Lizzie
Clueless newb
Posts: 199 
|
Post by Lizzie on Jul 9, 2014 20:22:12 GMT -5
I just like statistics. Sorry for being a nerd. Anaiah: I still think it's important to know what defines a "new player" before you can make a serious claim here. It definitely looks like people drop off over time, but it's not a particularly swift drop. I'm not defining it. Armageddon is defining it as a new account created during that 7 day period. I thought it was pretty clear cut? So we have no reason to believe the following regarding new accounts: 1) All listed new accounts are continuing on to create characters and play the actual game. 2) All listed new accounts who do the above continue to play and do not log into their character once, get bored and quit. 3) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - None of these are the dozen or so dummy accounts I, and others, have no doubt made over the past few years for various reasons. 4) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - They aren't accounts created because naruto1999 forgot his password before he finished character creation, and they aren't veterans looking for a fresh start. Why, again, should I take the information provided and believe that there is player attrition taking place? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2014 20:32:48 GMT -5
1. Nyr himself spoke on the numbers there on the GDB. I've done the rest of the math and I know what I'm talking about. Might want to factor in that according to Nyr, there have been (If I'm recalling correctly) actually around 46 players that have made legitimate accounts and kept playing from about 2010. Given that -unlike- having a sustained playerbase averaging 240 in 2010 each week (it's about 240 for the weeks on average), because we now have a roughly 200 person roster of people logging in weekly, that says we've lost 40, and then factor in the 46 players that Nyr says we've kept, you can add 46 to that. And that leads the game to be down roughly 86 'returning accounts'/veteran players/what you want to call it.
2. No, there's numbers for that, posted by Nyr on the GDB. I'm not exactly wrestling around in the dark.
3. Whether or not they belong to a legitimate user now, the rate has gone up 2-3x what it was, with total weekly logins remaining close to the same. It's a pretty goddamn big nobrainer where the differential goes.
4. These made up less than 1% of accounts created in 2010 - the where you heard about us survey and the fact that new accts get watched like a hawk are pretty good indicators of these numbers.
I'm not asking you to. But don't sell folks shit and try to tell them it's sugar. You either can't understand math or you're purposely fucking with me, god I hope.
|
|
|
|
Post by lulz on Jul 9, 2014 21:00:10 GMT -5
You either can't understand math or you're purposely fucking with me, god I hope. Well, you're really going to win them over with this gem. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2014 21:16:15 GMT -5
I'm not trying to at this point. Frankly, I wanted a place I could put the numbers, compiled, and say to someone who's telling me I'm wrong: "No, go look at the damn numbers". Whether or not I take acct nyr aka screen name lizzie at face value over the ridiculous argument that I can't know what I'm talking about is irrelevant, and completely not the point of my posting this here.
|
|
Lizzie
Clueless newb
Posts: 199
|
Post by Lizzie on Jul 9, 2014 21:21:09 GMT -5
1. Nyr himself spoke on the numbers there on the GDB. I've done the rest of the math and I know what I'm talking about. Might want to factor in that according to Nyr, there have been (If I'm recalling correctly) actually around 46 players that have made legitimate accounts and kept playing from about 2010. Given that -unlike- having a sustained playerbase averaging 240 in 2010 each week (it's about 240 for the weeks on average), because we now have a roughly 200 person roster of people logging in weekly, that says we've lost 40, and then factor in the 46 players that Nyr says we've kept, you can add 46 to that. And that leads the game to be down roughly 86 'returning accounts'/veteran players/what you want to call it. 2. No, there's numbers for that, posted by Nyr on the GDB. I'm not exactly wrestling around in the dark. 3. Whether or not they belong to a legitimate user now, the rate has gone up 2-3x what it was, with total weekly logins remaining close to the same. It's a pretty goddamn big nobrainer where the differential goes. 4. These made up less than 1% of accounts created in 2010 - the where you heard about us survey and the fact that new accts get watched like a hawk are pretty good indicators of these numbers. I'm not asking you to. But don't sell folks shit and try to tell them it's sugar. You either can't understand math or you're purposely fucking with me, god I hope. Maybe you've never been involved in a discussion before, but when you make a claim it's on you to back up that claim. I'm asking you to do that. You either don't understand how to construct an argument or you're purposefully trying to be vague. God, I hope it's first. 