Vision for the Game

[hwulf]

You are correct. The current structure of the game does not allow this. I'm sure you and many others want to understand how we will deal with this! :D You will all just have to stick around to find out!

Is there really a large population of people who would play this game, with the caveat that they need to be able to only login once a day and still be somewhat successful? "I'd considering playing age-after-age, but only if it requires less than or equal to 10 minutes, once a day".
And if so, (which would surprise me?), is that the population of people we WANT to get involved? Is there a way to target new players who might enjoying logging in, say, enough to be somewhat successful as the game currently stands?

Just worried the changes necessary to make once-a-day logins viable will be at the sake of those with luke-warm to high activity, which would be a bummer.

I guess with multiple servers, you'll be able to accommodate multiple markets. I should probably hold my tongue till we see what rolls out with "Genesis".

[an|on]

Posted this a month ago today and was wondering if anyone would like to speak to any of the points. This thread seemed a fitting place to share ideas for the future of Utopia so for what its worth here are a few of mine:

Let's begin by defining what Utopia is. Many would be quick to give an answer consisting of keywords that are readily indexable by a search engine, but that is a bit reductionistic to describe something so complex in such simple terms. The true definition, will depend entirely upon who is defining it.

For the vast majority of users, the UI is Utopia. The User Interface is how every Utopian, whether a seasoned veteran who has been here since its inception or a completely new player stumbling into our world for the first time, views and interacts with the game. Being a data driven (aka text based) game, it is paramount that this interface be both functionally and aesthetically gratifying to the player by leveraging current development standards.

Updating the navigation system as well as making relevant and contextual information glanceable is the kind of functionality Utopia needs to improve the overall user experience. Though some may hold fast to what is familiar, the learning curve for new players is made that much more difficult simply because of poor design. The current system of navigating pages within the game for bits of information is a much more cumbersome process than actually playing the game. In essence, the more elements that can be logically arranged, the better.

For the core base of users, the community is Utopia. There is no doubting that the continued existence of Utopia is due largely to the dedication of longtime players who continue to enrich the game by creating apps/tools, guides, and generally expanding its knowledge base. They have been, from the very beginning, the vanguard of Utopian ideals by which all developments are measured. As such, the inputs of the community should be highly valued to preserve its esprit de corps.

For developers, the API is Utopia. Development of an API is of particular importance as it is key to the overall longevity and scaleability of Utopia. If the plan is to grow Utopia back to its peak user base and beyond, we first need to develop an infrastructure capable of scaling to larger influxes of activity. An API will enable developers to build better apps and tools while greatly reducing server loads (and by extension costs) as Utopia expands across platforms to reach a wider audience.

The Genesis Server will be a great testbed platform to experiment with functionality, game mechanics, and potential changes to be rolled out to the standard server in subsequent Ages. It'll give developers a chance to try new ideas and work out the kinks before deploying to the greater community. This will help to ensure that only successful features and mechanics are implemented into the core Utopia experience.
---

Pay to Win | Never.
Engage to Win | Always.

Pay to Customize | Yes.
Customizations could be a viable income stream that would benefit players (end-users) and developers alike. Given a clean and properly documented API, developers are far more likely to dedicate their time and talents to maintaining and improving the Utopia codebase.

Pay for Functionality | Questionable.
The balance between hardcore/casual/new players is central to the growth of Utopia's user base. Depending on the advantage functions provide, they can be construed as Pay to Win if not properly balanced. The end goal should be to provide a full set of standard functionality to all users, with additional granular controls for kingdom management to Monarchs and Stewards.

Donate to Development | Yes.
Utopia should be a community funded and developed project. Community sourced development roadmaps with tangible goals, actionable metrics, and project milestones should be created and updated regularly to track progress and help encourage contributions. A persistent donation link should be implemented to allow donors access to a secure payment gateway such as Stripe/Bitcoin.
---

Let's start a dialogue about the future of Utopia.

[StratOcastle]

Cool.

I can't follow that. Well put.

[DavidC]

Very well put an|on. I won't comment on everything individually but I will say that 95% of your statements very accurately reflect our state of mind as if you sat on our board while we had these very discussions :) I'll +1 these comments in whole, less the Pay for development section as that is not something we've discussed by any measure.

