something to that effect.