Heres another example. If people have a bad perception about grouping a thane or friar or whatever, will that impact people leveling or playing friars?

Of course. If people dont wanna group certain classes than why would i roll that class. But what if that class is what i started on? Should i grind out groups on this class or reroll that class?

But the server has a perception of decline. Will the server still be populated in 4 months when i get this class to 50? Or should i just quit?

Perceptions, right or wrong, dictate our responses. Not so much true when dealing with reality.

Perhaps daily reports like 150+ people participated in pvp in of today. Etc. This will dispell myths and encourage people to join in.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Abydos wrote:40% of 515 or 20% of 1100.

This problem is more complex than you think. But instead of "OMG THERES NO ACTION" or "BGS ARE KILLING RVR" you might consider to ask, "Why is it that we retain european players at a higher rate than NA counterparts?"

I can answer that. Many of the EU players share the devs concept of what a classic DAoC server should be. We're used to struggling to get ahead in real life as well as in games. While some North Americans also like the game to be less convenient, a larger percentage of the American base will give up unless the game is more convenient.

[NOTE] I'm not talking about hard vs easy... DAoC is VERY easy but THIS version of DAoC has a lot of inconveniences. A larger percent of the EU players were willing to put up with them than the Americans were.

Gil wrote:

Abydos wrote:40% of 515 or 20% of 1100.

This problem is more complex than you think. But instead of "OMG THERES NO ACTION" or "BGS ARE KILLING RVR" you might consider to ask, "Why is it that we retain european players at a higher rate than NA counterparts?"

I can answer that. Many of the EU players share the devs concept of what a classic DAoC server should be. We're used to struggling to get ahead in real life as well as in games. While some North Americans also like the game to be less convenient, a larger percentage of the American base will give up unless the game is more convenient.

[NOTE] I'm not talking about hard vs easy... DAoC is VERY easy but THIS version of DAoC has a lot of inconveniences. A larger percent of the EU players were willing to put up with them than the Americans were.

Your opinion on why more EU players are retained instead of Americans is pretty condescending considering many EU countries are consistently rated has having higher qualities of life. I didn't realize a hard knock country like Denmark had to struggle so much to get ahead in real life. I'm sure there's some inner city kids here in America who'd love to hear all about that.

I think it is also telling that despite the cold hard facts of "There is lots of action the past x days" there is still denial, because it isn't a certain type of action. DAOC has many playstyles and just because yours wasn't fit, it doesn't mean you should degrade or discount the play styles of others. I'm sorry that "fair 8v8" might not have been in Emain a few nights this week. Maybe you could try joining intercepts for the big raid groups.

Gil wrote:

Abydos wrote:40% of 515 or 20% of 1100.

This problem is more complex than you think. But instead of "OMG THERES NO ACTION" or "BGS ARE KILLING RVR" you might consider to ask, "Why is it that we retain european players at a higher rate than NA counterparts?"

I can answer that. Many of the EU players share the devs concept of what a classic DAoC server should be. We're used to struggling to get ahead in real life as well as in games. While some North Americans also like the game to be less convenient, a larger percentage of the American base will give up unless the game is more convenient.

[NOTE] I'm not talking about hard vs easy... DAoC is VERY easy but THIS version of DAoC has a lot of inconveniences. A larger percent of the EU players were willing to put up with them than the Americans were.

It's hard to discern why most of the time.

I read an interview with one of the founders of CK Projekt Red (Polish studio who made Witcher) and the guy spoke about this for a part of an answer. I think it rings true - although outliers always exist.

With The Witcher 3, we really paid a lot of attention to immersion. This is really what we expect from games these days. Where we come from, Poland and Eastern Europe – and Germany, in a certain way as well – players have had always had a certain tolerance for hardcoreness, for clunkiness in interface. Let's say you have a game and you have to play with your hands crossed. "That's fine, I'm a tough guy. I'm smart. I'll play like that." And then, after you play like that for six hours, you think playing like that is cool.

