Retaining player pop after total loss

Scenario:
A player joins AoC for the first time and becomes a citizen of a large and stable city. Acquires land, gear and saves months worth of items/materials in their home.
3 months after playing, the city comes under siege and they lose their homeland and all of their belongings other than what they have in their inventory. They had no secondary home or alt character and their friends/connections scatter to different Nodes.

What systems or driving forces are going to be in place to motivate this person to keep playing the game?

Context: I have Alpha2 and I am hyped for AoC, asking as it's one of the very few things that concerns me most with AoC player retention.
I often look at how Albion has become a gankfest of PVP and is much less of an enjoyable mmo for many character progressive focused mmo players.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Maezriel

Here you go.

You don't lose everything, only a portion of your mats...maybe. After that you go and buy a house elsewhere and your furniture and trophies follow you.

Losing your stuff is supposed to act as the motivator to defend against a siege. If that risk isn't there then why fight?

Flokii

The Wiki says that after a successful Node siege, the remnants will be only rubble and the victors will be able to loot materials. It doesn't say anything about the defender being able to recover any mats or having lost only a % of the mats.
Clarification on this would be handy.

Yes, I get that it's a motivator (a strong one at that). I look forward to the risks/rewards.

Maezriel

Flokii wrote: »

The Wiki says that after a successful Node siege, the remnants will be only rubble and the victors will be able to loot materials. It doesn't say anything about the defender being able to recover any mats or having lost only a % of the mats.
Clarification on this would be handy.

Yes, I get that it's a motivator (a strong one at that). I look forward to the risks/rewards.

Yes, the Node is destroyed but only a portion of your stuff is looted. You still get mailed (possibly) a blueprint of your home's layout so you can attempt to restart in a new Node.

Same thing happens w/ Freeholds

Dygz

Looting materials means crafting resources.
Basically, you still have the vast majority of your stuff. You just have to move to a new location.

tautau

I am sure that a few people will quit after their node is successfully sieged and they lose things that they helped to build.

However, these are the same people who would have soon quit when their weapon was too much trouble to craft, or their big raid failed, or their caravan got ambushed. No great loss to the player community and I hope they prepaid for a 2 year sub for the game's sake.

Conrad

Varying by how punishing this will be, players either will stay or quit. They need to find a fine balance or ppl will quit when they house is wrecked

JustVine

This is a very good question that strikes at the heart of AoC's game play loop. I was discussing with Azherae about this not too long ago and we came to the conclusion that there was a relatively easy way to increase the game play loop without spending too many resources on it development wise (Azherae can correct me if I missed any points.) While loss rates will almost assuredly be tweaked and tested during Alpha 2 and Beta 1, I feel this solution needs to be on Intrepid Studio's radar as a possible approach to not just player retention but making AoC feel more like a living world.

Refugees and Quest:

An enemy attacking a node should and probably will have some form of preparation time for the defending players. During this preparation period it would be great if there were quests that spawned in surrounding nodes of npc's sympathetic to the situation. This could possibly spawn a quest to help fortify the area in some way. Upon victory, this would result in some form of 'increased confidence in alliance' between the two nodes. Upon defeat, this would result in the sympathetic party offering to take in the player as a refugee in some outskirts outside of town to temporarily store their stuff and possibly offer some form of limited temporary citizenship to give some access to vital utilities.

Why do this:

There are a few reasons why this makes for an effective game play loop.

The type of person who owns a house in a node and gets emotionally upset at losing their home is likely to be the sort heavily invested in the PvE, questing, and crafting side of the game. They are economic contributors adding real value and capital to the game.
A quest in a surrounding area gives the player a mental default as to where to retreat to and lessens the devastating effect of not just losing a large chunk of your property, reward, and feeling of progress in the game, but all the utilities that made it possible to be an effective economic actor as well.
Such quests offer a sense that connections to surrounding nodes are important and expand the players scope of what they are investing in. In other words if you are interested in a surrounding area not just one specific place at any given time, it is harder to fall into the emotion that you have truly lost everything.
It also helps reshape the context of REBUILDING. Rebuilding after loss is part of the gameplay loop. Losing your stuff and home can be extremely demoralizing. Changing the context to 'being a refugee on your back foot amongst allies with somewhere to go and refocus your efforts' can be inspiring.
When a player is emotionally upset it's harder to think clearly. Having a quest to nudge the player to a default area (that they chose through their own agency by starting the quest) provides an anchor point while they mentally regroup and get back to what 'fun' is for them.

Overall, I think this will really flesh out AoC's game play loop. Even in the real world we have refugees after catastrophic battles. Giving a way for players to have a tent outside a familiar enough area and some access to essentials for getting back on their feet is a great way to both make the world feel like a constantly changing and fleshed out place and mitigate some of the real player psychology challenges that arise from AoC's core gameplay. Not only that, but the quest writing and generation is quite easy to do without expending a lot of resources. Even just the quest itself without the refugee status will almost assuredly lead to a less negative and more immersive game play loop for some section of players.

maouw

@JustVine
I like that a lot.

As much as I despize the game, I think there are lessons to learn from Clash of Clans here - their gameplay loop deals with this exact issue. Big difference: in clash of clans your buildings are not truly destroyed, they just go through a phase of regeneration.

I think you could implement a similar effect in Ashes by providing some sort of boost to recouperating a portion of lost resources (but need to make sure that the siege was still a resource sink overall), probably via refugee-only quests.

daveywavey

Flokii wrote: »

What systems or driving forces are going to be in place to motivate this person to keep playing the game?

