Character Count

[Buffalkill]

We want people to play the characters they have. Not in a button-pushing sort of way, but they could be writing letters, forming alliances, informing their liege as to what they are up to, etc. Playing 3 silent drones instead of 2 silent drones isn't much of an improvement.

Like I said, fun players will be fun, and boring players will be boring. Don't let the 'perfect' be the enemy of the good.

[Gustav Kuriga]

Like I said, fun players will be fun, and boring players will be boring. Don't let the 'perfect' be the enemy of the good.

This. Reminds me of a military quote: The greatest enemy of a good plan, is the dream of a perfect plan  - Carl Von Clausewitz, Prussian general and military theorist

Honestly trying to come up with something perfect will just yield diminishing returns. We should instead look to come up with something good, which is what giving new players 3 nobles would be.

[Buffalkill]

This. Reminds me of a military quote: The greatest enemy of a good plan, is the dream of a perfect plan  - Carl Von Clausewitz, Prussian general and military theorist

Honestly trying to come up with something perfect will just yield diminishing returns. We should instead look to come up with something good, which is what giving new players 3 nobles would be.

Amen. I think I might pick up one of his books once I finish the one I'm reading now. Any recommendations? (Sorry everyone for going off-topic).

[Eirikr]

No disagreement here. My point was that fun players will be fun and boring players will be boring, regardless of how many chars they play.

Tom said that char limits keep the game at a level where casual players don't feel left out and dominated. Well, then it's a failed policy because the most dominant players also have the most chars.

Don't get me wrong, I was happy when my guys became lords because you get more gold and it gives you a bit more to do. But at the same time, a lord without knights is just a glorified knight. It's like being a department manager when you're the only one in the department.

Why not? It's top heavy because there are too few underlings.

Thanks for clearing that up; as we have seen, I was drawing the completely wrong conclusion from your words. It does bring one final question, though: When speaking of those in lordships, you indicated that currently, a lordship is like a 'glorified knight'. Are you trying to say that this isn't enough of a power increase (that is, it's a small step up and few tend to go farther), or that the power (or meaning, more accurately) of a lordship is diminished by the lack of knights/underlings?

I guess what I'm really trying to understand here is why this is a separate issue from increasing our player ranks in the first place. There's much to be said for the (oversimplified wording here) "good over perfect" mentality, but the question becomes what if BM's player count picks up again? (Or rather, why shouldn't we be focusing on increasing player count over this?) It seems to me that the ideal solution would be more players and this is just a band-aid for the short-term (which can be fine, as long as we understand the long-term ramifications).


EDIT: Please forgive me for being difficult, I'm just trying to get a good grasp on the point. We're seeing a lot of changes pop up, but that doesn't instantly mean they should all be accepted.

[Vita`]

Eirikr,

I'm not saying that player count isn't the bigger issue. I'm saying this is a pretty simple fix and reverts back to how the game was for a very long time. If it was OKAYed, it wouldn't take much to see it done and we could return to player count, content that new accounts start with 3 nobles now.

For older returning players, its a bit of a disappointing shock to only have 2 nobles, especially when the rest of the game is slower. While anecdotes prove that everyone treats character slots differently, it does give a newbie looking for more of the game more  opportunities to find something than 2 nobles/1 advy would. The advy can still appear later, just give them a bit of time to figure out the noble game first. I think more initial characters is likely to result in a better retention rate than one with less.

[Buffalkill]

When speaking of those in lordships, you indicated that currently, a lordship is like a 'glorified knight'. Are you trying to say that this isn't enough of a power increase (that is, it's a small step up and few tend to go farther), or that the power (or meaning, more accurately) of a lordship is diminished by the lack of knights/underlings?

The second thing you said. A boss without subordinates isn't really a boss.

I guess what I'm really trying to understand here is why this is a separate issue from increasing our player ranks in the first place.

