Wurm Player Retention

[Guest Docterchese]

Most of my friends have experience with First Person Shooter games as well as MMORPG's. MMO's ranging from World of Warcraft, to Silkroad, to Runescape, and even Star Wars Galaxies, they've got a wide variety of game experiences.

Seeing as the only MMO I'd played until joining Wurm was Runescape, your friends should at least have some chance at getting into Wurm.

[Busted 289]

So you want to make it even easier and safer to move around? Does that really sound like something that's going to make the game more exciting for new players? What shall we do, prepare ourselves for an epic journey through the wilderness to reach a far off place we've heard wonders about, risking life and limb and having a great time in the process or step through a doorway and just ... be there.

Convenience for you and other players who are either too lazy or want to do things the easy way shouldn't take priority over newer players or those who deserve to play in an open world sandbox without enjoyment sapping short cuts.

The attraction of Wurm to new players is the vast open spaces and potentially huge distances between the places you live and the places you want to go. Take that away and you bypass a fairly massive part of Wurms charm, with or without added danger.

No to portals. No to any more bloody easy mode game changes. It's easy enough.

[Lily 90]

I think the times that I burn out and quit are when I come across skills that I have to grind. My main ambition is to be a commercial shipbuilder, but the skills to be able to do this are just overwhelming sometimes. I only have 2 hours playtime a day at best and sitting down to churn out bowstrings (to skill up ropemaking) and throwing them in the trash as I go just seems soooooo fruitless.

It'd be great if some of the more obscure skills had a quicker curve to becoming effective.

[atazs 965]

Ideas for retaining players early on:

I don't feel the current tutorial > being thrown into live servers system is optimal for player retention. Golden Valley was not a bad idea, and worked great in the beginning. The problem was lack of map resets.

I feel some intermediate playground where they can go after the tutorial, but before they enter the real servers, would be best for player retention and would solve some problems. I don't have a perfect solution

for how to make this temporary playground though. I have some ideas which I won't elaborate before some dev's think it would be a good idea.

I might do... Make another server like GV(or open GV up) BUT allow sailing between other servers even if you are non premium. Everyone would spawn on GV but could have the ability to go to other servers if they make a boat or someone takes them there. Im sure people freshly out of the tutorial dont care what server they are on and if they want to leave then they can without buying premium and also keeping their stuff. Also dont allow deeds on GV and nothing more than wild cats,lions and rats.

[Werwolf 6]

Two people quit tonight thanks to Boston. ban Boston = better player retention. But oh, as usual, Boston does what he wants and gets away with it, because he spends lots of money on the game.

I know this isn't politically correct, and I'm sure will be moderated, but I don't care. If even one person sees this it was worth it. I tried going through the proper channels, tried PM'ing people, tried /support.... I bet he's still there, griefing that girl's deed. Fixing to lose another longtime player in myself. I refuse to sit around and watch any longer while the few elite that spend a ton of money on the game get to do what they want. I tried protesting with my voice, but it has gone unheard so I will protest with my wallet on my four accounts and three deeds. So, so angry.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Werwolf

[SirRick 22]

I can't speak for everyone else's suggestions, but I feel most of my suggestions so far aren't game-breaking and they don't make Wurm any less of a sandbox game.

I understand that the people who love this game and have played it for a long time don't want to see it change even the slightest bit, but it's this mentality that will keep Wurm Online stagnant.

The idea of changes, whether aesthetic or mechanical can be scary, but I don't think it's a reason to automatically poo-poo suggestions, nor do I think it's logical to speculate the worst.

I believe that many changes can be implemented without catastrophe.

To Review So Far:

I would like to see them simplify and clarify the tasks in the tutorial.

I'd also like to see the starting areas get face-lifts.

I think those two suggestions will help with new player retention, and I think new player retention is extremely important in expanding Wurm's playerbase.

Edited August 29, 2012 by SirRick

[BobMcKnob 46]

Two people quit tonight

This isn't the place for this. If you have a problem, take to PM. Enki or Oracle if you have to.

[Victor 27]

Actually, travel times are a problem, for the player who has limited time and for a community getting together. The start deeds should have a portal one can use to get to any other start deed. With carts and animals unable to go, this shouldn't make Wurm "smaller", but instead aid in getting where you want to go. Only a few players have the time to spend hours watching their character sail.

