Jump to content

Idea: Abandon Inactive Tiles for Unsubbed accounts After two weeks.


DBxWanderer
 Share

Recommended Posts

i have even better idea, keep it 3 months, but only if they reply to notifications. for example if your subscription runs out, your tile remains as it is, but every week you receive email notification to keep your tile and/or constructs reserved.

 

for example if you know you will subscribe again, you can just reply to that email (its fully automated ofcourse) and click on "keep my tile / constructs reserved - i plan on subscribing within 3 months" or if you know you won't play again, you can either ignore the email or click on "i want to abandon all my tiles and constructs" and then it all becomes unclaimed.

 

so this way, players still have chance to keep their stuff for 3 months, but they have to be active on PC and reply to weekly emails to keep their stuff, i think this would be more than fair! could even keep stuff for 6 months using this method, because if someone completely abandons the game, it's very unlikely they would bother clicking on "keep my stuff" which would require them to log into NQ website and confirm that they want to extend their reserve for another week.

 

but this would also be very useful for those, who literally can't pay the subscription or accidentally ran out due life issues. so at least they can keep their stuff for 6 months before it gets ravaged by others.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sethioz said:

i have even better idea, keep it 3 months, but only if they reply to notifications. for example if your subscription runs out


i don’t agree. You don’t pay, you don’t play you loose the tiles after 1month except your starting tile. 
 

this is a chance to clean up not active tiles, especially this t2+ tiles which would be great value to new players who had not been part of the tile rush from launch. I mean that’s nonsense, to maintain tiles with some alts and then there are no consequences for not paying anymore. I mean we would like to see DU to survive, that means you either pay or you are out and make room for new paying folks. 
 

as everybody likes to highlight it’s a sandbox, and in a sandbox things get lost. 
 

My 2 cent. 

Edited by Nemezir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jinxed said:

Two week, 28 days tops. I know for a fact people are sitting on tiles with alts burning one dac every four months. 

 

I recognise there may be an issue here with people blocking valuable mining tiles.

 

However, I do think that there is a need for builders to keep their constructs for more than a few weeks, which I believe was the intention for HQ tiles.

 

Perhaps there is a reasonable criteria to differentiate between these scenarios and handle them differently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Neirin said:

However, I do think that there is a need for builders to keep their constructs for more than a few weeks, which I believe was the intention for HQ tiles.


since builder sell BP’s they can BP their stuff, move to the starting tile and the work is safe. 
 

again, it can’t be, that one don’t pay, don’t play and then whine about losing stuff in a sandbox game. 
 

if one run out of real cash, move the assets to the starting tile and go to work. 
 

inactive not paying accounts need to be cleaned up and wiped, there is no other way to have a healthy rotation regarding of ownership and tiles.

 

active paying and playing accounts support DU and it’s improvement, not paying accounts don’t contribute to DU and therefore the nice assets must become available to those who pay the sub and still support DU. 

Edited by Nemezir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nemezir said:


since builder sell BP’s they can BP their stuff, move to the starting tile and the work is safe. 
 

 

I was more thinking about some of the giant monuments that I've seen around the place. It would be disappointing to lose one because the owner missed their sub for a few weeks and a random player tore them down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Neirin said:

missed their sub for a few weeks


I understand your point, but how do one miss a sub for weeks, if one plays active? 
 

If one don’t have the few bugs a month available I would recommend not to play so much and reconsider life choices. 
 

especially when we talk about folks having alts around. 
 

i am not against alts or people owning nice tiles. 
 

i have issues with folks firing some alts, blocking valuable tiles and resources and then stop paying and playing and expecting to not have any penalties. 
 

if DU wants new players to have their way, they need to make room for them. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but this idea is absurdly bad for any subscription based MMO.

 

To me, it betrays a complete misunderstanding of how subscription-based monetization works at a fundamental level. 

 

This idea that once someone's sub lapses, they ought to be completely purged from the game is immensely counter-productive. From a business perspective, it makes zero sense. 

 

This is because every subscription-based product faces high month-to-month churn, and with DU that's especially so. Every churned user then becomes a potential customer, because reengaging lapsed subscribers is a huge facet of any viable subscription service.

 

Consider what percent of active Netflix subscribers has at one point paused or cancelled their sub. I'd wager it's a vast majority. This is just a core concept with how subscriptions work, and any sub-based product that decides to ignore this is not going to last very long. 

 

Deciding to make it so there's no reason for lapsed users to return is an objectively stupid idea for any subscription...especially one that suffers from as much churn as DU. 

 

The push and pull between DU keeping tiles and reclaiming them has been discussed for a long, long time -- the flaw is inherent in the design of this game and the solution that NQ already has makes a lot more sense than this suggestion.

 

Hell, I'd argue timers should be even higher, because 3 months is not nearly enough time to re-engage a lapsed sub, and that's the whole point. 

 

TLDR: a game with so few subs can't be so arrogant in deleting old stuff to "make room" for new players, because there are no new players and regardless, all new players eventually become churned players (especially with DU's high churn rates), so this "strategy" is horribly counter-productive in every conceivable way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have no problem with the way it is, but what annoys me, is that i often see unclaimed tiles with lots of static constructs on them and then it says "unclaimed in 60+ days" .. like what? how can it be unclaimed if they already lost the tile? that is NOT ok! if you lose (NOT LOOSE) your tile, then all statics on it should instantly be unclaimed. that's only thing that really annoys me, just today i saw some of those. how can you even build on unclaimed tile, what is this nonsense?

dynamic constructs i fully understand, it would be crazy if you park your ship and it becomes unclaimed, but statics? not ok...

