Hey all, just a brief post here. I am interested to know what you think of the new player system. I see so many new players that never make it past the 10,000 or so value stage, leaving those players unable to grow and play. I am thinking that maybe it would be better for new players if they started at a higher ally value, and potentially started out with a small sum of money to grow. Interested to hear thoughts and opinion on the matter. Thanks
I think they should start off at a higher value who wants to get spammed to death when they start a new game?
@royalnavy. I find your solution very interesting. I would like to counter with a different proposal - have "new" kingdoms be searchable by typing "new" in the ally search, and then be sorted by newest to join game. This would do a lot more to distinguish them from the trash. Can't even find the new players due to the sheer number of inactives at all levels. Reason: Giving them a higher starting price would make them immediately undercosted and not worth buying. It would only make them easier to volley for gold for those who notice the announcement. // Edit: Less newsfeed for the new player, but at least it would give the impression they are "loved" before they get context on the value of gold.
Even boosting starting value to 1m or 10m would be enough. It gets rid of the horrible phase of volleying for both sides, doesn't make the newb "overpriced," and still lets small players buy cheap allies.
Corinthian, I love your idea involving the "new player" search option. And I understand your concern with an initial starting value being too high. Thus, I believe that your idea as well as Thrawn's idea to have the starting value at 1 million or so would work well together.
Support. I'm constantly trying to volley new players every time I see the WC announcement. I can't tell you how many stay under 1 million because they don't get a volley. Even the ones that join clans sometimes don't get a volley. If you advertise as a beginner clan, then you should help your clan mates. From a players perspective, it's not time efficient to volley a brand new player because the money isn't worth the continuous "error try again" messages. I agree with the above. Simply starting at 1M would eliminate quite a bit of time plus remove unnecessary newsfeed spam for the new player.
I think 10mil or even 100mil would be a better number. 10k would of been great... When the game first came out, now we have all these lands I've seen new players getting vollied to a tril lol.
I agree. at this point in the game I just don't think it makes sense to have players starting out at 10k.
The problem with 100m is for very new players, they won't be able to buy allies and get their max plunder immediately. It's a small issue, but for retaining newbs I feel it'd be important - hence starting people at 10m max. Think back to being a newb (less than a year for me on this account, so easy to imagine), and what a pain it is to slowly build plunder up for the first time (assuming f2p, noob clan, etc, like most new, non-alt players will be). Trying to save up the first 100m after getting vollied to 400b (which is usually where I see them get to if they get a good volley) is a pain, especially since you just want to upgrade. Small allies are crucial to getting past that phase quickly.
To add on, assuming no volley, that tiny tiny quest or battle gold has an immediate outlet. Those are good points, for sure.
Why not just raise the cap for gold earned from ally sales? I think it's about time that 7 (almost eight) year "fix" be changed to something suites such an inflated economy.
If u see a newbie grow up to 80m cs within 2 days, u'll know devs won't care about those free2play newbies