Number of Players Lost Since Glacier?

[Buffalkill]

As the dev team has said, an initial drop in players/characters was expected and factored in when they decided to do the glacier/monster invasion, so the fact that their predication has come true is not necessarily an indictment of their master plan. They've also said that they're looking at a timeline of about 6 months, so any assessment should be re-evaluated as time goes by. That said, here's a little bit of data that might be relevant for anyone wanting to provide their 2 cents. I'm not advancing any personal agenda. I'm just a fan of the game trying to help out.
Registered players
14 Jan. 2014: 848
13 Apr. 2014: 801

Characters
12 Apr. 2014: 1535
18 Apr. 2014: 1515

Characters on Dwilight
~Apr. 2013: 481
18 Apr. 2014: 364

Non-rogue regions on Dwilight
~Apr. 2013: 216
18 Apr. 2014: 103

[CyberGenesis]

I'd be skeptical of the non-rogue counts if i hadn't seen how many regions we lost to monsters and starvation in just our corner of the east. But a goodchunk of the west is now hijacked by monsters. So that count is sort of misleading for anything relevant.

[Buffalkill]

I'd be skeptical of the non-rogue counts if i hadn't seen how many regions we lost to monsters and starvation in just our corner of the east. But a goodchunk of the west is now hijacked by monsters. So that count is sort of misleading for anything relevant.

I'd respectfully have to disagree with you. Since the purpose of the monster invasion/glacier is to increase the number of nobles in non-rogue regions, you need to look at how many non-rogue regions there are in relation to the number of nobles to know whether the plan is working or not. The number of characters is only half of that equation.

[CyberGenesis]

RIght but without a full count of rogue regions ONLY in the west and Occupied regions in the west AND east in addition to the total count on the island - This information is much less useful

[Buffalkill]

RIght but without a full count of rogue regions ONLY in the west and Occupied regions in the west AND east in addition to the total count on the island - This information is much less useful

Western rogues: 91 out of 105
Eastern rogues: 46 out of 133
Nobles: 277

[CyberGenesis]

We're still only looking at a 2:1 density, still a bit light but it's better than 1.1:1

[Anaris]

We're still only looking at a 2:1 density, still a bit light but it's better than 1.1:1

And around the level we were projecting when we chose the land to remove.

[Blue Star]

Pulling his blade from the ice he hears rumors of a new land once sunk under the waves of the world now once again reemerging, a man with a dream awakens and walks toward the sea what only those of old age and rumors have said existed, he prepares himself and begins to atone for his sins, though plenty more are surely to come.

[Bhranthan]

Perhaps a silly idea, but how cool would it be if the current effects given to realms effected by the ice/monster invasion, where given to every realm in the game with a fairly extreme player density.
Those rare situations where a realm is so crowded that tax shares are so low only a few can pay for a unit, for example after being seriously reduced in size after a war or something else.
These effects will give that realm a boost to be able to for example migrate to the together side of the map or simply start a war against their a little bigger neighbor.
Why? because we normally see these realms just slowly bleed out noble for noble, without any realistic chance for conflict.
Its like a last chance for potential, small realms to not only survive, but to remain fun and grow.

Perhaps equally, the opposite effect could be given to realms with an extremely low noble density, slowly increase their unit costs, more morale penalties for marching away to far.
This will force bigger realms with low noble counts to fight wars only with direct neighbors or just reduce in size, preferably both.
Preventing big realms to become police realms of the continent, marching anywhere to include them selves in every conflict.

I understand there are already other mechanisms in place, but i really see potential in this effect on the game in general.

[Poliorketes]

Honestly, I don't think the ice will send a lot of players out of the game, but I don't think more density is going to make the game more fun. If we want more players, we must do the game funnier.

For example: This game have a lot of limitations without any real justification and only make the play more limited and boring. Honestly, this game is wonderful, but sometimes I found myself thinking "There is no human way to make this thing more boring?!".

We want a fun game? get rid of (or lesser A LOT) equipment damage, morale loses for distance, limit of troops for honour, infinite Take Overs, etc... give freedom to the noblemen! not tie them with a ton of limitations. This would be only a small step, but it would be a step in the right direction!

[trying]

Then the big realms would just stomp the small realms into the ground.

[Antonine]

Density does help a lot. If you're an active player in a realm with a total of ten nobles in total where the majority of players are passive then the odds are you'll be bored stiff because there's no one else active to play with and very little activity within the realm.

If you have the same situation with three times the nobles then at least there's likely to be enough active players to keep a decent level of activity going on within the realm.

[sharkattack]

I feel like if Barca/Asylon/Niselur plans dont work out in the East because of lack of income/resources and their armies get wiped out that many of their nobles will quit the game.

Me personally will try and stick to the game as long as i have will to play on. But this whole situation frustrated me a lot.

[Poliorketes]

Then the big realms would just stomp the small realms into the ground.

I don't see how is different now. Big realms stomp small realms right now!

Density does help a lot. If you're an active player in a realm with a total of ten nobles in total where the majority of players are passive then the odds are you'll be bored stiff because there's no one else active to play with and very little activity within the realm.

If you have the same situation with three times the nobles then at least there's likely to be enough active players to keep a decent level of activity going on within the realm.

Small realms without active nobles don't survive and in small realms one noble can make the difference... Big realms where only the council decide and 50 noblemen follow orders, are no much fun either.

If this was the matter, all big realms would have a steady growing in noblemen, while small realms would had disappeared... is this the case?... and  honestly, if this was the matter, why begun the number of players begin to fall??? If the number of players is the reason, and some years ago, we have the "good proportion" of them... then why begun the fall in players?

[Zakilevo]

They should have probably executed it together.

I think all three realms failed on carving a new realm on the east.