1. I could care less about what the player base was in 2010. It has absolutely nothing to do with the issue I'm raising here. If "players that Nyr says we've kept" means "players who made a character and actually played for a significant amount of time" then you just answered my first question. 2. Then it is safe to assume those numbers are not factored into the information provided here? 3. This actually is important. If the "new" accounts are just old players making an account to dick around on without repercussions, then they are not, in fact, new players at all. I'm not asking if they're a legitimate user, I'm asking if we know whether or not they are actually new to the game. 4. What criteria on that survey is needed to be added to the list? When new accounts are watched closely, what exactly might preclude them from being added to the count of "new accounts"? Your data is only as good as its source. Just the manner in which it was collected could seriously skew the numbers one way or another. For all we know, Nyr is fudging the numbers and things are worse than they appear here. Hell, because he wants to get voting up they could even be better. What are the criteria for an account to be considered new? |
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Jul 9, 2014 21:55:01 GMT -5
In my opinion the greatest reason why veterans are leaving the game or growing into 1 hour a week types is not Nyr, nor Tuluk, nor lack of arm 2, nor presence of arm 2, nor imms, nor players, nor state of the game. It is a.simple fact that veterans of Armageddon grew the Fuck up. They had the time for arm during school and universities, but now they got jobs and families. That is the biggest reason for loss of players and little can be done about it. Eh. The numbers just do not support that. Unless yuo meant to say that's the main cause for losing veterans I wouldnt call it unreasonable. But it's definitely not the main reason for losing everyone being lost. There are way too many new accounts each week for that to justify the unique logins count being so steady.
I'm not defining it. Armageddon is defining it as a new account created during that 7 day period. I thought it was pretty clear cut? So we have no reason to believe the following regarding new accounts: 1) All listed new accounts are continuing on to create characters and play the actual game. 2) All listed new accounts who do the above continue to play and do not log into their character once, get bored and quit. 3) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - None of these are the dozen or so dummy accounts I, and others, have no doubt made over the past few years for various reasons. 4) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - They aren't accounts created because naruto1999 forgot his password before he finished character creation, and they aren't veterans looking for a fresh start. There is a line between skepticism and just being contrary for the sake of disagreeing. nyr (the actual Nyr) compiled these numbers. And it is reasonabl to presuppose any numbers he provided would either be 1) accurate or 2) dishonest in favor of Arm. To the best of his abilty atleast. It is unreasonable to pretend those numbers are entirely meaningless just because it's not statistically impossible. using your stance that the incredibly unlikely is a valid response, i can point out we have no reason to disbelieve the following: 1) All of the new accounts are delerak. 2) All of the unique logins are also delerak. 3) delerak is also Nyr. And the reason he (as Nyr) is such a complete cock is because he's a Manchurian candidate style sleeper agent whose sole goal is to destry armageddon as the least likeable staff member imaginable. 4) You are also a delerak account. and this contrarian business is to throw us off the fact you're almost the entire playerbase of the game you're finally going to destroy. as Nyr. Why, again, should I take the information provided and believe that there is player attrition taking place? The idea the game isnt losing players is absurd. there are people on this forum who came here after quitting. Overal the game has gained a net 77 players if the numbers Nyr compiled were correct. Out of over 9000. Do you have some convincing reason to dismiss all of Nyr's numbers? one that amounts to more thn a blanket dismissal based solely on inventing incredibly unlikely (but not impossible) scenarios where they wouldn't mean the slightest bit of anything? Id like to see this reason. |
|
Lizzie
Clueless newb
Posts: 199
|
Post by Lizzie on Jul 9, 2014 23:01:00 GMT -5
In my opinion the greatest reason why veterans are leaving the game or growing into 1 hour a week types is not Nyr, nor Tuluk, nor lack of arm 2, nor presence of arm 2, nor imms, nor players, nor state of the game. It is a.simple fact that veterans of Armageddon grew the Fuck up. They had the time for arm during school and universities, but now they got jobs and families. That is the biggest reason for loss of players and little can be done about it. Eh. The numbers just do not support that. Unless yuo meant to say that's the main cause for losing veterans I wouldnt call it unreasonable. But it's definitely not the main reason for losing everyone being lost. There are way too many new accounts each week for that to justify the unique logins count being so steady.
