Bedlam
Approved user
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2017
- Messages
- 377
Careful mate,they get quite upset when you call them out.
Nexon is on the wrong way
- Thread starter SiuYin
- Start date
Careful mate,they get quite upset when you call them out.
There is revenue indicator for top 200 games.
Domination fall to the edge of 200 in early december, and no longer back to top 200 after 19 Dec.
LordAnubis
Approved user
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2016
- Messages
- 534
10k (Dominations) vs 845k (CoC) per day. yeah thats says it all. revenue is in the sewers for the game.
Master Contrail Program
Approved user
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
- Messages
- 350
I had 2 back to back, then it asked for the "Are you still here?" code within minutes of booting the game up this morning.
King Barbs
Approved user
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 55
That is not a revenue indicator but merely an indication of downloads.
Nb4powerup
Community Manager
- Joined
- May 16, 2016
- Messages
- 741
I don't usually weigh in on these types of threads but this time, I'll make an exception. APP ranking by revenue changes constantly, trying to dial in on what you think a game is making per day by this method is 100% impossible. Why? There's no relation, no scale to judge against that's even remotely visible to the user or other competitors in the games space, save for insider information.
Now, that doesn't mean analyst won't throw themselves at released data (major dl achievements, revenue press, etc) and try to craft a numbers ship in which they can sail on. This is always based on app release to milestone announcement. But, I can tell you, that the numbers tossed around in this thread are so inaccurate, I can't fathom where they would have been generated from logically. They're certainly not compiled from the press release.
Downloads do not equal revenue, that's just potential for conversions. Some games have healthy organics that can translate into longer player retention. Other titles have to constantly pump the UA war machine to make it worthwhile. Neither is completely representative of a game's revenue generation or its success in the market.
DomiNations has done very well and continue's to be one of the most immersive titles available on mobile today. We're not "closing shop" anytime soon.
Now, that doesn't mean analyst won't throw themselves at released data (major dl achievements, revenue press, etc) and try to craft a numbers ship in which they can sail on. This is always based on app release to milestone announcement. But, I can tell you, that the numbers tossed around in this thread are so inaccurate, I can't fathom where they would have been generated from logically. They're certainly not compiled from the press release.
Downloads do not equal revenue, that's just potential for conversions. Some games have healthy organics that can translate into longer player retention. Other titles have to constantly pump the UA war machine to make it worthwhile. Neither is completely representative of a game's revenue generation or its success in the market.
DomiNations has done very well and continue's to be one of the most immersive titles available on mobile today. We're not "closing shop" anytime soon.
Last edited:
Thanks for not closing the thread.
There is some numbers about APP ranking, revenue estimation, DL count, players reviews. they are not 100% accurate, or maybe only 70% or 60% accurate, but all of them showing a bad trend.
And yes, Dominations still doing well compare with most of other games, and still doing well compare with most of the similar games.
But keep in mind that, It is a good game, and should always target to be #1 of same kind, we are not happy to see Dominations at the down hill slope
I have seen so many games which are good at beginning, but after 1 or 2 years, barrier of entry keep going up with more contents release, less and less new players join, and finally died or dying.
Hearthstone once a juggernaut, but with higher and higher barrier of entry, it now a dying game. but it is not too late for Dominations to reduce barrier
I do have a feeling that Dominations is lack a overview of how game is going on. for example
What is the expected time for a casual / heavy / paid players to upgrade into late game age (GA / AA / CWA )from begin
What is the expected hour for a casual / heavy / paid players to play daily
What is the expected time of retrain after army lost, and what is the expected lost after a raid
From a heavy player point of view, I am expecting the game can be maxed in 2 years for a beginner (around 1 years to max till last second age, and end game age take another year)
And I expecting upgrading Attack is hard in resource but short in time, while defense is long in time but easy in resource, so that a dynamic balance between hard core and paid player.
I don't see much revenue will come from rush in early age, but I do see the potential if shorten upgrade time in early age, player will rush for retrain in order to keep their workers busy.
There are many balance works need to be done for Dominations, but to begin with, lower the barrier of entry and help new joiner,
There is some numbers about APP ranking, revenue estimation, DL count, players reviews. they are not 100% accurate, or maybe only 70% or 60% accurate, but all of them showing a bad trend.
And yes, Dominations still doing well compare with most of other games, and still doing well compare with most of the similar games.
