One Week thoughts

General
#21

Reckon not on the cut the price. Due to historical reasons we’re never going to get fully automated so that always means high over-heads in terms of staff etc. Also every time we reduce (and presently we’re subsidising the US Dollar turns enormously) the price we don’t particularly find any more players join the game.

Whether you pay $7.80 or $5.80 that’s not a big difference for the majority of players we’ve found. I don’t see we’d get more players - instead of players running 2(-3) nations they’d run 1(-2) nations and I find that burnout for 1wk games is a problem - especially in very tight Grudge games with lots of diplomacy et al. When we tried to get more players to play 1wk games it didn’t work, (we held back on some 2wk to help push it for example and did a big mailing to see if we could get interest - got upto half a game). Cutting cost might get the odd player or two, but I think the game would suffer in the long term in the form of cutting of staff, reduction of service etc as we’d not make any more money, but probably lose some, with a higher amount of work to run the game. There’s a certain level of burn-out play - so say we offered free games even there we’d see players not play 10 positions - they’d just get burnt out, so I’m worried about doing that with a too low price.

Even where there are games like UW where there is a discount for running multiple positions and as fast a turnaround as you’d like that hasn’t garnered the players into 1wk.

As to hands on - yep. I think it’s the best way to be. I try to be as unobtrustive (no really!) as I can be, but I’ve found that sometimes I need to assist the process.

One thing I’m looking at in future is a 1v1 game - bigger positions but reduced cost relatively. That will take some development to organise but I’ll keep you posted. I’ve got KS set-ups to look at (yeah!) and feedback the set-up routine so that we can start testing and that looks promising.

Clint

#22

You mean 1v1 as in 1 Nation vs 1 Nation?

Still think that over time the 1 week game would produce for you… :slight_smile:

#23

My suggestion would be to allow another one week game to form while the present one is still running… Might allow it to be filled faster… during certain times of the year you could actaully get 2 of these running at once… As for the cut in rate not a huge problem… But for anyone who has expierenced the 1 week game it’s much more intense as it cuts the lapse in communication and leads to loss of interest… Even the team who is not doing well the communication is so high and teamwork so well in the last 4 or so… They continue to put up one hell of fight… I can’t see where the one week game is actaully more expensive from your end than the two week becuase it’s effectively the same as filling 2 two week games… More is always better.

#24

Tried filling another one whilst one was running before on a couple of occasions and it didn’t work. I just don’t have enough players interested in playing 1wk at present.

Clint

#25

Well, you might consider opening one up now as the FP in Game 80 shouldn’t last much more than 2 weeks… :smiley:

#26

Well I LOL at your concept of “rusty” players. There are certainly a few of those who pop up from time to time, and are indeed sometimes as bad, or worse than the newbies, often because they return with old baggage - it’s always worth trying to find out why they stopped playing in the first place.

But your thought is perfectly sensible, and it’s an old issue which has plagued MEPBM for longer than I’ve been playing (15 years). It’s not just relevant to the 1 week game, but to all the variants, and nothing is so annoying as a potentially good (and expensive) game which gets ruined after a few turns by inadequate allies, opponents, or by droppers.

A few years ago some of us tried to find a solution in the form of the Player Rating System. The original intention (in my opinion, but see later) was to produce a ranking system so that reliable players could identify one another and set up games which would not crumble so easily. Unfortunately, many other people wanted many other things from a PRS, and others still experienced a terror fueled antipathy to the very concept, so what we got was a PRS designed by comittee - complex, misleading, emotive and consequently ignored by many players.

You also need to understand that the game is run by a company as a business enterprise, so they are always going to have to serve two masters. They have to get games up and running without long long waiting times - and the more variants we have, the more lists we have - that means giving the benefit of the doubt to anyone who wants to sign up, so that games get started, and players who’ve been waiting start sending their dosh. Obviously, if too many games collapse too often, players will leave and the long term income suffers, but that’s the delicate path which MEGames has to try to navigate.