So we have no reason to believe the following regarding new accounts: 1) All listed new accounts are continuing on to create characters and play the actual game. 2) All listed new accounts who do the above continue to play and do not log into their character once, get bored and quit. 3) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - None of these are the dozen or so dummy accounts I, and others, have no doubt made over the past few years for various reasons. 4) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - They aren't accounts created because naruto1999 forgot his password before he finished character creation, and they aren't veterans looking for a fresh start. There is a line between skepticism and just being contrary for the sake of disagreeing. nyr (the actual Nyr) compiled these numbers. And it is reasonabl to presuppose any numbers he provided would either be 1) accurate or 2) dishonest in favor of Arm. To the best of his abilty atleast. It is unreasonable to pretend those numbers are entirely meaningless just because it's not statistically impossible. using your stance that the incredibly unlikely is a valid response, i can point out we have no reason to disbelieve the following: 1) All of the new accounts are delerak. 2) All of the unique logins are also delerak. 3) delerak is also Nyr. And the reason he (as Nyr) is such a complete cock is because he's a Manchurian candidate style sleeper agent whose sole goal is to destry armageddon as the least likeable staff member imaginable. 4) You are also a delerak account. and this contrarian business is to throw us off the fact you're almost the entire playerbase of the game you're finally going to destroy. as Nyr. Why, again, should I take the information provided and believe that there is player attrition taking place? The idea the game isnt losing players is absurd. there are people on this forum who came here after quitting. Overal the game has gained a net 77 players if the numbers Nyr compiled were correct. Out of over 9000. Do you have some convincing reason to dismiss all of Nyr's numbers? one that amounts to more thn a blanket dismissal based solely on inventing incredibly unlikely (but not impossible) scenarios where they wouldn't mean the slightest bit of anything? Id like to see this reason. Thank you for providing us all with an astounding example of a strawman argument. |
|
|
|
Post by fakeymcfakerton on Jul 10, 2014 0:33:48 GMT -5
So when Nyr posts player retention numbers each month he always posts it this way (interesting parts in bold)...
That "actual logins" part is key. That tells me that the number of "new accounts" listed on weekly update doesn't mean that many new people actually logged in and started playing the game. It's just how many people created accounts. I bet a bunch of those people never submitted a character or their first character got rejected and they never came back.
So I'd like to see the assumptions people are using when they try and calculate "dead accounts" or whatever, because I think you need to know the number of new accounts that actually logged in and started playing before you can assume anything about player retention. Retaining a player means they were ever a player to begin with, and I don't think you can call some dude whose app got rejected and never actually got in game a player.
|
|
Lizzie
Clueless newb
Posts: 199
|
Post by Lizzie on Jul 10, 2014 1:07:54 GMT -5
That is what I've been trying to say. Thanks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2014 6:31:16 GMT -5
That's also what I've been saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Jul 10, 2014 11:49:21 GMT -5
Thank you for providing us all with an astounding example of a strawman argument. Actually it was reductio ad absurdum. And it took up less than half the post which you've attempted to dismiss entirely. So thank you for providing us with an example of hasty generalization. Here. I'll help you with the part you missed by crossing out the part that apparently upset you by displaying the absurdity of your response. you may note there's a whole lot of post that wasn't that part you mislabeled in your attempt to pretend youre a master of debate:
I'm not defining it. Armageddon is defining it as a new account created during that 7 day period. I thought it was pretty clear cut? So we have no reason to believe the following regarding new accounts: 1) All listed new accounts are continuing on to create characters and play the actual game. 2) All listed new accounts who do the above continue to play and do not log into their character once, get bored and quit. 3) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - None of these are the dozen or so dummy accounts I, and others, have no doubt made over the past few years for various reasons. 4) All listed new accounts belong to a legitimate new user - They aren't accounts created because naruto1999 forgot his password before he finished character creation, and they aren't veterans looking for a fresh start. There is a line between skepticism and just being contrary for the sake of disagreeing. nyr (the actual Nyr) compiled these numbers. And it is reasonabl to presuppose any numbers he provided would either be 1) accurate or 2) dishonest in favor of Arm. To the best of his abilty atleast. It is unreasonable to pretend those numbers are entirely meaningless just because it's not statistically impossible. using your stance that the incredibly unlikely is a valid response, i can point out we have no reason to disbelieve the following:
1) All of the new accounts are delerak.
