Getting people to find Utopia

[Crazyguy]

Or Go To T-Mobile or CNN's Facebook page and spam their posts with links and invite ppl to come play. I'm currently banned from Fox News' FB page lol. I just popped a link and a game description onto one of T-Mobiles FB post, I have 37 likes and a new team member. One good description is "this game uses like no data at all, it's all text kinda old school D&D style, and tons of fun.

[handofthrawn]

I find it funny that everyone blames advertising or bishop. Not the toxic nature of the game. Advertise and say what come play utopia where we are going to. A. Not teach you how to play. B. Top kingdoms will bottom feed on you all age. C. Kill you off for not knowing how to play. D. Force you into wars you have no chance to win. But hey come play utopia doesn't it sound so much fun. Until attitude changes or a code of conduct is followed in utopia it will continue to shrink. So every time you wave someone and refuse to accept a cf your part of the problem. You wave someone way smaller then you your part of the problem. I could go on but haha I won't waste my time, because nothing will change. Utopia is what it is.

[Palem]

A. Not teach you how to play. B. Top kingdoms will bottom feed on you all age. C. Kill you off for not knowing how to play. D. Force you into wars you have no chance to win.

How does this differ at all from Call of Duty? Doesn't seem to be affecting their popularity.

[handofthrawn]

Haha playing call of duty right now. Province takes alot of time and effort to build. Long days and nights to win wars. To have it taken away by bottom feeding explores using net munipulations rob you of land, honor or force you into a un winnable war. Call of duty you get destroyed but you reset every battle that last min not months. I mean no one likes being crushed between two kingdoms that are trying to force war. It's why people quit or never get started playing the game.

[Crazyguy]

The game doesn't have to change to bring in players. This game is addictive. Also it sure beats the HELL outta candy crush. People actually PAY to play candy crush. Why? Because their friends do. People just don't even know that this little nugget of awesomeness exists.

[Goodwitch]

we could start a mentoring program with volunteers. Experienced players that take an age off from chasing crowns and instead teach new players. Of course that would mean that these new players would have to be placed in these select kingdoms. And towards the end of the age the mentor could try to find them more permanent homes depending on their skill level. A lot of work but I bet there would be some volunteers.

[Palem]

Province takes alot of time and effort to build. Long days and nights to win wars. To have it taken away by bottom feeding explores using net munipulations rob you of land, honor or force you into a un winnable war.

1.) There is absolutely no way to force a kingdom into a war. If you give the button to a kingdom you can't beat, you deserve to get beaten and lose.
2.) You keep the resources you're able to protect. If bottomfeeding is such an unfair advantage and exploit of game mechanics, one must ask the question, why exactly aren't you doing it?
3.) I believe the single biggest issue the game faces is with instructing new players. They land in ghettos with either other new players or generally players who are usually terrible. This wouldn't be a problem is the game was quick to pick up, but it's not. The learning curve is absurd (but totally worth it) and it usually takes an age or two (over half of a RL year) to just get a decent grasp of the game mechanics. Currently the only way for a new player to really stand a chance and learn the game is to get recruited into a decent kingdom which is a lot more initiative than a typical new player will show.

[handofthrawn]

Simple game mechanic changes would stop bottom feeding. Like gain penalty's for the whole kingdom instead of just nw per province. So 30 million net kingdom couldn't hit a 15 million net kingdom and gain much. It would help force more wars and in general be good for the game. It would set up tiers noobs at the bottom and they will have the chance to grow up through the ranks.

[handofthrawn]

1.) There is absolutely no way to force a kingdom into a war. If you give the button to a kingdom you can't beat, you deserve to get beaten and lose.
2.) You keep the resources you're able to protect. If bottomfeeding is such an unfair advantage and exploit of game mechanics, one must ask the question, why exactly aren't you doing it?
3.) I believe the single biggest issue the game faces is with instructing new players. They land in ghettos with either other new players or generally players who are usually terrible. This wouldn't be a problem is the game was quick to pick up, but it's not. The learning curve is absurd (but totally worth it) and it usually takes an age or two (over half of a RL year) to just get a decent grasp of the game mechanics. Currently the only way for a new player to really stand a chance and learn the game is to get recruited into a decent kingdom which is a lot more initiative than a typical new player will show.

No my kingdom does not bottom feed. I don't allow it period.

[octobrev]

There is a kd nw gains reduction

[Korp]

No my kingdom does not bottom feed. I don't allow it period.

So you mean you micro every single hit made by your kingdom by every province to make sure that they are not too much out of range? Man, you dont have a job do ya?

[citadela01]

Simple game mechanic changes would stop bottom feeding. Like gain penalty's for the whole kingdom instead of just nw per province. So 30 million net kingdom couldn't hit a 15 million net kingdom and gain much. It would help force more wars and in general be good for the game. It would set up tiers noobs at the bottom and they will have the chance to grow up through the ranks.

This is allrdy implemented.
As things stand gains formula is heavily in favor of smaller kd, ppl just get intimidated too easily and dont retal.
Topfeeding is very very strong.

[StratOcastle]

This is allrdy implemented.
As things stand gains formula is heavily in favor of smaller kd, ppl just get intimidated too easily and dont retal.
Topfeeding is very very strong.

This truth isn't just mechanically forgiving, it has some roots in reality. There are several examples of small nations resisting the occupation of larger nations. The feelings by some that the mechanics are broken are unfounded. I reflected on this last age.

In short, great kingdoms with solid leadership and core will do better in the game. The intimidation factor can be concentrated in one area and that's the t/ms. This is the price of top down kingdom design. If a kingdom wants to secure UB vs evenly matched nw then they must weather the peril of bottom feeders. This in itself defines the difference between top kingdoms and organized war kingdoms. This culture is clearly demarcated by lack of cows in the land rankings.

Thus, I would argue that joining an organized kingdom may not be the best way to learn. I'm placing player happiness over kingdom success in order of player retention. The old lower tier kingdoms abide top feeders by default; they play the game at a casual pace. They have sustained, but aren't where new players stay.

The new player needs a place to make mistakes. Unorganized ghettos give them the opportunity to feel out the game and decide where they go from there. It's up to us as veterans to guide them where they would be happiest, from casual to hyperactive.

[Goodwitch]

Getting rid of the land reward for won wars would help a lot. Right now if a small new kingdom wars a few ghettos and gets lucky and wins they are stuck in the top 10-20.

[Palem]

This truth isn't just mechanically forgiving, it has some roots in reality. There are several examples of small nations resisting the occupation of larger nations.

Check and mate.