To give MEGames their due, the number of droppers has greatly reduced in the last few years. That bit on the cover sheet where it says “dropouts available” is often unpopulated now. In the “olden days” it was often a long list.

As someone’s already told you, “grudge” games are often better and occupied by a higher calibre of player. But it’s a great shame that many experienced players will only play grudge games now because it means that up ‘n’ coming players in open games don’t get to meet and learn from them. When you’ve made enough contacts whom you consider reliable (probably 5 for a 2 nations each 12v12 grudge game) form a team and set up a challenge.

I’d personally like to see a restarted and much simpler PRS, but I can hear the howls already. :frowning:

#27

I would be interested in understanding how many “experienced”/“good” players are effectively taken out of the player pool as they only play grudge games.

I think it’s a real shame that there seem to be a lot of players that no longer play in open random games…

I know there is an element of pain and suffering that has to be endured by the majority of open game players, but it would really be a huge boost to bring more grudge only players back to playing some normal 1650 games.

The PRS system… so many heated debates… wasn’t even started with everyone having an identical rating from which to start… if you bothered to send Harley your back catalogue of wins/losses/draws, your score was amended from the start… and what is it actually used for?.. pretty much as soon as it was introduced, it dissapeared into the ether…

Does anyone actually use it to tout for allies or enemies?

As for Harley and their business practices… it’s tough to offer lots of choice when the player pool is not expanding rapidly… paper/email/turn based games… are they becoming a thing of the past with so many MMOs? Pricewise… you’ll never hear me say the price is fine… to me the price is high… for 1 game of 2 turns per month I pay the same (more) than if I joined an MMO… but you weigh up the pros/cons of why I play, and I guess I stick around for more. would I play more if the price was lower? Absolutely, but it would have to be a proper lowe price… not just a small margin… and from what I’ve read, its not easy to square all the mouths that need to be fed with no big influx of players. Personally, I’d look at limiting the number of grudge games allowed at once, and I’d look at making a tough choice about the many variants… 1650, 2950, 4th Age, and the new ones which dilute the players and make starting new games longer… why not go for a major price incentive for a player pool to pick up dropped positions… something like… £15 for 6 turns (picked out of thin air)… I’m sure there would be people willing to act as picker-uppers for the right price and for enough turns to incentivise them to make the position work.

Regards

Michael

#28

Regarding vets only playing grudge, that happens (IMO) because the majority of players in open games dont want or dont have the time to put into the game. If you dont have 2-4 planning hours per turn then play LOTRO or a FPS. Doing orders takes less time than actually “soaking in” the current state of the game and I find that many players are basically order processors.

A gaming buddy of mine once made the analogy that open games were like cattle drives. The 1-2 cowboys that get the most cows to the destination wins. Nothing worng with being a casual gamer just dont expect hardcore players to want to deal with you

A grudge game between 2 very good teams is different game, totally.

My .02 and no offense intended.

Steve

PS 1 vs X is a ton of fun if you have the time.

#29

I don’t take offense at your thoughts. However I will ask…

where do you think the good players learned to be good? There were normal games long before there were grudge games.

I’m pretty sure that there are good players and bad players in all games. If only good players are in grudge games, how will new players learn to become good?

If only bad players are left playing normal games, who will want to play?

I just think there aren’t the masses of players that there might once have been, and there is more choice to which scenario to play. When I started, there was only 1650… so everyone played 1650… “Team Games” as they were called back then, were more rare than just open games. Games were also postal, but that’s another matter. Now, there’s lots of choice, and turns come back on day they are run and then distributed to the whole team… no waiting for the thud on the doormat, and then either phoning everyone or creating a newsletter with everyone’s info!!!

It’s the same game, but a different experience now… but the added choice is both great (for those who indulge in the choices on offer) and bad (for spreading of people across the choices and reducing player pools for each choice).