While in the U.S., which we had to learn the hard way, it's: "If it's like that, then I'm not playing it; see you, thanks." It's like the way the country is constructed. It's user friendly. It's easily approachable. I totally agree with that, but it was a long way to get to this understanding. When I sit right now and watch a TV series or play a game, I have limited time. I have a family. I have three kids. I don't have time to learn the world for 10 hours in order to have another 20 hours of fun. I'm not talking about simplifying things. I'm talking about smart introductions and flawless immersion. That's what we are very much after in games. And I think Witcher 3 was a very important step in this direction. The commercial success proves it.

To piggyback off that, I like my challenge to be in the game mechanics itself - the combat. I like having a good PvP or PvE fight. The PvE on this version of DAoC feels pretty trivial or it just requires a ton of pet spam classes. Things like no gold for RvR which forced people back to PvE (they didn't/don't want to), drastically reduced RPs while dead (I helped, didn't I?) no RPs for keep takes (takes a half an hour and multiple people for at best passive bonuses), the slow leveling speed (I spent 160 hours to level this class and it's gimp/unwanted), and the list goes on.

Uth has exemplified these sharp edges DAoC had and clearly based on some players responses on the forums, they like these. It makes them feel accomplished, and that sort of challenge is what they are after. For the rest of us? I don't get any feeling other than frustration fighting over petty timesinks.

Contrary to the quote Blue keeps in his signature, expending effort into a digital service which might close at any moment does not yield the same results as taking a hard hike to a beautiful viewpoint or crafting something painstakingly by hand. The length of time to get to the fun does not make that fun much sweeter, especially if it took you 160 hours to get there and when you finally do you find that your class sucks, or you don't like it, or that you can't afford to respec due to stone prices, or that all the l33t 8mans won't invite you, etc.

The core game of DAoC is unforgiving enough without building a giant obstacle course to get there - especially when that obstacle course ends up being you stuck to the ass of a Necro, hanging out in Barfog for days, or Lyonesse in the same way. I think Mythic eventually realized this, and thus the glut of new PvE content that ended up in DAoC, which gave us new locations, new mobs and quests, harder and more varied encounters, and more loot to chase. It wasn't all perfect, but I think they realized that their barebones PvE system in classic wasn't going to sustain them in a world where games like WoW totally shook up the dynamic and changed the playing field.

Abydos wrote:I think it is also telling that despite the cold hard facts of "There is lots of action the past x days" there is still denial, because it isn't a certain type of action. DAOC has many playstyles and just because yours wasn't fit, it doesn't mean you should degrade or discount the play styles of others. I'm sorry that "fair 8v8" might not have been in Emain a few nights this week. Maybe you could try joining intercepts for the big raid groups.

That's because frankly, people don't give a flying ****** about whatever statistics you dredge out. What matters is the end user experience in game. Statistics are a part of that, but they aren't the end all be all. They're a numerical glimpse that is one part of figuring out the whole.

Blue can say we have 9000 level 50s all day long.

You can say we've got 40% of the online population in RvR but if somebody either can't find a group to get out into the field with, or they run around for 50 minutes in all the frontiers and find nobody the end result is still frustration.

It does also fall on the players fault at times - we've seen people post here that they go to X location and nothing happens for hours and they don't move. Or they only have one playstyle, refuse to touch keeps, and nothing happens to them all night.

To say it's entirely dead is a lie, but it's faltering some nights and exploding on others. Quite a few NA players I speak to are waiting to see what comes next to decide if they're going to stick it out or not. They're looking for confidence that the staff understands their plight and might do something to change it instead of tossing statistics at them.

isocleas2 wrote:

Gil wrote:

Abydos wrote:40% of 515 or 20% of 1100.

This problem is more complex than you think. But instead of "OMG THERES NO ACTION" or "BGS ARE KILLING RVR" you might consider to ask, "Why is it that we retain european players at a higher rate than NA counterparts?"