REVENGE!!!!!

Azherae

maouw wrote: »

@JustVine
I like that a lot.

As much as I despize the game, I think there are lessons to learn from Clash of Clans here - their gameplay loop deals with this exact issue. Big difference: in clash of clans your buildings are not truly destroyed, they just go through a phase of regeneration.

I think you could implement a similar effect in Ashes by providing some sort of boost to recouperating a portion of lost resources (but need to make sure that the siege was still a resource sink overall), probably via refugee-only quests.

Rule Exception! (I'm posting in this thread, that is)

The part JustVine 'forgot' from our discussion was related to the feelings for the attacker. She mostly directly answered the question, so this is just context.

Anything that makes the attacker feel like they wasted their time, or that the target 'got off easy', is likely to be annoying. Drama or sometimes even without drama, some people just want their enemies to suffer as much as possible.

Politics therefore becomes the main thing here, the attackers feel 'good' because their opponents really have lost the full amount, and they can even threaten the node that dares to act as their refuge, if they think that the players will regroup and strike back.

Alternately they can try to convert people who were defeated to their side, telling them to come live in their nodes and not have to face the wrath of the advancing army again, and some people will do this because they join the winning side if they have nothing left to lose.

You can even add an alternate quest in the attack origin node (or node run by the attacking guild) where they offer to integrate citizens similarly, for 'those people who didn't agree with fighting back', though it is likely that quite a few of those people technically defected to begin with, and just 'became unable to move their stuff' once the Siege was declared.

So you've got three different emotions to grab most involved. Attackers get to feel powerful or as if they inflicted whatever effect they wanted. Defenders can feel 'accepted into the powerful army and safe' or 'accepted into the friendly nearby node as refugees and plot'. Not to mention the double agents, the political posturing, and the fallout from any dungeons or points of interest that despawned when the Node fell.

It won't catch everyone, but it should probably be enough, especially if it's really clear.

Tyranthraxus

A big assumption that yours truly found himself intially guilty of is the notion of "my initial Node will stand FOREVER!"

However, the more and more I read and watch AoC's pre-launch content, the more I've come to accept that the majority of players will likely change nodes (willingly or un-willingly) probably 2 or 3 times/year.

It feels like going into the game with more of the latter expectation sets up a better mentality, for the game. You'll have tales and memories of the heights of your previous Nodes, and you'll be better equipped to both help the advancement of your new Node, and more capable of accepting the eventual loss of the one you're now in.

The game-world will change like real life changes, and for some people that'll be too much to handle. The game's not for everyone; Some people would prefer a static WoW-like world that never changes no matter what you do. HOWEVER, yours truly shares IS's vision that MMO players would prefer a more-dynamic world where the things you personally partake in that lead to those changes will stimulate your interest and keep you playing in the long-run.

Dygz

We will reclaim our original Node the moment the usurper pops to Village.
Bet!!

bloodprophet

I can see times when a guild might pick up and change nodes all at once. Big caravan and 300 peeps trekking across the map to a new location they have already prepared for themselves ahead of time.

tautau

Perhaps I will record the history of my server and write a Chronicle some years down the road, which nobody will read or care about. It will be just like a career in Academia!

maouw

I wonder if Ashes might be able to prep new players for this sense of loss as an introduction to the game?

e.g. if they have a Tutorial Mode in Sanctus,
Teach you to craft a chair, then have the player place the chair in the world - triggers a "bully" NPC to break your chair and then you learn combat by fighting the bully for revenge.
...?

Noaani

This loss leading to players leaving the game is what I have considered Ashes biggest issue for a few years now. I've had a few discussions here.

I personally don't see the issue as being people leaving after a single node loss, but if you combine losing a few homes in a row, losing a few caravans and being blocked out of top end content by other guilds, all of that combined will see people leaving the game - without a doubt.

TheHiddenDaggerInn

Try to make a positive out of it, how many times in a game do you wish you went a different path or location, perhaps now meeting up with some friends you met in game. Always things I wish I could of done differently at the start, and now I would have the chance to do so.

Tyranthraxus

maouw wrote: »

I wonder if Ashes might be able to prep new players for this sense of loss as an introduction to the game?

You know, once they get further along the development path, it might not be a bad idea to have IS put out a video on relocating and what that will look like, for a guild and for individual players.

It'll be interesting to see conglomerations of non-guilded players and the effects they'll have in seeking the well-established cities for more stability, versus the cities that will be supported by a few strong patron guilds. If you're an un-guilded player who sees three of his smaller cities and towns destroyed, it feels like that's a lot more encouragement to move to a strong Metropolis and throw your hat in, there.

It feels as though the guilds that support a Node are likely more to be the ones that stick around in the aftermath of a loss to rebuild and learn lessons and preventative measures that can be taken, to ensure their next iteration of a city in that Node will fare better than the last time. Individual, un-invested players will likely see less sense in sticking around in the same place to build anew, but even moving to a Metropolis feels as though it's inherent encouragement to then join a community and to become invested.

Yours truly has no complaints about the planned Node systems; It seems like it's a good way to encourage new growth, world change, and innovation in trying to hold on to your community's foothold, in the game.

maouw

Another weird dynamic to consider:

The more crowded a city (node) gets, the more anonymous everyone becomes, and the less attachment you have to the location.

Depends how "city" a metropolis will feel I guess...

Dygz

I don't see how there will be less attachment. We still know where the neighbors we play with live.
And we still have the same Node-Type goals to pursue - more than ever before.
Less attachment is more likely, for some, if the Node pops to an undesired race.

Child Item