Regards

Michael

#30

One of the points that should be made is that… Some of the best play I ever seen has come in the 1 week variant… Whether the Old Farts who play only Grudge Games now think they are so Good as to have an easy time in That variant will be shocked to find themselves quickly Eliminated and lose the game… 12 vs 12 grudge game is lame compared to dealing with The Nuetral threat… Winning a game when the 4 to 1 nuetral Split goes against your team as FP to the DS… These are just a an example on How Good the regular players of the One Week 1650 game truly are! The One week Variant is the Closiest game to the Old days of Making sound millitary strategy and getting the team up to speed quickly every turn… The Old team game back in PBM days was like that we had to use the old telephone and huge phone bills to do this…

As for the player pool… I see the game has become more stable than ever before… Many of the new players do get alot help from the Older ones… The new players are also hungry to learn and listen well to sound advice… So the player pool should grow… The growth of our player base is really up to US the current players to attract new players teach them and Encourage them even when they do not so brilliant moves… Acknowledge their great team spirit and glorify thier success to help make them hungry for thier next game… Whit was My Foe in One week game when I first ran accross him… His early moves was easy to predict and defeat… But by Mid game in His first One week game he became quite challenging His team rallied around him and threw me Back almost eliminating me… This was again a One week game! Over just 2 one week Games he has become a Veteran player and quite Good some old Farts who do not know him will be in for a shock Including Veteran grudge players…

What the grudge only players should remember… the dropout rate is lessoned so games being ruined by that are much less… If your only losing one teamate during a course of a game it’s easily fixed within the player pool in game… Is your real reason that grudge games are more challenging than open games… Deal facing 14 nations against your 11 and win and you tell me!

#31

I’m doing what I can; trying to recruit a couple of teacher/principal buddies of mine…and who knows…

I will give 1wk games a go once I’m done w/ graduate school but right now that’s just not gonna happen…lol…

as for indy games v grudge v gunboat v scenarios…I can’t really speak against or for any one over another…I like them for different reasons but I do get tired of the dropping…so anymore when I take on a game I always get ready to step in when the dropping occurs and pick up another nation or two…it’s kinda cool running 2 or three guys at a time…makes the case for small grudge teams I suppose…

anyway i digress…

#32

Yes, be prepared to take over a dropped position or don’t get all high and mighty about drops…very simple - you accept and take it or you do something about it, neither avenue has room for all the preachy pontificating we get on our respective yahoogroups when shyte happens… I end up with a second nation in easily half my Indie games as a result of drops at some point.

Mind you, the only relevance to the thread the spectre of Drops has is that one has to recognize the issue and react to it sooner in 1 week games… But I content you’d actually care to notice in a 1 weeker… How many 2 week games do you get 15 emails from Bob, 5 from Stan, 2 from Belinda and 1 each from 3 other players…before you realize that 3 of the starting 10 havent sent a thing…files take 10 days to upload, etc…

All together, keeping consistent with the thread, the 1 week game is better not just because you have the opportunity to remember what you were doing when you get your turn (as opposed to the Christmas turns in 2 week games - “Gee, what could this funny email be about…??”) but because it happens faster - you can see things through in a reasonable time and you can see the impacts of your idiocy faster. Better learning, better forced communcation - all around a better game.

Brad

#33

Sorry, but for me, 2 week games are the only real choice. RL interferes with my ability to play 1 week games. I like GB and you have to think a lot in GB… that takes time. I like Grudge games and you have to think a lot in Grudge games… that plus the team coordination and communication takes a lot of time.

I can see your argument for a 1-week “open” game where it’s 10v10 + 5N, but that style game is definitely not for me anymore.

Just this week in our grudge team game we have had a rousing discussion of a game mechanic detail and a surprising conclusion based on factual analysis of a LOT of game turn pdfs. I’d never learn that kind of thing from a open game.

Will Kin Strife be a cool new “open” type game? probably! There will be a few playtest “experts”, but even old-timers will be rank novices for the most part.

So Brad, I’ll buy that 1-week is good for open games, but not for GB and not for Grudge. Obviously, if people preferred 1 week games, then ME Games would be running lots more of them!

cheers,
Dave

#34

It really comes down to time spent. Very few players are willing to put the time in to become much more than an order processor. I dont think its ever been about only mediicore players in open games. Ive been playing since '96 and I cant ever remember a person asking for advice etc and being turned down by a supposed “vet”. Most ME’ers love to talk about/teach the game.

