Warrior General Games

I get what you're saying, but two free players is about the best introductory approach I can imagine. '

edit:
Although I guess post-beta accounts only get one.

Originally posted by SteveMax58
My contention is that the flex model is better suited to an ad-supported model so why not entice people with a different model that allows them to build half a team with little to no recycle after?

Well think about it like this. You are a new person and you build half a team. 2 seasons later you are getting trounced and realize your building method wasn't very good and there are better ways to do things than you originally planned. At that point you have the ability to recycle 70% of that flex spent and start over.

Alternatively under your proposal I am a new user in my 2nd season and figure all this out and oh fucksticks now what?

Originally posted by jdbolick
I get what you're saying, but two free players is about the best introductory approach I can imagine. '

edit:
Although I guess post-beta accounts only get one.

Yeah, I dont think they need to give more free players away or even discount the flex pricing below their "average target profit" per customer or per dot (however you compile that, which wouldn't be that difficult if you have the numbers). I think 1 free dot is perfect for a new customer that literally just signed up yesterday & has a steep learning curve. I'm just saying after that introductory period, they learn the basic concepts of pumping skills for ALGs, not putting SPs in SAs right away for better long term success, and then read up on the forums on specific build types. But there is also a lot of lull periods if you have only 1 or 2 dots. For some, thats about all they have time for & that works.

For others (and specifically for getting more hardcore new users), the building process is a lot more interesting on multiples of dots as you experiment & learn each type of position better. Maybe start coordinating your own team in the process as you may not even know anybody or be inclined to ping experienced agents to help you. I think all of this makes people more knowledgeable on the game & that increases competition, which makes leagues more interesting, and makes the newer user want to do a "little better" next time.

Originally posted by SteveMax58
But there is also a lot of lull periods if you have only 1 or 2 dots. For some, thats about all they have time for & that works.


eh...it's a lull period whether you have 1-2 dots or 22-55. Granted I don't argue that it is more fun to coordinate your own dots at times.

Originally posted by bhall43

Alternatively under your proposal I am a new user in my 2nd season and figure all this out and oh fucksticks now what?

I get that but keep in mind the entry fee for that team was 50% less than what it is right now (or whatever the price needs to be to still maintain the same profit margin they get today). I don't think most new users are inclined to build an entire team inside of their 1st month or 2 but their likelihood to do it goes up dramatically if the cost is lower. If they want to retry it...then ultimately they are paying again. My contention is that they are more likely to try building an entire team earlier, and if they do, they will be more inclined to retry it if the cost appears lower.

IDK...I don't claim to be the pulse of the new user. I'm just saying that my experience with the game is that I have much more fun when I learn and I do that with more dots. So tweaking the flex model to lower the entry barrier for the way (I believe) more users enjoy the game only increases your chances of engaging a user who will commit the time to learn the game & stick around longer, thus buying more flex in the long run than if they were bored by having a single dot & not learning nearly as much.

Originally posted by SteveMax58
I get that but keep in mind the entry fee for that team was 50% less than what it is right now (or whatever the price needs to be to still maintain the same profit margin they get today). I don't think most new users are inclined to build an entire team inside of their 1st month or 2 but their likelihood to do it goes up dramatically if the cost is lower. If they want to retry it...then ultimately they are paying again. My contention is that they are more likely to try building an entire team earlier, and if they do, they will be more inclined to retry it if the cost appears lower.


Even going beyond the new user mark. There are plenty of teams that are complete fails in the lower leagues. You take away that 70% return and making a great effort to perfect everything once becomes a greater emphasis. Remember that it isn't just one time return of 70%. It is a continuous dwindle of 70%. That softens the blow quite a bit and keeps a user around for an extended period. Halving the cost of a player might draw in more potential start up dots, but not getting that flex refund % would most certainly deter people from restarting.

Originally posted by bhall43
Even going beyond the new user mark. There are plenty of teams that are complete fails in the lower leagues. You take away that 70% return and making a great effort to perfect everything once becomes a greater emphasis. Remember that it isn't just one time return of 70%. It is a continuous dwindle of 70%. That softens the blow quite a bit and keeps a user around for an extended period. Halving the cost of a player might draw in more potential start up dots, but not getting that flex refund % would most certainly deter people from restarting.

