Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 4:47:00 PM (view original):
Well, I hate to sound like benis but world populations tell you something about new user retention. For people enjoying themselves, they're not sticking around to enjoy themselves for a 2nd season.

The one thing I learned, under an alias(poiuyt), is that you have to re-up before RS2 to actually sign players. I know I was super-thrilled to find that I'd put a lot of work into scouting/recruiting only to have it not matter since I wasn't around to reap benefits. Maybe people enjoy that. I did not.

What a well thought out logical argument supported by some data.

You DO sound like me!

That would kill the little guy with limited resources. Big school with 6 schollies can afford to "waste" HV on a guy they eventually lose. Little school with 1-2 schollies cannot.

Posted by mullycj on 10/4/2017 4:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 4:35:00 PM (view original):
shoe helped me a lot so I'm not trying to be "all up in his bidness" but it seems like he wants to "punish" users with EE. While most are colossal whinebags, that's not my concern. I just think first time users have little to no reason to be 2nd season users based on the current set up. You don't get the full experience and you probably lose a lot. 1st seasons suck.

The 2 sessions intent was to give bored A.D.D. users with sucky teams something to do during the regular season. The idea created many more issues than it solved.

Is Seble big enough to see that/admit the mistake and correct?

It wasn’t a mistake, the process is more realistic (in-season scouting and recruiting, player discovery rather than existing massive database scan, recruits make more intelligent choices, based on personal preferences rather than hundreds of home visits, which would be more likely to result in a restraining order than a commitment) and is better gameplay (less formulaic, more strategies in play) than the previous version.

The “issues” you’re talking about amount to players being frustrated by needing to adjust their gameplay to be successful.

Nixing in-season recruiting will reduce the risk of recruiting only elite talent, and narrow the range of teams that can compete for elite talent. I like competitive games, I’m not the one looking for a participation trophy here.

Posted by Benis on 10/4/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 4:47:00 PM (view original):
Well, I hate to sound like benis but world populations tell you something about new user retention. For people enjoying themselves, they're not sticking around to enjoy themselves for a 2nd season.

The one thing I learned, under an alias(poiuyt), is that you have to re-up before RS2 to actually sign players. I know I was super-thrilled to find that I'd put a lot of work into scouting/recruiting only to have it not matter since I wasn't around to reap benefits. Maybe people enjoy that. I did not.

What a well thought out logical argument supported by some data.

You DO sound like me!

Except there is no data regarding the reasons for player retention, which was also bad in the previous version. There’s no reason to even suspect that going back to one session will increase retention, and lots of reasons to suspect that it will make the D1 game worse. Using “population data” in this way is disingenuous.

Posted by shoe3 on 10/4/2017 6:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/4/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 4:47:00 PM (view original):
Well, I hate to sound like benis but world populations tell you something about new user retention. For people enjoying themselves, they're not sticking around to enjoy themselves for a 2nd season.

The one thing I learned, under an alias(poiuyt), is that you have to re-up before RS2 to actually sign players. I know I was super-thrilled to find that I'd put a lot of work into scouting/recruiting only to have it not matter since I wasn't around to reap benefits. Maybe people enjoy that. I did not.

What a well thought out logical argument supported by some data.

You DO sound like me!

Except there is no data regarding the reasons for player retention, which was also bad in the previous version. There’s no reason to even suspect that going back to one session will increase retention, and lots of reasons to suspect that it will make the D1 game worse. Using “population data” in this way is disingenuous.

Why did you put population data in quotes?

He's making an "ill-fitting" point.

He's sweating D1 equality. I'm sweating new user experience. The new user experience sucks.

Posted by Benis on 10/4/2017 6:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 10/4/2017 6:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Benis on 10/4/2017 6:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 4:47:00 PM (view original):
Well, I hate to sound like benis but world populations tell you something about new user retention. For people enjoying themselves, they're not sticking around to enjoy themselves for a 2nd season.