2) All of the unique logins are also delerak.
3) delerak is also Nyr. And the reason he (as Nyr) is such a complete cock is because he's a Manchurian candidate style sleeper agent whose sole goal is to destry armageddon as the least likeable staff member imaginable.
4) You are also a delerak account. and this contrarian business is to throw us off the fact you're almost the entire playerbase of the game you're finally going to destroy. as Nyr.Why, again, should I take the information provided and believe that there is player attrition taking place? The idea the game isnt losing players is absurd. there are people on this forum who came here after quitting. Overal the game has gained a net 77 players if the numbers Nyr compiled were correct. Out of over 9000. Do you have some convincing reason to dismiss all of Nyr's numbers? one that amounts to more thn a blanket dismissal based solely on inventing incredibly unlikely (but not impossible) scenarios where they wouldn't mean the slightest bit of anything? Id like to see this reason. |
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Jul 10, 2014 12:02:49 GMT -5
... So I'd like to see the assumptions people are using when they try and calculate "dead accounts" or whatever, because I think you need to know the number of new accounts that actually logged in and started playing before you can assume anything about player retention. Retaining a player means they were ever a player to begin with, and I don't think you can call some dude whose app got rejected and never actually got in game a player. If you'd like to see that it's in this post. if you actually looked at the numbers we crunched before you posted this you might have noticed anaiah's (and mine by extention) June 2014 matches your preferred number. specificly... ... which is June 2, 2014 - June 8, 2014. You might notice the new player number is 51 and not 184 or 182. so you've already seen the assumptions being used based on "the number of new accounts that actually logged in and started playing" before I "assume anything about player retention".
That is what I've been trying to say. Thanks. You do realize fakey just disproved a few of your points right? Because Im pretty sure thats not what you were trying to say. Im getting the distinct impression you're lumping sides together into arguments. Which isnt particularly helpful to anyone. Yourself included. so in an attempt to get our disagreement on the same page... I'm on the same side as @anaiah (Arm's player retention is shit) but Im involved in a totally different argument. my argument is limited to estimating the churn rate of new player accounts. You and i are actually in agreement these numbers dont lend themselves to calculating the loss of veterans. We are not in agreement regardng these numbers and player attrition. |
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Jul 10, 2014 14:16:23 GMT -5
I'm not sure why this is such a big deal. Is it a "ha ha the game is losing players" thing? The way I see it, you really don't need statistics to know any of this. If you play on a regular basis you can see there aren't that many new players. I think the most important thing for staff to do with these numbers is say "how can we keep the people that are trying out the game playing?"
Now this might piss people off, but I'm starting to feel they needed to shrink the world down as a way of keeping new players. The next obvious choice is to redo the code base and world to make it easier to play (we know how that went) and that's out. Again, if I was a new player and I apped a character starting in Red Storm couldn't find anyone to RP with, went outside the gates and immediately got killed by a beetle, I'd be like "fuck this game". You have old players that play in their own little corner and you have new players that don't know what the hell is going on, who's gonna stay? And the only suggestion for new players is join the Byn. Lol....no.
Let's face it, arm has a very steep learning curve. Even D&D and other tabletops have made their rules easier to play and understand, there's a reason for that. Different generation, now, now, now....instant gratification. If arm doesn't appeal to that a little more, we're going to be stuck with the same players.