But I think that just highlights what I'm trying to get at.

If everybody recycled their flex to zero, then a HoF package is really like having over 800,000 flex (not 250k flex). Thats if you literally drag it out to the last recycle drop. I'm sure most users don't do that but the ones who do buy HoF packages certainly keep the average flex per user $ up. But at that rate of recycling & cost, the "non-recylced" HoF package is a more enticing $300. Obv the lower the entry cost, the more people you are opening your business to. So if somebody's disposable cash is $30, they get more flex upfront for the dollar, which entices them to build more dots, and engage more in the game.

Thats my quick & lazy math but its clear that you are getting great value to stick around. But what advantage is there to have users stick around who aren't paying? I'm talking in pure business costs.Sure they have paid their fair amount to do so, but my contention is that they (and other users) would spend the same in shorter bursts but the key is that more users would spend.

No, Sorry Steve, but bhall is actually very close to my perspective and I would imagine most others as well. Better value.

The problem is building dots is boring and predictable no matter how many free dots you get.
The over emphasis on effective level is really what ruins it no matter what anyone says , nothing else matters in this game but effective level it seems which is a shame.
Having to develop your dot according to some mathematical equation and not being allowed to assign SA's until you are level 50 is total and complete bullshit that sucks the life right out of building dots.

The other big problem is 255-0

Originally posted by Phantom Of The Opera
No, Sorry Steve, but bhall is actually very close to my perspective and I would imagine most others as well. Better value.

You say better value. Let me ask you this...how much did you spend on flex last month? Or at least the last time you spent.

You dont have to say how much but then consider if the amount of flex you received was tripled...but, with no recycle to it. How bad a value would you perceive it to be?

Originally posted by SteveMax58
But I think that just highlights what I'm trying to get at.

If everybody recycled their flex to zero, then a HoF package is really like having over 800,000 flex (not 250k flex). Thats if you literally drag it out to the last recycle drop. I'm sure most users don't do that but the ones who do buy HoF packages certainly keep the average flex per user $ up. But at that rate of recycling & cost, the "non-recylced" HoF package is a more enticing $300. Obv the lower the entry cost, the more people you are opening your business to. So if somebody's disposable cash is $30, they get more flex upfront for the dollar, which entices them to build more dots, and engage more in the game.

Thats my quick & lazy math but its clear that you are getting great value to stick around. But what advantage is there to have users stick around who aren't paying? I'm talking in pure business costs.Sure they have paid their fair amount to do so, but my contention is that they (and other users) would spend the same in shorter bursts but the key is that more users would spend.

Well they obviously aren't hurting extremely in revenue so the idea is to retain users long enough to build on new projects and then build on their userbase from there. Your premise might be great if GLB/Warrior Games was really under hard times but it is pretty clear that they aren't so really it is mostly about retention and growth current point.

I bought a starter package. 2013-03-31 03:48:13

I won't purchase anything higher than a starter package, although I would if changes were implemented.

Originally posted by Overthemiddle

The other big problem is 255-0



GLB can't force teams to be competitive and really they shouldn't have to because that is lame for people that are good.

Originally posted by Overthemiddle
The problem is building dots is boring and predictable no matter how many free dots you get.
The over emphasis on effective level is really what ruins it no matter what anyone says , nothing else matters in this game but effective level it seems which is a shame.
Having to develop your dot according to some mathematical equation and not being allowed to assign SA's until you are level 50 is total and complete bullshit that sucks the life right out of building dots.

The other big problem is 255-0



I have news for you EL is not everything. Performance is more important. EL might give you some insight, but a High EL dot can be beat by a better dot with a lower EL and good game planners.

Originally posted by Phantom Of The Opera
I bought a starter package. 2013-03-31 03:48:13

So now you have 60,000 flex instead of 20,000 flex. You can't recycle the 60,000 though.

Would you be more or less inclined to build more dots? And if you did, would you expect to learn more about the game mechanics, more optimal build strategies, etc. given that you have built more dots? And if you did that...would you likely be more competitive & want to try again after you have learned enough to know what you could have done better?

Its the premise that building 2 dots for 12 months is considered funner than building 6 dots for 4 months. The difference is that you have a lower upfront entry cost to do the latter if you so choose, or you can simply do the former & it works the same as it does today and the cost is the same.