[Shockwave]

The main issue i have with the game right now is that its mostly rewarding for the whoring KD's, which are not a majority, but they control most of the game. Why is it that the whoring KD's can abuse/use the mechanics of the game to bottomfeed and get literally every age more honor than any warring KD (with a few very minor exceptions over the past ages). Why is honor even an option oow, there is nothing honorable about bottomfeeding, something obviously has to change either in gains or the honor system itself. The game needs to be less about the whoring tier getting advantages imo. We can pretty much freely wave any KD that is smaller and 99% of the time u wont even get a retal. How can a system like this be fun for 90% of the server?
Tms have also gotten weaker and weaker, im not saying that tms should be UB all the time, but u also cant have attackers be able to run 3rwpa 4rtpa and still be able to break tms easily.
And i agree on the balance, this age it is extreme.. basically 2 attacker races to choose from as the others have huge deficits. The same on tm combos. But im sure you guys will get better balance the next ages.

You want to make the game even less fun for 90% of the player base? Force the whoring kds into warring to grow. Watch the warring tier get constantly steamrolled by those kds. CR showed what happens when a top kds messes around in the warring tier a couple ages ago. They destroyed the so called "best" warring kds. Point being, if you think bottomfeeding from top kds is bad, wait til you're getting farmed by them in war day after day.

[an|on]

Very well put an|on. I won't comment on everything individually but I will say that 95% of your statements very accurately reflect our state of mind as if you sat on our board while we had these very discussions :) I'll +1 these comments in whole, less the Pay for development section as that is not something we've discussed by any measure.

Thank you David for taking the time to respond. It is encouraging to think that we have at least a 95% shared vision for the future of Utopia lol. I have been playing on and off since 1999 and over the years have watched as the user base steadily declined, so it is exciting to see the game we all have grown to love in capable hands.

When considering the path forward, I felt that the topic of revenue streams should be addressed. Not only to increase overall income for the purposes of growth and development costs, but also in ways to diversify those streams. Giving users the ability to donate to development over a secure payment gateway such as Stripe and accepting micro-payments via Bitcoin was one such diversification.

The reason I suggested Bitcoin in particular was due to the power of micro-payments and the ability to appeal to a target market with a natural proclivity for data analysis. (see BitBulls.com | gdax.com) There is a very big difference between paying for development and donating to development, as one implies an obligation for continued growth whereas the other rewards growth. Creating development roadmaps with tangible goals, actionable metrics, and project milestones empowers donors to track progress and helps encourage further contributions.

If anyone cares for me to elaborate further or would like to discuss ideas, please by all means, keep the dialogue going.

[artist]

You want to make the game even less fun for 90% of the player base? Force the whoring kds into warring to grow. Watch the warring tier get constantly steamrolled by those kds. CR showed what happens when a top kds messes around in the warring tier a couple ages ago. They destroyed the so called "best" warring kds. Point being, if you think bottomfeeding from top kds is bad, wait til you're getting farmed by them in war day after day.

So you admint that the problem exists for 90% of the player base... its just what i said that would make it worse!? And then as i understand you dont a change because it might be even less fun? Thought we want the game to be fun, enjoable and competitive, not stalled for ages on the same basic system. And your assumption is wrong, i am not part of the ones getting bottomfed, i just dont see the point where you can hit any province u want in the lower tier and CF the rest of the top. Its basically a race of who is better at finding targets to bottomfeed, not a competition btw the top KD's. To make it worse one gets honor for bottomfeeding and after 2 months every top kd attacker is viscount/count which makes the top KD's stronger and gives more benefits. And yes one might say but u can break CF or not CF others at all and war/wave them - yes ofc, but one rather takes the easiest path to achieve something and it is a lot easier right now to hit the weaker then gain it by warring a top KD. Rarely there are exceptions.