But keep in mind that, It is a good game, and should always target to be #1 of same kind, we are not happy to see Dominations at the down hill slope
I have seen so many games which are good at beginning, but after 1 or 2 years, barrier of entry keep going up with more contents release, less and less new players join, and finally died or dying.
Hearthstone once a juggernaut, but with higher and higher barrier of entry, it now a dying game. but it is not too late for Dominations to reduce barrier
I do have a feeling that Dominations is lack a overview of how game is going on. for example
What is the expected time for a casual / heavy / paid players to upgrade into late game age (GA / AA / CWA )from begin
What is the expected hour for a casual / heavy / paid players to play daily
What is the expected time of retrain after army lost, and what is the expected lost after a raid
From a heavy player point of view, I am expecting the game can be maxed in 2 years for a beginner (around 1 years to max till last second age, and end game age take another year)
And I expecting upgrading Attack is hard in resource but short in time, while defense is long in time but easy in resource, so that a dynamic balance between hard core and paid player.
I don't see much revenue will come from rush in early age, but I do see the potential if shorten upgrade time in early age, player will rush for retrain in order to keep their workers busy.
There are many balance works need to be done for Dominations, but to begin with, lower the barrier of entry and help new joiner,
Nb4powerup
Community Manager
- Joined
- May 16, 2016
- Messages
- 741
I do agree that there are some changes that could improve the overall game experience for new and old players alike. BHG is hard at work making some changes but I don't have an ETA as to when they'll be released.
Manifesto
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,920
I'm genuinely curious what you suggest they should do to 'lower the barrier of entry and help new joiner'.
IMO, it's already so easy to pick up this game and advance to Iron age or Classical age and even Medieval age without spending any money. I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this.
Barrier of entry doesn't mean in early age, it is the time for a player upgrade into end-game age.
I believe you seldom participate war between heavy alliances.
And you may not know there are lot of merge happened between alliance in leader board.
Alliance Perk could be one reason, but the main reason is they can't find suitable reinforcement due to the small player pool.
We are in different world, friend. My alliance with glory 26k+, on the leader board, for us, barrier of entry means how long a player will be able to fight in our war
and it is equal to
1. Full Atomic Troops upgraded
2. Complete most of university item in attack
And we find that we lost more members (who abandoned ) than our reinforcement. And 220 threshold is another shock for us, Almost all of our attacker unable to join war for at least 3 months due to the upgrade.
Manifesto
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,920
Ok, you were talking about entering and upgrading after joining an alliance. Didn't get that from your post.
However, how is that any different from a player progressing through the ages on their own? They still have to raid and loot and upgrade whether they're in an alliance or not. It's just easier when you're in an alliance because you have help.
So isn't it 'even' easier for players to progress when they're in an alliance?
Maybe I'm missing something but I fail to see this 'barrier' for new players you're talking about. Seems to me the barrier or help for new joiners you're asking for is the same boring age-old complaint about how long it takes for people to get where others are. Blah blah blah.
An argument I'm not going to go into ''again''.
PS: why limit your teammates to full Atomic troops? Why not ''help'' lower ages become better fighters by exposing them to wars earlier on? Let them learn by participating in wars, don't make them wait until they're strong enough for YOUR needs.
Seems to me the barrier to your own teammates is YOU. How ironic.
However, how is that any different from a player progressing through the ages on their own? They still have to raid and loot and upgrade whether they're in an alliance or not. It's just easier when you're in an alliance because you have help.
So isn't it 'even' easier for players to progress when they're in an alliance?
Maybe I'm missing something but I fail to see this 'barrier' for new players you're talking about. Seems to me the barrier or help for new joiners you're asking for is the same boring age-old complaint about how long it takes for people to get where others are. Blah blah blah.
An argument I'm not going to go into ''again''.
PS: why limit your teammates to full Atomic troops? Why not ''help'' lower ages become better fighters by exposing them to wars earlier on? Let them learn by participating in wars, don't make them wait until they're strong enough for YOUR needs.
Seems to me the barrier to your own teammates is YOU. How ironic.
Last edited:
Manifesto
Approved user
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,920
Seems to me that you're not interested in helping other players at all, as you claim. Instead you're only interested in other players upgrading the quickest, to help you/your alliance.
Well, at least you're honest about it.
Good luck to you and your alliance!
Well, at least you're honest about it.
Good luck to you and your alliance!