I've recommended Arm to people over the years and have heard many reasons they don't stick around from it's too hard (a lot of that) to they don't like the buffer when emoting.
If you compare Arm to a twenty year old music band it's the same thing. It's going to still appeal to its core followers, but ask a kid about it. It's just not relevant to them. To me that's what the numbers say. They're doing a good job of advertising it ( that's good) they're doing a bad job of keeping the people that come (that's bad).
As much as we make fun of the moves they're making, they make sense when you look at those numbers.
|
|
|
|
Post by fakeymcfakerton on Jul 10, 2014 15:44:17 GMT -5
... So I'd like to see the assumptions people are using when they try and calculate "dead accounts" or whatever, because I think you need to know the number of new accounts that actually logged in and started playing before you can assume anything about player retention. Retaining a player means they were ever a player to begin with, and I don't think you can call some dude whose app got rejected and never actually got in game a player. If you'd like to see that it's in this post. if you actually looked at the numbers we crunched before you posted this you might have noticed anaiah's (and mine by extention) June 2014 matches your preferred number. specificly... ... which is June 2, 2014 - June 8, 2014. You might notice the new player number is 51 and not 184 or 182. so you've already seen the assumptions being used based on "the number of new accounts that actually logged in and started playing" before I "assume anything about player retention". Reading comprehension is key. Your data that shows that in week 23, the first week of June, Armageddon added 51 accounts, whereas what Nyr is saying is that in the entire month of June, Armageddon had 51 accounts that actually logged in. Adding your data up for weeks 23 - 26 (i.e. all full weeks in June) would indicate there were 167 new players who started playing in June. That seems to match pretty well with the 184 number of all new accounts that Nyr reported since we're missing 2 days of data in June by adding the weekly totals. And again, Nyr doesn't say those 184 people actually played, just that they made an account, then realized they had to read documentation in order to create a character, and most of them probably just fucked off right there. Your data is comparing the number of new accounts per week to total logins per week, but since not every new account ever logs in, it is going to be quite difficult for you to use that data to make any provable claims about what that means for player retention. The only thing that seems clear is Armageddon doesn't do well at converting new accounts into new players. |
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Jul 10, 2014 20:19:30 GMT -5
Reading comprehension is key. Your data that shows that in week 23, the first week of June, Armageddon added 51 accounts, whereas what Nyr is saying is that in the entire month of June, Armageddon had 51 accounts that actually logged in. You are correct. I apparently missed that bit. Sorry about that. to answer your original question (with the proper frame of mind now) the calculation of dead accounts is unchanged. But what you bring up changes the nature of that number. It still represents the number of people who have failed to be retained. But now there's only an unkown subset of that number who actually got a character approved and connected to it. there is no way to assume how much of the dead accounts actually played a character from the data we've used so far. Adding your data up for weeks 23 - 26 (i.e. all full weeks in June) would indicate there were 167 new players who started playing in June. That seems to match pretty well with the 184 number of all new accounts that Nyr reported since we're missing 2 days of data in June by adding the weekly totals. And again, Nyr doesn't say those 184 people actually played, just that they made an account, then realized they had to read documentation in order to create a character, and most of them probably just fucked off right there. Where are you guys getting this from anyhow? I didnt see anyhting about two days being missing in your post (possibly something not copied in?) But it makes sense given what he said. Your data is comparing the number of new accounts per week to total logins per week, but since not every new account ever logs in, it is going to be quite difficult for you to use that data to make any provable claims about what that means for player retention. The only thing that seems clear is Armageddon doesn't do well at converting new accounts into new players. Agreed. though the data can still be used for indicating issues with the application process. Keep in mind the trimmed down number you were talking about included getting a character approved and logging in as that character. I dont believe you can curently make an account without connecting to the MUD. And iirc you can immediately make a character after creating an account. So it's not reasonable to assume someone might make an account then not attempt to make a character. I could see someone quitting in the middle of the process. But it gets murk at that point. |
|