Also, around the starter deeds, the spawns need to be adjusted. Having spider, troll, bear and scorpion lairs so close by are very frustrating to a new person trying to learn the game. NOTHING worse than a 20 fighting should spawn anywhere near the start deeds, ever. If you have to, move the start deeds to islands.

[Xiled 11]

As a player that can handle the harder mobs, I understand the want to have more excitement. But, I do remember starting out and the server was new, not a lot of deeds, and plenty of wildlife. It was a challenge just to get a deed planted at first. Had a couple of guys running around running off the mobs so we could plant, but we died several times in the process and had to make the 20-30 minute hike back, while trying not to die. Then having to deal with the anacondas afterwards.

So while I personally would enjoy more of a challenge, maybe it should be the form of more rare spawns?

[Werwolf 6]

You know what? Never mind. I'm done talking, time to start doing.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Werwolf

[Drakemoore 2]

I've been playing on epic mainly since joining about two months ago. I will say that I've played just about every mmo out there, from free to subscription, all over the world. I even play mmos using shoddy English translations for them.

I've also worked in other MMO projects before as a developer. I will tell you right now that from a business stand point your task is to improve subscription duration and improve your brand. But never lose sight that if you don't please your customers, and improve their product they will very unlikely try to get their friends into the game and you will never have substantial growth rates. So while you have to keep the business outlook in front, always keep the customer and what the product is doing for 'them' right beside it. Otherwise you will very likely fail as a business.

If I had to name the things that I feel would improve the game:

• More mineral types and alloys, let it actually affect equipment stats. But let it give pros / cons. Not simply bonuses.
  
• Let existing wood types also be more interesting, most have no real use.
  
• Make all permission management identical to houses so that you have nothing that includes your whole friend list. But that you can selectively add who you want to it.
  
• Keep keys for the purpose of 'removing / changing' locks but add permission management to everything involving locks. While it may not be quite logical, nor is it logical for deeds to have full control over doors either. But I feel it's detrimental that you cannot have 'Gates' and other things be shared unless you spend a lot of silver and make a deed. It's certainly put a damper on several communities I've tried to form because it becomes such a chore having to share keys and nothing else really compares to 'gates'.
  
• A big one; Let people build underground structures, let them also be able to build mines deeper instead of the current global water level which is just silly. Maybe even let them affect water levels in some fashion. I've seen a lot of people wanting to build underground settlements only to be disappointed over wurm's primitive cavern system.
  
• Speaking of the rock system, we need some way to be able to shape caverns and rock formations.
  
• More breeding animal types, I myself and some other villagers were highly disappointed to find out that only a few animal types could be bred, things like bison cannot. Not to mention there isn't really that large of a variety of animals either, even though models for wildlife would be easy / very cheap to come by in the game asset market today.
  
• Add seasonal wildlife and terrain changes. Sure we have snow that appears in winter, but nothing else really happens aside from a few of the rare plants that you can harvest. Make it so that small ponds freeze over, let people harvest ice and make things out of it, and sure it will melt eventually.
  
• More construction types, things like colossus statues are nice long term projects but there really aren't many of them. We need larger varieties of things that we can build, and if possible we need the ability to customize them like houses.
  
• More 'vehicle' types and possibly even the ability to customize them a bit. It'd be nice if some day we could actually make a custom boat out of a hull instead of prefabs. E.g. maybe I want a cargo hold in my boat, and perhaps instead of sails I'll have them all be oars. But wait maybe you don't move as fast with Oars if you don't have more players in your boat for so ever many oar implementations. Could still have the same, or a variety of boat hulls like we have now but it'd be great to be able to customize them, that goes for Carts too.
  
• It'd be nice if players could actually swim vertically instead of simply walking across water.
  
• I don't really see any problems with the amount of travel people currently have to do but I can see the need for faster forms of travel. Maybe some animal types that can fly? Could balance it in that there can only be a small amount of weight the mounts can carry including yourself so players could only carry a very tiny amount.
  