I can answer that. Many of the EU players share the devs concept of what a classic DAoC server should be. We're used to struggling to get ahead in real life as well as in games. While some North Americans also like the game to be less convenient, a larger percentage of the American base will give up unless the game is more convenient.

[NOTE] I'm not talking about hard vs easy... DAoC is VERY easy but THIS version of DAoC has a lot of inconveniences. A larger percent of the EU players were willing to put up with them than the Americans were.

Your opinion on why more EU players are retained instead of Americans is pretty condescending considering many EU countries are consistently rated has having higher qualities of life. I didn't realize a hard knock country like Denmark had to struggle so much to get ahead in real life. I'm sure there's some inner city kids here in America who'd love to hear all about that.

Our Quality of life is pretty wonderful here in Denmark but, it comes at a price. For example our Sales tax is 25%! And that's pretty typical of other EU countries. Our income tax is also quite high compared to the US.

We get wonderful services here from our government but of course someone has to pay for that. We're comfortable with high taxes here.

We're also, on the average, more comfortable with in game inconveniences then most Americans. BTW, that doesn't mean I WANT the game to be inconvenient... We've got lots of Americans in our Guild and Alliance. I want more people to play the game, not just those who are more willing to put up with inconvenience.

BTW, I'm a US citizen and have lived and worked in the US more than half of my life. I'm not anti American. I've just noticed a different reaction most Americans have compared to most in EU.

Gil wrote:

isocleas2 wrote:

Gil wrote:[quote="Abydos"]40% of 515 or 20% of 1100.

This problem is more complex than you think. But instead of "OMG THERES NO ACTION" or "BGS ARE KILLING RVR" you might consider to ask, "Why is it that we retain european players at a higher rate than NA counterparts?"

I can answer that. Many of the EU players share the devs concept of what a classic DAoC server should be. We're used to struggling to get ahead in real life as well as in games. While some North Americans also like the game to be less convenient, a larger percentage of the American base will give up unless the game is more convenient.

[NOTE] I'm not talking about hard vs easy... DAoC is VERY easy but THIS version of DAoC has a lot of inconveniences. A larger percent of the EU players were willing to put up with them than the Americans were.

Your opinion on why more EU players are retained instead of Americans is pretty condescending considering many EU countries are consistently rated has having higher qualities of life. I didn't realize a hard knock country like Denmark had to struggle so much to get ahead in real life. I'm sure there's some inner city kids here in America who'd love to hear all about that.

Our Quality of life is pretty wonderful here in Denmark but, it comes at a price. Foe example our Sales tax is 25%! And that's pretty typical of other EU countries. Our income tax is also quite high compared to the US.

We get wonderful services here from our government but of course someone has to pay for that. We're comfortable with high taxes here.

We're also, on the average, more comfortable with in game inconveniences then most Americans. BTW, that doesn't mean I WANT the game to be inconvenient... We've got lots of Americans in our Guild and Alliance. I want more people to play the game, not just those who are more willing to put up with inconvenience.

BTW, I'm a US citizen and have lived and worked in the US more than half of my life. I'm not anti American. I've just noticed a different reaction most Americans have compared to most in EU.[/quote]Don't worry about him, he's probably just slowly dying of a easily treatable disease and has no access to affordable medical care. It can make us Yanks a bit cranky at times as I'm sure you can understand.

You are right though. In my time here on this forum, I've noted that Euro players are simply more accustomed to dealing with the in game hardships and inconvenience than NA counterparts. Even in game, I try and pick peoples mind as to what they enjoy/dislike and I find that European players are much more varied in what aspects of DAoC they enjoy.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Abydos wrote:

Tulkar wrote:as far as i (european time zone ) heard, the hibs tried to go for mid str relics last night ( american time zone ). By beeing told there was literally no one defending at all.