[Aelia Capitolina]

So you admint that the problem exists for 90% of the player base... its just what i said that would make it worse!? And then as i understand you dont a change because it might be even less fun? Thought we want the game to be fun, enjoable and competitive, not stalled for ages on the same basic system. And your assumption is wrong, i am not part of the ones getting bottomfed, i just dont see the point where you can hit any province u want in the lower tier and CF the rest of the top. Its basically a race of who is better at finding targets to bottomfeed, not a competition btw the top KD's. To make it worse one gets honor for bottomfeeding and after 2 months every top kd attacker is viscount/count which makes the top KD's stronger and gives more benefits. And yes one might say but u can break CF or not CF others at all and war/wave them - yes ofc, but one rather takes the easiest path to achieve something and it is a lot easier right now to hit the weaker then gain it by warring a top KD. Rarely there are exceptions.

The problem is laziness and mediocrity.
It's not difficult to force eoacf on the top, that is if you actually try.
There are so many options I'm not even going to bother making a list, but it starts with getting out of the comfort zone.
What most warring KD's actually want is to be able to isolate themselves from those that are better at the game, and just war similar or lower skill level opponents. There are some exceptions, and they know who they are.

Allow me to abuse this quote as a mirror.

but one rather takes the easiest path to achieve something and it is a lot easier right now to war the weaker then gain it [ww points] by warring a superior KD. Rarely there are exceptions.

CoL is an excellent example, when is the last time they warred the best KD's? wsk, divinity, fs, bb, cr, emerity? Honestly I don't recall. They spend their ages avoiding these by land dropping or outright refusing to war even if in range.

(yes the later one's listed are usually larger, but at start of age they are within reach, focus on the former if it bothers you)
(CoL is a great example as their motives are justified as a pursuit for the WW crown through the path of least resistance. The same cannot be said about most of the warring tier.)

You want to live in a world where you could deny interactions with those that are better than you. As is often done in the lower ranks right now via refusing wars. But that would make the game stale and repetitive.

[Band of Horses]

@artist everyone starts at 400

[StratOcastle]

The problem is laziness and mediocrity.
It's not difficult to force eoacf on the top, that is if you actually try.
There are so many options I'm not even going to bother making a list, but it starts with getting out of the comfort zone.
What most warring KD's actually want is to be able to isolate themselves from those that are better at the game, and just war similar or lower skill level opponents. There are some exceptions, and they know who they are.

Allow me to abuse this quote as a mirror.


CoL is an excellent example, when is the last time they warred the best KD's? wsk, divinity, fs, bb, cr, emerity? Honestly I don't recall. They spend their ages avoiding these by land dropping or outright refusing to war even if in range.

(yes the later one's listed are usually larger, but at start of age they are within reach, focus on the former if it bothers you)
(CoL is a great example as their motives are justified as a pursuit for the WW crown through the path of least resistance. The same cannot be said about most of the warring tier.)

You want to live in a world where you could deny interactions with those that are better than you. As is often done in the lower ranks right now via refusing wars. But that would make the game stale and repetitive.

The kingdoms you're referring to are kingdoms that CF each other. The other problem here is the total misunderstanding of lower tier culture. Sure there's fear, but some of us aren't afraid of anything in Utopia.

The idea that most war kingdoms want isolation is based in competitive sport parallels. The moral ineptitude of certain players, including tops, make these systems of isolation a point of contention.

You see, it takes a top kingdom and not top players to make things happen. There are plenty of top players who ghetto, but the excuse is false: The claim that they're "taking it easy" is not correct. If they were superior province managers they would rise above, but they don't. This evidently points to something I know because I have been up there. The kingdoms are fantastic, no doubt; but the crank leverage is the CF environment or good 'ol boy network.

It may seem I'm criticizing this. No. I criticize the mentality that deems it's ways superior and condemns it's non-hostile neighbor as cowards. A top kingdom is land based to provide mechanical torque for all its endeavors. These mechanics exist in every game: in Utopia it is land. Being a land kingdom by default forces your land yield to come from smaller kingdoms.

I come from games that parallel top kingdoms as dragons to slay. Admittedly this is a rare mentality in Utopia. Most of you grew up into the digital age and your emotional wherewithal is fatally attached in a way I can't relate. But this understanding that the game is important to others should force your moral self to practice mutual respect. The brushes of bullying are in every word. I perceive that.