I don't think it necessarily is a separate issue, but maybe this will answer your question:     

Stop !@#$ing derailing topics. This point has its own topic already.

the question becomes what if BM's player count picks up again?

That would be great. I don't see a problem if that happens. If it ever gets too crowded, that would be a good problem to have, albeit unlikely.

(Or rather, why shouldn't we be focusing on increasing player count over this?) It seems to me that the ideal solution would be more players and this is just a band-aid for the short-term (which can be fine, as long as we understand the long-term ramifications).

Everybody wants more players. You just need to find a way to make that happen. The point of increasing the char limit is 2-fold: 1. increase the number of characters in the game; & 2. increase the amount of fun for newbies.

[Penchant]

Noble limit from 2 to 3 will help the newbies longtermish, as I doubt that a newbie is truly going to be having 3 nobles within their first 3 months at minimum. I didn't have 3 nobles by choice for over 1.5 years.

[Renodin]

I had 2 nobles and an advy fairly soon. Learned the ropes with my first character and then moved on to asking around which other realms were nice. Proceeded to create my second character and got curious about advies so yeah. That filled up my character slots in under a month.

As soon as I garnered 5 or was it 7? Family fame I made my 3rd noble, pauzing my advy, in a third and different realm on a different continent.

I have avoided deleting characters, if I didn't like one place I took the time to travel away to different realms and / or emigrate.

With the slower pace this game runs at, changing realms is a somewhat strenuous process in my opinion. 3 character slots would've been nice from the start. If I would receive a 4th slot I would most likely make another character hehe.

[Eirikr]

I'm (finally) convinced. I can't really see much harm myself, though I think Tom's idea also has a lot of merit, for a different problem altogether.

[Atanamir]

If I had had only 2 chars as new player 9 years ago, I might not be now here.

I can't imagine how it would have gone with either Ikalak (SEI), Darka (Atamara) or Old Rancagua (EC) not being there, cause all three gave me a different experience which made the game complete for me.

Three different continents are very important to try out as new player.

[Kai]

When I started making the second and third character was exciting. It must suck having only 2 chances, you would feel like the second character created would seal your fate. Oritolon/Ikalak/Lasanar(I think) was a great combo.

[Eirikr]

If I had had only 2 chars as new player 9 years ago, I might not be now here.

I can't imagine how it would have gone with either Ikalak (SEI), Darka (Atamara) or Old Rancagua (EC) not being there, cause all three gave me a different experience which made the game complete for me.

Three different continents are very important to try out as new player.

When I started making the second and third character was exciting. It must suck having only 2 chances, you would feel like the second character created would seal your fate. Oritolon/Ikalak/Lasanar(I think) was a great combo.

I just want to point out that Tom's suggestion addresses that exact point. Perhaps a third character is more exciting than just two, but Tom's suggestion actually gives you potentially two chances per character to find a place you like. Quoted and emphasized:

I believe if we really wanted to help newbies, then an ability to quickly pack up your things and go elsewhere in case your first realm choice was bad is A LOT more important then having another character slot.

[Jaden]

Why not both?  :D

[Atanamir]

I just want to point out that Tom's suggestion addresses that exact point. Perhaps a third character is more exciting than just two, but Tom's suggestion actually gives you potentially two chances per character to find a place you like.

The problem I have with Tom's suggestion is that it is not good for the realms the players start in.
Imagine people hopping around like locusts when they are not greeted within a second in a realm or beacuse they don't like a region name or whatever else.
It is not good for the realms as they would never achive to build up a decent foundation of nobles.
I think it is important to take time to get to know your realm and vice versa.

The old system was a successful one since so many want it back, why not returning to it?

[Tom]

The problem I have with Tom's suggestion is that it is not good for the realms the players start in.

Only if they suck and can't engage new people.

Imagine people hopping around like locusts when they are not greeted within a second in a realm or beacuse they don't like a region name or whatever else.

You'd think by now you would have trust in the dev team that we won't allow a realm change within seconds, if only for the abuse/spy potential.