• Permissions again here. I'd like to be able to have a friend list and people to talk to without sharing some permissions with my entire friend list.
  

[Wiro 370]

Yes flying mounts is definitely what Wurm needs. How about a cash shop and fashion items next?

Not. I love your other suggestions though. For permissions I wish it all worked somewhat like mine doors. Kingdom, everyone, alliance, village, all your friends, or simply specific names. I hate how writs have huge lists of names, it's impractical.

[Drakemoore 2]

Well, you could have both. Let players create subgroups in their friendliest. Like 'My guests' and then select My guests in your door permissions and soon. It's definitely a underused / underdeveloped feature.

[atazs 965]

Two people quit tonight thanks to Boston. ban Boston = better player retention. But oh, as usual, Boston does what he wants and gets away with it, because he spends lots of money on the game.

I know this isn't politically correct, and I'm sure will be moderated, but I don't care. If even one person sees this it was worth it. I tried going through the proper channels, tried PM'ing people, tried /support.... I bet he's still there, griefing that girl's deed. Fixing to lose another longtime player in myself. I refuse to sit around and watch any longer while the few elite that spend a ton of money on the game get to do what they want. I tried protesting with my voice, but it has gone unheard so I will protest with my wallet on my four accounts and three deeds. So, so angry.

[joedobo 1,187]

Some of that providing depth by putting a static world in motion does not actually give a player any more to "do". But the last part, which Busted and Joedobo were talking about, has a direct affect on players. We used to joke about an animal alliance on Golden Valley. Spiders and Lava Fiends and Bears cooperating in their common quest to eat as many players as possible. But what if it were true? Not for the dumb animals, but what if Goblins worked to control an area for themselves, if Trolls cooperated to defend themselves from powerful player hunters, if Lava Fiends made lairs in the depths and tried to take over extensive player mine networks with their minions?

I would find that providing more to do, and more reason to cooperate with other players, adding to Wurm without changing the nature of it. I think this is possible, and if it should happen, would be a great enhancement to the game.

- Teggs

Why is it that people here think the only way to challenge PvE is to threaten deeds? (I'm coming to this conclusion from this quote because goblins might have to push back player deeds to control and expand their influence). (imo) All that will be achieved is providing challenge to some player at the expense of alienating another group. This is especially annoying to me because those combat challenges can be placed away from player deeds.

I ask all this simple question.

Whats the difference between going to Dev created mob zones, a dev funded deed with buildings and lots of stuff to kill, versus having mobs threaten deeds? In both cases a combat person is presented with challenges, but in the deed attack scenario those who aren't interested in such things are forced to do play in a way they don't like. Why not create a game that caters to both groups?

This may sound insulting but are some player so simple mined and unmotivated that they have to be spoon feed challenge?

How about an event where the players are asked to come and maintain an area that is being attack by mobs?

[Keldun 335]

The problem with raiding creatures is the same as raiding players:

You log off, someone stumbles on your deed, you log in and the enemy is gone, but so is your deed.

There is no challenge whatsoever, you just lost everything and there is nothing you could do.

[Busted 289]

I ask all this simple question.

Whats the difference between going to Dev created mob zones, a dev funded deed with buildings and lots of stuff to kill, versus having mobs threaten deeds?

You've got a much bigger vested interest in your own holdings and those of your villager buddies than than a staged arena and as such will want to log in and help preserve it.

Nobody cares about an arena, whether it offers combat or not. It's not about the fighting, it's about giving people a reason to log in and fight. Protecting what's yours from being damaged/wrecked by hostiles is attractive to people and I promise you if it's balanced properly it will not only draw new people but it will keep them a lot, lot longer.

Sorry if you can't see that or just don;t want to have to deal with a potential home invasion but we're talking about what's good for the game (as in adding and keeping new people) and not what's good for the individual.

[joedobo 1,187]

Sorry if you can't see that or just don;t want to have to deal with a potential home invasion but we're talking about what's good for the game (as in adding and keeping new people) and not what's good for the individual.

I guess if you think sacrificing a certain group of players to realign the game to that model good idea, so be it. I think your forgetting that players can choose to play another game. Threatening to destroy what players worked hard to create isn't going to go like you think. You may promise about an outcome, but based on my experience with Wurm and UO, it won't go well.