The one thing I learned, under an alias(poiuyt), is that you have to re-up before RS2 to actually sign players. I know I was super-thrilled to find that I'd put a lot of work into scouting/recruiting only to have it not matter since I wasn't around to reap benefits. Maybe people enjoy that. I did not.

What a well thought out logical argument supported by some data.

You DO sound like me!

Except there is no data regarding the reasons for player retention, which was also bad in the previous version. There’s no reason to even suspect that going back to one session will increase retention, and lots of reasons to suspect that it will make the D1 game worse. Using “population data” in this way is disingenuous.

Why did you put population data in quotes?

The data does not indicate why retention is low, and does not discern between new and veteran players. Therefore, world snapshots presented as “population data” in a discussion about new player retention does not offer a full picture.

Do you "think" new users are sticking around?

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 6:23:00 PM (view original):
He's making an "ill-fitting" point.

He's sweating D1 equality. I'm sweating new user experience. The new user experience sucks.

If the concern is for the new user, by all means give them the choice - if it is determined to be an actual concern - to sign up during the jobs phase so they can recruit some of their own players. Easy.

But that isn’t why this thread exists.

Posted by shoe3 on 10/4/2017 6:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 6:23:00 PM (view original):
He's making an "ill-fitting" point.

He's sweating D1 equality. I'm sweating new user experience. The new user experience sucks.

If the concern is for the new user, by all means give them the choice - if it is determined to be an actual concern - to sign up during the jobs phase so they can recruit some of their own players. Easy.

But that isn’t why this thread exists.

I suggested that earlier.

I can't express how little I care about EE. But losing and not playing with "your" guys, while not learning about recruiting, is a terrible first season experience.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/4/2017 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Do you "think" new users are sticking around?

Some are. I’ve had private message conversations with a few, some make appearances on the forums. Is a new user more or less likely to stay for 5 or 10 seasons, or start in new worlds than they used to be? I don’t know. That’s not the data being presented.

The more important question is, if not, why not? If it’s determined that not being able to play the first season with their own recruits is a significant factor, then as I’ve said 5 times previously, that can be addressed without blowing up a big new feature of the game.

As I’ve suggested before, I suspect the number one reason the game doesn’t do well retaining new players is because it is a niche game geared for a specific market. It’s never going to be NBA Live. These aren’t real players, there are no graphics, it’s slow, it’s kind of expensive until you’re really successful. But I think among players who *should* like the game, the biggest stumbling block is number of years and dollars it takes for a player to get to the level they want to play at when they sign up.

But that’s my speculation, I don’t have data for that either, beyond my own experience. That’s why these conversations are asinine. None of us are shareholders in WIS. We’re customers. I’m not obligated to care about filling worlds. I’m only obligated to choose whether I’ll keep paying for it. Katy Perry sells way more records and tickets, it doesn’t mean Bon Iver should be trying to sound more like her.

Who is Bon Iver?

Sigh. I was one of those "few". I've already explained why I stuck around.

I'm obviously pulling from my HBD experience but virtually every new user to a world, n00b or vet, wants to "rebuild" or "put my stamp on the team" or "build it in my image". I know this because I've fielded thousands of questions about HBD since it originated. Since I believe the guy who likes HBD is some sort of blurry image of a guy who likes HD, or vice versa, I find it EXTREMELY hard to believe the HD guy doesn't want to "rebuild", "put stamps" or "image build".

Maybe I'm completely wrong. Maybe HBD and HD are like comparing goats and apples. I just don't think so.

Your obligation to HD is to purchase a team or move along. But this is an open forum and I think MOST of us would like to see more people playing and a better game. You are not obligated to contribute to those discussions. But you do. Why?

Posted by Benis on 10/4/2017 6:49:00 PM (view original):
Who is Bon Iver?

Do you have a search engine on your computy thing?

I thought maybe it was auto correct from Bon Jovi.