Reverie World Studios Forums

Reverie World Studios Forums (
-   Public Suggestions and Proposals (
-   -   How to promote PvP and Retain Players (

Ailric 04-25-2013 10:10 AM

How to promote PvP and Retain Players
It is my opinion that many people do not pvp because they are afraid to lose their units and when they do PvP they will not use certain units for fear of loss. As a result Players become bored, exhaust existing content and leave the game.

If we were to provide a method where player loss of unit on death were less extreme I think that we would encourage more people to try pvp and as a result stay with the game. My proposal is to have a 50% chance of unit destruction on death in battle, and IF that unit is killed, to allow it to be resurrected for a cost in crowns. For elite units the cost in crowns should be 50% of the original cost in crowns + the level of the unit, for all other units, the cost would be 50% of unit level. Meaning if your level 20 foot knight died, it would cost 10 crowns to resurrect him. Given that there was only a 50% chance of him being destroyed in the first place, the real cost could be 10 crowns on average.

To make this easier from a development stand point, all killed units should be moved into an 11th army graveyard to await resurrection, or even to the bank to allow for purchase if easier.

In any case, I believe it would promote PvP, which would increase effective content, which should intern increase retention.

It may also generate revenue as some players who are less patient than others may actually buy crowns so that they can fight again... :)

PGoslingaDoF 04-25-2013 11:30 AM

that's a great idea ^^

Puschkin 04-25-2013 11:49 AM

Maybe a good idea I don't know because I'm new on the game...

But just one thing that I think it's important with your system. It will be better if you can resurrect soldier only directly after the battle or they die, not when you want. Resurect army directly is too powerfull (imagine people who let her dead-army for killing "noob" with new unit and SBAM resurect all after for serious PvP). I think some patients players will just wait x days, and if they are patient they won't buy crowns for them.

Moosegun 04-25-2013 01:08 PM

Not keen on the idea but I will probably be in the minority. I find the fact that units can be destroyed quite refreshing. I am not a fan of the MMO / internet attitude towards permadeath. I think more games should include it. Makes you a lot less reckless with your pixel lives. I totally understand why games do it, the majority of society doesnt like working for things or losing things.

Ailric 04-25-2013 01:29 PM

I do appreciate the perma death perspective, but if you have tried to pvp, you will see that finding matches can be pretty hard. Looking at the forums, there are a a lot of posts on it, so it is obviously an issue. My target is player retention, perma death is fine, but you achieve a close proximity via death with an associated cost, which is what I have proposed.

Pushkin, you may be correct in that is should be pay on death or loose the unit. It seems reasonable that if you cant pay to raise them then that you have lost the unit for good, or you can only resurrect the units you can afford to at the time.

That said, I think that you should not be able to instantly leave a battle. If you are losing, you should pay in crowns if you want to instantly leave, resources if you want to leave on a timer where you try to retreat.

Moosegun 04-25-2013 05:00 PM

I am not sure that the issue with getting pvp is just down to people being worried about losing units. I think the other issue is timing, I always seem to get attacked when I am planning, or sorting resources, or just moved troops to another army, often it is just easier to pay off. The issue is that one party wants to pvp, the other might not at that time. Also I always find that it is the armies that I dont want to pvp with that get attacked. My sheep army, or transport, so I just pay off and then often dont bother to cancel protection.

I think a pvp flag for each army would be a good idea, so you can flag up armies that you would accept pvp for, this would not stop other armies being attacked but WOULD allow that army to be attacked even if protection is in place. I would happily have my 2nd army flagged all the time.

GooberLord 04-26-2013 05:02 PM

I think Ailric's idea is a great one not only from the perspective of the players to engage in PvP more, but for the developers as well as it could encourage another avenue of crown purchasing that players would be enticed to engage in.

I would say that it would have to be crowns paid at end of battle, so people would be encouraged to always have a ready supply of them in case of that occurring. I think however the units that are totally wiped out should all go to that post-battle pool of potential revive instead of only 50% to preserve that risk for the player. 50% could work, but it's really how punishing you want to be to bad plays, and I kind of agree with Moose on having such a punishment still exist for players - but Crowns would be an apt punishment that wouldn't drive players mad if they lost a unit due to a bug or a misclick.

What I'd Add:

First: I would add a bit more incentive to engage in PvP being to increasing the Crown reward for a victory in PvP, and to give a smaller reward to players who at least engage in it to begin with. Since instant retreat is heavily penalized it shouldn't have a problem of people joining just to retreat and get their Crowns (irritating for a player wanting to play), but if that did become an issue retreat from within a battle could be made more penalizing still. As for how big a reward that losing reward would be, I say a random amount between 1-2 crowns - not super awesome, but not nothing. And since it isn't nothing, and I might be able to revive killed units, I'd definitely try giving the battle a shot.

Second: Make an option for inviting PvP for players. Basically the opposite of immunity from attacks, it would be armies that would be welcoming an attack and appear in some way for other players to see, on the map or a regional window for players to see what armies are raring to go, organized by army size/strength. Some sort of indication for what overt opportunities exist would be better than blind mine-sweeping that currently goes on, and for those players who basically want to fight could just set that option for their army to appear on that list for fighting. Still could have armies that hit non-flagged groups just poking around, but for those people wanting to find others it might be a good idea to let them see each other.

Third: Some major city/regional structure 'Arena' where armies could go and fight in controlled settings. Basically like battles with different layouts, rules, and maybe less harsh punishments for losing (maybe units that die come back at minimal health outside of the fight, thus keeping people from just mashing armies together blindly in the Arena for crowns or whatever rewards there are since they wouldn't be able to win with a broken army). That would just be more fun outside of the more 'serious' battles where armies or towns can be annihilated, and provide a whole new realm of PvP options that would let players experience fun new variations on army fighting. That one would be later down in development though, but I think it would be a good direction to pick up sometime.

SadClown 04-27-2013 03:35 AM

Paying with crowns to get my lvl 20 BD ressurrected? No, thanks. Don't make this game pay-to-win. Perma death should stand as it is, Mythador is dangerous.

zhen21 04-27-2013 03:46 AM

i think their should be a time limit till you can bring your men back to life. other wise their will be lots of revenge players trying over and over again. I also thinking making it a quest with a small army size would promote it. where their is only players with that quest can do it

Ailric 04-27-2013 05:58 AM

The object here is not to make this pay to win, it is not to take away permanent death. It is to keep players in the game. Open up your friends list. Look down it. Ok... How many have you seen in the past week in a game that has been out four? How many will be there next week?

What we are trying to accomplish is a way to keep more players playing longer with a minimal amount of development. I have a buddy that built a level 20 army, but quit before he ever used it because it would be too hard to rebuild if lost and just went back to playing World of Battles.

I will give you a final reason, there are too many bugs at this stage for permanent death and too many players exploiting the 100% resist bug for that to be even remotely practical. If I lose a level 20 army to a player that can't be killed, I become a much unhappier camper.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:26 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2001-2011 Reverie World Studios INC. All Rights Reserved.