And it can also easily be refuted. More kd's of equal talent = more kd's with the same amount of players. There are talented kd's out there who don't get up to the top because they can't get 25 players of the same skill, but would do well if only their core was required to fill up the kd.Originally Posted by Coke
What's the real world got to do with anything? People get paid to work in the real world. You have more tools to work with than you do in utopia.Look you're admitting I'm right more or less. Your arguing that you need success to recruit people, wow that's completely different from how the real world works. OFC you need success for people to start bandwagonning on your KD. Who the hell wants to join a losing KD for a long period of time? Also players do leave for RL issues, but most either use that reason as a excuse because they are bored. They are bored because their leadership hasn't offered them anything new. Good Leadership sets clear goals of what their intention is every age, whether it be setting up a race strategy for dicing advantages or whether to play a attacking heavy race staying slightly smaller and warring more. Like I said, you should look to what your doing wrong (or what your lacking - i.e. success record) before you begin to complain.
Don't you see there's a catch 22 there? You can't get good players unless you're successful, and you can't become successful with ****ty players.
Your claim is that if you just have good leadership, players will come flocking, and they will never leave. That's just not true, because you don't have any way of showing how good your leadership is when there's no players to show it to. What are you supposed to do? Put up an ad saying you have really good leadership? Being able to present some goals takes little skill, and generally won't be enough to attract specially many players. If they can choose between a kd with a well known name, and an unknown kd, they choose the well known kd almost all the time. The unknown kd will be able to do some recruiting, but it likely won't be enough to arrive at 25 good players. The good players are often impatient and leave if they get an offer to a kd that is already up in the top. In real life that would respond to another company offering a much better salary. Some people would stay because of a good leader, but most wouldn't, because they would expect a similarly good leader in the other company, and a faster payoff (higher salary).
I also think you're greatly overestimating the value of goals here. That you have clear goals doesn't matter at all when you've already had that goal several times before. The game is limited and stagnant. There isn't a lot you can do differently. People get bored regardless of how good the leader is.
That the suggestion is bad is your opinion, and he's rejected your arguments and simply thinks you're not bringing anything new to the table. Of course he's wrong about the onus though.
There is a problem with kd sizes, and a change could strengthen the effects of advertisement in a later stage, which is something I've been arguing for a while now. No one said the kd sizes is the only reason the game is dying. What we're saying is that it's a brake block.
Anyway, we're clearly not ever gonna agree on this. The devs now have a thread with people arguing back and forth. No one is really bringing anything new to the table anymore, so they can just look at the thread and decide what they'll do, which will likely be nothing.