This is a team game, so your performamce affects everyone else’s success. I cant blame anyone for gravitating towards teams or GB. Quite frankly many players are last minute order submitters and that leaves no time for corrections even if someone is willing to check them. Frustration builds and so on.

Steve

#35

For you… And a lot of our contemporaries, I suspect. Nothing personal, I’m not talking about you and them, perse…

Will Kin Strife be a cool new “open” type game? probably! There will be a few playtest “experts”, but even old-timers will be rank novices for the most part.

Great, another module that’s sucked all the dev effort from a cross platform web app that can greatly modernize the game’s experience. This module comes what, 2 years later than initially predicted? And will simply suck players away from the already too many modues (BoFA, 1650, 2950, FA, UW…GBs, etc) and nothing will fill for all the aging players in their lazy 2 week habits waiting now an extra month before even remebering to bother removing their name from a Games Filling list that’s moving as fast as those tectonic plate thingies (or whatever they are…).

I’ll buy that 1-week is good for open games, but not for GB and not for Grudge.

Why not Gunboat? Gads, no communication or discussion required…??? These should be 48 hour turnaround games, takes me 30 minutes to complete and send orders for my 2 GB’s and that includes multi turn data analysis, changes over time, predictions and character tracking (oh, that’s right, that’s because I have a cross platform multi function app that gives me this info at a click, but isn’t released nor necessarily supported for “genpop”…)

Obviously, if people preferred 1 week games, then ME Games would be running lots more of them!

Dave, you’re quite the bright fellow, but if MEGames said the earth was flat, would you then post “Obviously, the Earth is Flat!”…??? Come now, bless their souls, but their not trendspotters or marketting guru’s are they? Never caught that in their resume. If they were they’d be billionaires on the stock market and running this game for free as a hobby and a favour to us all (well, they’d feel more free to kick some of us out of the game…!! ahahaha!).

I’m simply coming from a high level perspective and over the last couple of years I’ve seen MEPBM kind of slowing down a little…starting to look like a dying game… Clint’s moved off to invest in more lucrative gaming ventures and MEPBM appears to be left to be administered until finally the day shall come when there’s nothing left to administer. I’ll argue for things to be done to prevent that as, frankly, I’m a sad and pathetic addict who likely requires an intervention…but until then, I’ll want more/faster games and I personally think that is where the market would be found - not in a 3 week “Our players don’t like them” assessment - but over a period of time. Can’t say I’m wrong, 'cause it’s never been done.

Cheers,

Brad

cheers,
Dave[/QUOTE]

#36

LOL Brad. Is the Earth not flat? Really? <wink>

I think ME Games responds to market pressure. If more players want 1-week games, they’d ask ME Games, and ME Games would respond. This isn’t a mysterious market analysis problem requiring consultants, gads of money, surveys, focus groups, etc. The players are talkative and communicate what they want. If 1-week games were to fill more rapidly, then for sure, Clint would put up more 1-week games! duh!

As to GB being a 48-hour turnaround game, you are completely wrong IMO. I think a LOT about GB and it’s that continual thinking (which takes time) that produces results…

But, we can agree to disagree. cheers!
Dave

#37

[i]Will Kin Strife be a cool new “open” type game? probably! There will be a few playtest “experts”, but even old-timers will be rank novices for the most part.

Great, another module that’s sucked all the dev effort from a cross platform web app that can greatly modernize the game’s experience.[/i]

That’s not, IMO, what makes the game. Modernize does NOT = good. A nice web-app will just be an improved Mapping program (I’ve seen enough modern games and play the odd one to know the difference). It won’t “regenerate” the game. Some players want a new challenge and new things, hence KS. That will be new rather than a re-working of old, but good, ideas. It might well be that some modules suffer but that’s difficult to avoid without opening new game concepts, ideas etc.