So the American population seems to be crap,

While the population is less than during EU primetime, there was more than 40% of the total online population in RVR last night. I've never seen the EU Primetime percentage that high except during GM events.

would you mind releasing the exact numbers for big rvr abermani thidranki and caledonia and the big rvr ? Those would be insteresting to see, how many of those 40 % been alb hib and mid and where they where located

http://imgur.com/a/8kO5z

This was for last night. As you can see, populations swings quickly in terms of "which realm has more players" Take care not to misconstrue any findings on the relative 'balance' of population from this small sample set. We have far more metrics that show more accurate data than these point-in-time snapshots.
We won't get more specific than this but we have far more metrics

Do your figures take in account for people in the border keeps?

For example u say 50 people in alb in OF zones, but 30 of them are in CS waiting for port to housing or Bg or are lowbies selling stuff.

How many of those are lvl 30s and 40s trying to xp some?

Your numbers may reflect only those participating in rvr but if its just a quick /who of the zones then i can see why theres such a disparity between what the devs think are in rvr and what players see in rvr.

I mean its very common to see 10-50 players in CS right?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Rvr has been declining for months. Saying x amount of people are in rvr zones means nothing if you run around zones for hours, not just emain, and see eight people per hour. As someone stated perception is all that matters, not facts of numbers that people can not seem to find. There is only so long that people can hear the facts but as they are playing see that these facts are not reflecting their in-game experience over multiple gaming sessions.

I stopped playing because running into fights 1x per hour was a huge waste of time. Plus if we had missing people trying to fill the void when we had no tanks online on alb became boring because /who would net 0 and people don't want to level again. We ran with the Zerg protecting them as you said for a while but it's now how we enjoyed playing the game, as a main purpose since it seemed that's what it became.

I love DAoC. But when it's no longer fun it's time to stop.

Ownnyn wrote:Do your figures take in account for people in the border keeps?

Border keeps are excluded

Spin wrote:Rvr has been declining for months..

Actually once we hit critical mass of 50s in RVR the numbers are relatively unchanged. It wasn't like suddenly had 2000 people in RVR zones when we had 4500 on the server.

Spin wrote: Saying x amount of people are in rvr zones means nothing if you run around zones for hours, not just emain, and see eight people per hour. As someone stated perception is all that matters, not facts of numbers that people can not seem to find.

Actually it does matter - because it means people either 1) Don't want to play in any way possible, but only 'their' way (for example, not going and killing XPers, or not wanting to go kill the 1-2 fg in SH or whatever) or 2) that people who run "for hours" with literally hundreds of people in these zones don't "see anyone" are clearly looking ni the wrong spots. In these cases we (staff) and the players in question should focus on hotspots. We have these in keeps and relics, but how to make it even more visible and attractive such that people don't just expect to get a full perfect group in mpk in emain then run MMG<->AMG in emain for 2 hours getting inc every 5 min.

What exactly are you trying to achieve here, Abydos?

When Uth 2.0 launched, there were over 4000 players logging in almost each and ever single day, eager to play on your server. Right now, that number is not even half that. You're trying very hard to argument that "Actually once we hit critical mass of 50s in RVR the numbers are relatively unchanged". As if it is a good thing! Your RvR numbers could have been triple what it is now, if not more. They could (and should) even be rising gradually. In fact by now the boards could have been flooded with posts about how action is too bountiful and that we need more areas to disperse the players because DAoC servers weren't meant to have over 1k active players in RvR.

At one hand, you guys are showing willingness to really tackle this issue with certain changes (which are not all equally good at solving the core of the issue, but still), but at the same time you come on here, hoping to convince the people who actually seem to care enough to come here and post about it that they really don't know what they are talking about and that the server is doing juuuuust fine. They should just get a grip and learn where they can find inc. If you were right, then you wouldn't budge an inch and not issue any of the changes that have gotten to pass the last month. Look at the facts, not just the data.

Almost every single post you have made in this thread is in pure denial of the state of the server. What do you think you're achieving with this, really?