Because your challenge to warring kingdoms like Confessions of Lotus is not about friendly competition. Your intent is to shame them and thus why I deem it as fair to shame you. You have your style and Confessions of Lotus hasn't criticized that. You're offending openly and aggressively, but trying to make it sound reasonable.

This is the wrong way. I'll tell you the right way: tell them how to cow or how it was to cow. Tell them about soldier swapping and ToG. Tell them about CF language and timing. Tell them about acre efficiency. Some of these things are safe because they reflect on older mechanics. Offer them the respect to relate those older mechanics to the newer.

Even this is just an invitation. You know as well as I that the diminished player base has an effect on available, active talent. If the narcissistic generation fills your roster you will have a hard time convincing them to war up. Just as many top players retire rather than enjoy being out in the field of random attacks and convoluted strategies. You miss out on the charm of the game when all you look at is bigger fish idioms.

[Aelia Capitolina]

The kingdoms you're referring to are kingdoms that CF each other. The other problem here is the total misunderstanding of lower tier culture. Sure there's fear, but some of us aren't afraid of anything in Utopia.

The idea that most war kingdoms want isolation is based in competitive sport parallels. The moral ineptitude of certain players, including tops, make these systems of isolation a point of contention.

You see, it takes a top kingdom and not top players to make things happen. There are plenty of top players who ghetto, but the excuse is false: The claim that they're "taking it easy" is not correct. If they were superior province managers they would rise above, but they don't. This evidently points to something I know because I have been up there. The kingdoms are fantastic, no doubt; but the crank leverage is the CF environment or good 'ol boy network.

It may seem I'm criticizing this. No. I criticize the mentality that deems it's ways superior and condemns it's non-hostile neighbor as cowards. A top kingdom is land based to provide mechanical torque for all its endeavors. These mechanics exist in every game: in Utopia it is land. Being a land kingdom by default forces your land yield to come from smaller kingdoms.

I come from games that parallel top kingdoms as dragons to slay. Admittedly this is a rare mentality in Utopia. Most of you grew up into the digital age and your emotional wherewithal is fatally attached in a way I can't relate. But this understanding that the game is important to others should force your moral self to practice mutual respect. The brushes of bullying are in every word. I perceive that.

Because your challenge to warring kingdoms like Confessions of Lotus is not about friendly competition. Your intent is to shame them and thus why I deem it as fair to shame you. You have your style and Confessions of Lotus hasn't criticized that. You're offending openly and aggressively, but trying to make it sound reasonable.

This is the wrong way. I'll tell you the right way: tell them how to cow or how it was to cow. Tell them about soldier swapping and ToG. Tell them about CF language and timing. Tell them about acre efficiency. Some of these things are safe because they reflect on older mechanics. Offer them the respect to relate those older mechanics to the newer.

Even this is just an invitation. You know as well as I that the diminished player base has an effect on available, active talent. If the narcissistic generation fills your roster you will have a hard time convincing them to war up. Just as many top players retire rather than enjoy being out in the field of random attacks and convoluted strategies. You miss out on the charm of the game when all you look at is bigger fish idioms.

I suggest you read my post before replying.

[StratOcastle]

Warring kingdoms are not going to crawl out of their comfort zone. Not in the numbers to energize the game.

You have a few ambitious guys that are hobbled by ego. They need to lead. The downside is they can't get past the idea that their core won't abide. This is partly the compromise of The Virtual Kingdom: remaining a leader within the scope of actual influence.

I apologize if I misinterpreted your statements, but bravery is not a common trait. Why do you think I migrate to non-issue kingdoms? Because when the game is "on" I find it hard to keep it within the framework of an incomplete vision...and there are a lot of them.

[Band of Horses]

I'm reminded of Pascal. There are only two kinds of men: the righteous who think they are sinners and the sinners who think they are righteous.

[Pillz]

I'm reminded of Pascal. There are only two kinds of men: the righteous who think they are sinners and the sinners who think they are righteous.

There are those of us who are just Sinners, though.

[Band of Horses]

There are those of us who are just Sinners, though.

I see what you did there, but you are more than that.