I’m simply coming from a high level perspective and over the last couple of years I’ve seen MEPBM kind of slowing down a little…starting to look like a dying game…

It’s stable - we lose some players and gain/ re-gain a like quantity. So your statement is not accurate. Like all PBeM games it’s reduced somewhat in player base, but that’s the nature of these games but is stable at present.

Clint’s moved off to invest in more lucrative gaming ventures

Well not really, see me posting here. I’ve managed to pass on the labourious stuff of day-to-day running to my staff freeing me up to get other projects done. (Yea!) :D:) I’ve developed, with player help, a lot of new updates to the game etc that I think are broadly supported by you, the players. I’ll continue to do that as well inputting into both companies as I see it need be. I’ll pass on the reins of most of the other day-to-day stuff to others I’m hoping, freeing up more time for me to be creative. We specifically bought the ME licence to one day develop the licence into other genres etc. That doesn’t mean you guys won’t get top notch service for as long as you play the game. I’m reasonably sure that you’ll pipe up should we fail to live up to those high standards we’ve set. :smiley:

and MEPBM appears to be left to be administered until finally the day shall come when there’s nothing left to administer.

Nope, not the case at all. It’s my retirement fund so… :wink: We’re continuing to develop the game, there’s massive amount of work being put into the game as you can see with the mapping programs, updates, PC conversion, new modules. The only thing that has delayed the new KS module is the PC conversion taking longer than we planned for, everything else has come on from there. We’ve filled in that time with other developments as basically programming time has been the major pita here.

I’ll argue for things to be done to prevent that as, frankly, I’m a sad and pathetic addict who likely requires an intervention

Okay, here’s my intervention, my advice is don’t claim that the game is being left to die when the exact opposite is occurring… LOL…

…but until then, I’ll want more/faster games and I personally think that is where the market would be found

I don’t think so. We’ve tried. Players sometimes want what they want, not what is always possible (I’m very much in that boat myself for example as a player). I try to give players what they want but sometimes that’s not possible. The player base is big enough to support many varieties of games and modules we’ve found and different play styles.

Get a bunch of players (and a web-based app won’t do that as you seem to be asking for a web-based app that reduces our income to too low a level - I’ve seen it with other PBeM games btw so can back up my supposition here) into the game that like fast turnaround games. Or play in a grudge game with a few friends (multiple positions) in a one week format. That would get you the faster games that you require I suspect.

Clint

#38

From what I have seen over last few years. The One week Variant fills faster after it’s been offered than any other format including grudge games looking for opposition… It’s not weeks it’s Days now! why play in several 2 week games vs one week game the true time to write effective orders and get a feel for what is going on on takes hours for your nation and maybe a day or two to scan your teams pdf’s if all are submitted… once the game starts a real flow of orders and options comes and only minor corrections of the turn 0 and so on is required… We all have minor bumps of real life that come to play… But in the last few one week games the trust is so great amongst the team… players delegate someone trusted to write the shadow orders required…

If more one week games were formed the initail point of expierence in one week games would become mute… Plus players including new one would have less chance to become disinterested by the LONG wait in between turns… The two week variant to me hold’s less interest becuase it takes Months to fulfill even a turn 0 strategy…

For myself I love the one week strategy becuase it’s easier to get into and torch the best players in the game Faster… It’s fun to play with good players but it’s more fun to beat the best! the One week variant leaves no excuses becuase even becuase that variant keeps thier attention high even sometimes more than a two week grudge game…

I also think if more two week games were offered players currently in a one week game might sign up for two of these games for the same reason I would… Even when your not writing orders alot is discussed in a short period of time…

The one week game will never totally replace the 2 week game… But the two week game is now the old slow game of the PBM days… (once a month). In this respect I believe that the one week game will show to become the norm even in grudge games as more players expierence that format and it revitalizes our pastime and helps new players build interest!

terry

#39

The One week Variant fills faster after it’s been offered than any other format including grudge games looking for opposition

Yes, mostly because I only offer it when the last 1wk game has ended. :wink: I agree it does usually fill reasonably fast then.

Clint

#40

Is it full?
Is it full?
Is it full?
Is it full?
Is it full?