Retaining Players

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Retaining Players

      OK, i've been in a few 22 player games. All seem to be nearly full but after only 4 or 5 days there are onl 2-4 players active.

      Why is this? It becomes frustrating because I don't to bash AI. I want to play real players.

      Why do they leave? Is it because of the slow gameplay or is it perhaps that PLUS the fact that you can do very little for the first few days.

      Researching and building in order to produce the minimum required to go to war (some tanks, arty and an air force or navy) takes at least 2 days to get your first units out. Then it takes the best part of a day to march them to a border and assemble the force. So that means effectively 3-4 days were u can do very very little.

      I can see this as being very demotivating to most players.

      Would it be possible to have an option when creating a game where you start with a reasonable army/airforce in the middle of your country. I know we have a couple of AA, Armd Cars and infantry but perhaps we could have 6 ;ight tanks. 3 med tanks, 5 artillery pieces, a couple of motorised infantry and a couple of antianks and tank killers?

      It would allow you to march a relatively fast moving army somewhere and do something with it.

      It would perhaps retain more players.

      I'll probably be flamed by older more experienced players but let's think about it. A game where 9/10 players drop out after 4 days, probably never to play again is probably an indication something is not quite right?

      Am also only suggesting it's an OPTION and we don'e have to redo everybodys habits of years of play?

    • Early drop outs are a problem on almost all browser games. CoN is even worse than CoW, about 90% quit after 3 days!
      The maps with minimum rank requirements have fewer quitters, and the players are a bit more skilled. Usually the 50 player maps are finished within a month when a coalition of 4 good players gets going early.

    • New players have very high drop out rates. Unfortunately, we don't get feedback from the players that quit. It could be that the game is too slow for many of them. Dropout rates would have to be monitored for map types before and after changes to see if it reduces the dropout rate significantly. Some players may drop out if they don't feel they can be in the top 3 players in a given game.
      After the higher requirements for larger maps, the drop out rates fell significantly. So that was good.

    • One reason could be because there is a (lack of internal motivation within the game)
      Lets look at the (Achievements Section) Is anything provided for fulfilling them ?
      People playing browser games like to be rewarded for there time and effort.
      Apart from playing games that last 2,3,4 months for a small gold reward and a few
      collected blue prints along the way.
      Dont get me wrong players like myself,Hardcore strategy and tactics with the human element
      making strategy and tactical decisions against you is what its all about.
      But times have changed and game creators and development need to change with it.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Sixaxa ().

    • Yes Lawrence, I agree that the pace of the game might put off a lot of players but I think the fact that you can do very little for the best part of a week at the start of the game is also an issue and is something that can be easily fixed.

      2 separate issues here. One of which I believe is a simple fix.

      Sixaxa I agree as well. I looked at the blueprints. Nice idea but you cannot use elite units till VERY late in game. Am guessing you might not even use them in some games if they don't last long enough.

    • This has been an issue since before this game even started, as this game is pretty much a S1914 clone and that has the same problem. I think it is just something that has to be dealt with at this stage.

      On the other hand though, I do like your idea to start off with more units. Maybe not quite the ones you suggested, but something along those lines. I am a serial quitter of this game and it is usually because of the god awful drag at the start of games. I would be picky about how these units are spawned in though, in some of the historical maps you get extra units but they are so badly mixed up it takes a day or two to organise them anyways and, at least for the USSR in historical, you can't even fly some of your planes to your borders.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • it's just a suggestion, am not familiar with all units but enough to be useful in a limited sense. not enough to beat a neighbour but enough to make an incursion.

      planes are an issue cos u'd need airbases to get them around.

      perhaps there should be a slightly larger starting number of buildings. we have 4 or 5 ICs and 1 airbase. Perhaps an airbase with each IC and infrastructure?

      what do u suggest QuasiDuck?

    • Many of my friends find this game boring, so they quit. A few of my friends celebrate like heck after taking one province, just to be destroyed a week later. There's no incentive to keep playing, except for joining maps and MAYBE winning gold. I've only won 1 real game, and that was with my friends. There are also a LOT of games out there, so many lose players quick.

      Bytro could easily fix this by upping the requirement to make games and giving a small gold reward when you rank up a couple (maybe 10-15) ranks.

    • I agree that alot of people quit this game early. But I really think CoW is a game for certain people. Most people are just not interested in a WW2 strategy game or just strategy games in general.
      "A ship is always referred to as she because it costs so much to keep her in paint and powder." - Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

    • well Quasi I hear what you say but what are you going to do with slow moving AT and AA or Inf and Militia? They take ages to go to the other side of map. That doesn't address the issue I raise.

      Mythical - I think most people who try the game are probably inclined to play WW2 strategy. The trick is to retain them.

      there needs to be an "instant action" option at least.

    • am now in 2 x 22 player games with only 1 other player after 1 week. The games both started with 20ish players. So that's like 36 players who have disappeared from the game probably never to play again.

      It costs advertising money to get them to try the game, it's a shame they can't be retained.

      Now I am USA in one game and the other player is Russia Empire :(, Spain versus Romania isn't as bad but still a pain.

    • Spitfeur wrote:

      well Quasi I hear what you say but what are you going to do with slow moving AT and AA or Inf and Militia?
      I said you can build these on day one. These are the units I suggested.

      Quasi-duck wrote:

      The normal stuff, with 1 LT, 2 arty, and a CC.
      :00000441: Forum Gang Commissar :00000441:

      Black Lives Matter!!!!! All Lives Matter!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:



    • Thanks for all the suggestions. Retaining players is always an issue in online browser games. A high dropout rate is kind of expected as we pull in a broad range of users and not all like this kind of game. They just try it out for some minutes and see if they like the game style.
      We could be better though and we will probably revisit that problem at some point in the future.
      For now I recommend playing in non-tutorial game rounds if you want more active players in your match.

      One thing that is coming very soon though actually is something nice with achievements *wink* ;)

    • always good to hear from Game Designers. One of the things I noticed in the news is there are constant revisions to the game which is promising.

      Perhaps you might look at this "instant action" option in near future. It would be great to retain more players.

      Look forward to the achievements update now :)

    • Well, I have a suggestion, For the maps, Why not have it for realistic army units for that time? For example, The soviet union has always had a large military, each country should have a realistic force count. I think that would retain players for a while, However, I personally find that the achievements don't really matter to new players, they just want to get into a match and fight people. Besides, CoW does get predictable after a while, You build up a military, You get really strong units, then you invade, you win, and the enemy attacks, etc etc. If a player does that several times they tend to get bored, there needs to be a change in gameplay. At least I think so.
      "ANU! CHEEKI BREEKI IV DAMKE!"

    • JCS Darragh wrote:

      Well, I have a suggestion, For the maps, Why not have it for realistic army units for that time? For example, The soviet union has always had a large military, each country should have a realistic force count. I think that would retain players for a while, However, I personally find that the achievements don't really matter to new players, they just want to get into a match and fight people. Besides, CoW does get predictable after a while, You build up a military, You get really strong units, then you invade, you win, and the enemy attacks, etc etc. If a player does that several times they tend to get bored, there needs to be a change in gameplay. At least I think so.
      I think that would help to spice things up a lot.
      "A ship is always referred to as she because it costs so much to keep her in paint and powder." - Admiral Chester W. Nimitz