Evidence of Players Abandoning Game

LordAnubis · Oct 12, 2017

Maybe it's the tactical helo nerf but I doubt it. With nearly maxed resources (including oil) I have not been hit in several days. My layout is not even that good being a rushed Global. This is no doubt a sign of the end of the game when hardly anybody attacks in PVP because the rewards just flat out SUCK.

Mountainking · Oct 12, 2017

Sitting on 70k oil, I got hit 7 or 8 times overnight (mostly for resources) until on the last hit I got a PT. I moved from 1600 to 1800 medals......

LordJestix · Oct 12, 2017

LordAnubis said:
Maybe it's the tactical helo nerf but I doubt it. With nearly maxed resources (including oil) I have not been hit in several days. My layout is not even that good being a rushed Global. This is no doubt a sign of the end of the game when hardly anybody attacks in PVP because the rewards just flat out SUCK.

cant see your screen shot, too small.

LordJestix · Oct 12, 2017

im a rushed AA sitting at 600 medals and had 90k oil and i didnt get attacked once.

BeerMan · Oct 12, 2017

The TH nerf has made a big difference. The night before the nerf, I was sitting on 65K oil and had 5 or 6 TH raids against me overnight. Last night, sitting at 85K oil, zero attacks against me.

I do think the player base is shrinking though. We are a middling alliance (hovering around 21K glory), and we have faced the same alliance in war 3 times in the last couple of weeks.

Green Bird · Oct 12, 2017

Where any lack of active players is felt is in the early âges. I have a gunpowder age account and there are practically no attacks there regardless of how much in resources l have. Similarly, when I attack i see mostly abandoned bases. Note that these ages are not affected by silos or helicopters or anything so hotly debated here, actually.

The situation is different in my global age account where I am attacked regularly and often face active players in multiplayer.

This makes me believe that the game player base has become an inverted pyramid. Pretty dangerous for the future of the game, I would say, but I do not know what the shelf life of this type of game is. I still have rise of nations and age of empires, though those obviously are stand alone games.

LordJestix · Oct 12, 2017

Green Bird said:
Where any lack of active players is felt is in the early âges. I have a gunpowder age account and there are practically no attacks there regardless of how much in resources l have. Similarly, when I attack i see mostly abandoned bases. Note that these ages are not affected by silos or helicopters or anything so hotly debated here, actually.

The situation is different in my global age account where I am attacked regularly and often face active players in multiplayer.

This makes me believe that the game player base has become an inverted pyramid. Pretty dangerous for the future of the game, I would say, but I do not know what the shelf life of this type of game is. I still have rise of nations and age of empires, though those obviously are stand alone games.

A very well developed game, CoC, has a great shelf life. Its been a top 3 money earner for years and its a 5 year old game. But a focus on P2W, lack of fixing bugs in a timely manner, poor CS, unjustified banning, etc have caused many players to leave which also means those former active players no longer tell their friends about the game.

KniferX · Oct 12, 2017

Agreed, I can already tell from my own example how the game is becoming less enjoyable over time and I can see why players are quitting.
Poor balancing (nothing is done to bring some nations from the dead, useless units left and right), pay 2 win, sandbag matches, oil raiding, incredibly long build times, all are taking a toll on my game enjoyment. Honestly as I think a lot of people think the same, if I wasn't in a great alliance I would quit the game.

SiuYin · Oct 12, 2017

It happened form time to time that player abandon game, it may because graduation, marriage or having a new born baby.
The actual problem lack of new player joined.

It have been mentioned many times: 1 year to upgrade into Global age is very un-friendly for new player.
And it also been mentioned many times: Overall upgrade time is too long.

In reality, when I joined the game, I spend 3 month to upgrade into latest age (IA) , but now, a new joiner need more than 1 year to upgrade into latest age (AA)

TizzZeus · Oct 12, 2017

KniferX said:
Agreed, I can already tell from my own example how the game is becoming less enjoyable over time and I can see why players are quitting.
Poor balancing (nothing is done to bring some nations from the dead, useless units left and right), pay 2 win, sandbag matches, oil raiding, incredibly long build times, all are taking a toll on my game enjoyment. Honestly as I think a lot of people think the same, if I wasn't in a great alliance I would quit the game.

so devs u keep crapping on poor business model

Manifesto · Oct 12, 2017

IA is where the game becomes fun. The units you get in IA are worth the wait, even if the upgrade times are not.
Just keep going at least to Global. The game gets harder but now with increased production and new leaders in Uni, which we veterans didn't have, you should have more fun!

SiuYin · Oct 12, 2017

No thanks. I reach IA before GA go live. And already in AA for a long time

Motaz Tarek · Oct 12, 2017

we had like 3 220+ alliance mates quit and they were paying well for this game, and they didn't even feel sorry to abandon the progress they made and the cash they spent

also many of the top alliances merged together due to lack of players and others completely quit cuz of battle time bug

Bedlam · Oct 12, 2017

We have had nearly 10 new players join over the last few weeks. These games gave a finite shelf life,it's no surprise that people leave sometimes.

LordAnubis · Oct 13, 2017

well max oil is 220k 8.5 mil food 7 mil gold. kind of ridiculous only getting medal droppers.

LordJestix · Oct 13, 2017

Bedlam said:
We have had nearly 10 new players join over the last few weeks. These games gave a finite shelf life,it's no surprise that people leave sometimes.

New to the game, new to the alliance, or alts?

Bobortvogel · Oct 13, 2017

We periodically drop our minimum medal count and pretty quickly get relatively newer players. So there are still players working their way up. I don't see a way to tell if new players are increasing or decreasing.

Festivus · Oct 13, 2017

We run two alliances, one a serious war alliance and the other a relatively high-turnover training alliance. The training alliance has a constant flow of new people - we boot people after wars and they are replaced within a day with new people joining. New people ARE coming to the game in droves. The question is whether they'll stay.

LordJestix · Oct 13, 2017

Festivus said:
We run two alliances, one a serious war alliance and the other a relatively high-turnover training alliance. The training alliance has a constant flow of new people - we boot people after wars and they are replaced within a day with new people joining. New people ARE coming to the game in droves. The question is whether they'll stay.

or they are just joining from a dead alliance or they are alts.

Green Bird · Oct 13, 2017

I am in a very active 50 strong alliance. There are plenty of people joining, usually early age players after the old man tells them to go find an alliance. Unfortunately, many/most of them abandon the game quickly and get kicked. I would say the game player base is getting “older”.

Evidence of Players Abandoning Game

Approved user

Attachments

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Approved user

Similar threads