 

offtopic, but please stop saying "loose" ... i dont get how 99.999% of people get it wrong, it's different word with different meaning. "lose = lose the tail" -- "loose = screws are loose on table" totally different words ... ugh 😕

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nemezir said:


i don’t agree. You don’t pay, you don’t play you loose the tiles after 1month except your starting tile. 
 

I think people should lose their starting tile too.  Right now there are a ton of them and no good locations for actual new players, but nobody really uses them.  Pack up the player's stuff into magic BPs, give away their tile and when they resub they pick a new starter tile and get their BPs back.

 

Make Sanctuary tiles the only permanent ones and sell STUs in a cash shop.

 

IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sethioz said:

i have no problem with the way it is, but what annoys me, is that i often see unclaimed tiles with lots of static constructs on them and then it says "unclaimed in 60+ days" .. like what? how can it be unclaimed if they already lost the tile? that is NOT ok! if you lose (NOT LOOSE) your tile, then all statics on it should instantly be unclaimed. that's only thing that really annoys me, just today i saw some of those. how can you even build on unclaimed tile, what is this nonsense?

dynamic constructs i fully understand, it would be crazy if you park your ship and it becomes unclaimed, but statics? not ok...

 

offtopic, but please stop saying "loose" ... i dont get how 99.999% of people get it wrong, it's different word with different meaning. "lose = lose the tail" -- "loose = screws are loose on table" totally different words ... ugh 😕

But what if your construct is on someone else's tile.  Suddenly you loose everything (sorry, the devil made me do it).

 

Just grab the tile and requisition the constructs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, blundertwink said:

Consider what percent of active Netflix subscribers has at one point paused or cancelled their sub. I'd wager it's a vast majority.

You are so funny. 
Comparing DU and Netflix to explain subscription models. 
 

But if You feel like: 

in that case that would be like each subscriber would own a movie or series that no one else can watch anymore as long the payment of that customer is active. Imagine how that would go? 
 

imagine WOW or EVE, no one could consume content or resources permanently in a way that it’s not available to others anymore. 
 

Each DU subscriber consumes and blocks content and resources, that is not available or accessible anymore. And that is by game design.

 

as a new player I look at a lot blocked tiles and many are inactive. 
when I go to Netflix the content is not blocked by a TU from an earlier subscriber. I pay equal money, I want equal access to resources and content like the early birds. 
 

And don’t get me wrong here, I don’t want it on a silver plate, but I have no chance regardless how much effort I put in. 

 

ja I know Territory-warfare - let’s see. 

 

 

Edited by Nemezir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long post, executive summary (TLDR) at the bottom.

 

Why don't they just do the same as they already do for dynamic constructs?

I own a tile which I was given by an org member who was quitting.
He signed the tile over to me and I got instant access to mining rights etc.
What I didn't get was automatic access to his constructs.... I had to right click and acquire them. I think that took two weeks to count down. can't remember.


Furthermore, there was a dynamic construct sitting on my tile which I still can't claim for another month or so, (it says 30 something days until abandoned)


According to the quitting org member who gave me his tile, the dynamic construct belong(s/ed) to someone who quit a couple of months before he did.

So once that timer counts down, I can claim his construct, too.

 

So why not just use the current system?


If you stop subscribing, someone can claim your old TU and you get sent a notification and wait for the handover timer to tick down (2 weeks?) After that, it becomes his or her tile anyway, so they can then request acquisition on all the dynamic structures (2 weeks, say) or static (pick something like, say, 2 months or thereabouts).
In the meantime, they are in any case free to deploy mining units or harvest the territory since it is theirs.

 

OTOH, if the tile stays unclaimed, then after 3 months, everything gets abandoned regardless.
 

 

TLDR: Here is the executive summary of my post:
Lots of people are quitting DU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, CptLoRes said:

A 'lots of people quitting' is a relative term considering how few are remaining and still actively playing in the first place.. 😛

Relative is true, after all, I never stated “absolutely loads of people”.. 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Nemezir said:

You are so funny. 
Comparing DU and Netflix to explain subscription models. 
 

But if You feel like: 

in that case that would be like each subscriber would own a movie or series that no one else can watch anymore as long the payment of that customer is active. Imagine how that would go? 
 

imagine WOW or EVE, no one could consume content or resources permanently in a way that it’s not available to others anymore. 
 

Each DU subscriber consumes and blocks content and resources, that is not available or accessible anymore. And that is by game design.

 

as a new player I look at a lot blocked tiles and many are inactive. 
when I go to Netflix the content is not blocked by a TU from an earlier subscriber. I pay equal money, I want equal access to resources and content like the early birds. 

 

Well, you're the one that doesn't seem to understand how a subscription monetization works, so I used the most popular subscription service as an example...

 

Churning users permanently is a bad idea and will always be a bad idea for any product with a subscription model. 

 

It doesn't matter that DU is a different product than Netflix -- the monetization model works the same. Being "blocked" is completely irrelevant to how this model works. You're talking about specific gameplay, I'm talking about how subscriptions work at a fundamental level. 

 

That NQ didn't understand how subscriptions work is part of my point -- trying to make DU fit into a monetization model that doesn't work for the core design is a part of NQ's many problems.

 

Changing the timing doesn't even really solve this problem, the game still can't scale indefinitely -- it's almost like making property ownership a core part of a persistent MMO is a bad idea unless they scale the property available along with the number of players. Adding planets doesn't do this because new players don't start on new planets. 

 

This topic has been discussed for so many years...this fact that the new player experience degrades over time as tiles get more claims.

 

Years and years people talked about this, warning NQ that their design made no sense for a persistent MMO. At the end of the day, though...the core design of DU is counter-productive with a subscription model by NQ's choice and it would take more than a few small tweaks to change this. 

 

It doesn't matter that DU works differently than Netflix as a product, it matters that user churn is the number one most important thing for any sub and DU's core design is counter-productive for this model no matter how you slice it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...