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

You've got a much bigger vested interest in your own holdings and those of your villager buddies than than a staged arena and as such will want to log in and help preserve it.

Nobody cares about an arena, whether it offers combat or not. It's not about the fighting, it's about giving people a reason to log in and fight. Protecting what's yours from being damaged/wrecked by hostiles is attractive to people and I promise you if it's balanced properly it will not only draw new people but it will keep them a lot, lot longer.

Sorry if you can't see that or just don;t want to have to deal with a potential home invasion but we're talking about what's good for the game (as in adding and keeping new people) and not what's good for the individual.

Purely on PvE servers (not chaos/epic), I would prefer if a player owned homestead could only be "raided" by mobs if the mayor or at least one villager is on the premises. The reason why is -- it can still be an unexpected catastrophe but you are then participating in the event and reacting to it. You might repel the invasion, or hide inside a stone house and wait for them to go away, or log off in a panic, or /cry on alliance chat or kchat for someone to come and help you, you might be terrified and upset and have a lot to lose, but there is some adrenaline because you are participating in an emotionally triggering event. That's different from logging in after a three day vacation and coming back to find someone killed your pet Champion Wolf and all your horses are gone and there is zippity-do-dah you can do about it other than feel helpless.Otherwise we might as well have giant meteors fall on people's houses too.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Brash_Endeavors

[Busted 289]

I guess if you think sacrificing a certain group of players to realign the game to that model good idea, so be it. I think your forgetting that players can choose to play another game. Threatening to destroy what players worked hard to create isn't going to go like you think. You may promise about an outcome, but based on my experience with Wurm and UO, it won't go well.

Well in this scenario it's the players choice whether they adapt or move on. Sucks if you happen to be in that stubborn group who refuse to adapt but when weighed up by the gains it makes financial sense for Wurm to take the route most likely to attract and retain new players. People seem to forget that this is a business, not a hobby project done for laughs.

Obviously there's always going to be two sides to this argument and reconciliation is all but impossible when you've got two opposite visions of how things should be so maybe if this theoretical change went ahead, it would be on a new map where the hardcore would go to play and survive.

[joedobo 1,187]

I guess buying guards would still be an option. Players that don't want to participate in that nonsense could get 5 or so deed guards.

[Busted 289]

Purely on PvE servers (not chaos/epic), I would prefer if a player owned homestead could only be "raided" by mobs if the mayor or at least one villager is on the premises. The reason why is -- it can still be an unexpected catastrophe but you are then participating in the event and reacting to it. You might repel the invasion, or hide inside a stone house and wait for them to go away, or log off in a panic, or /cry on alliance chat or kchat for someone to come and help you, you might be terrified and upset and have a lot to lose, but there is some adrenaline because you are participating in an emotionally triggering event. That's different from logging in after a three day vacation and coming back to find someone killed your pet Champion Wolf and all your horses are gone and there is zippity-do-dah you can do about it other than feel helpless.Otherwise we might as well have giant meteors fall on people's houses too.

Obviously thing's would need to be worked out in detail and no, nobody wants to log off for a couple of days and then find their village totalled - not suggesting it would be that extreme. Broken fences, smashed down building walls here and there, chickens eaten and maybe lose some cattle - there has to be limits otherwise it's would be soul crushingly unfair on that particular player. But it shouldn't be minimal either. The game plays best when cooperating with others. It's the Hermits I imagine are the ones who object most to ideas like this because the burden of maintaining the village is on them and not other people. Maybe the hermits should cut back on their holdings or group up with others for mutual protection? Wurm is a social game, after all. Of course, nothing is stopping hermits from playing, they just shouldn't be exempt from the goings on in the world because they chose to live along by themselves IMO.

[joedobo 1,187]

when weighed up by the gains it makes financial sense for Wurm to take the route most likely to attract and retain new players. People seem to forget that this is a business, not a hobby project done for laughs.

Just want to point out that this is your opinion which your trying pass over as fact. Here is a neet fact for you...very few, if any, games allow NPC AI mob to raid player housing. This is especially try with non PvP type game.

[Brash_Endeavors 4,735]

I am not sure what hermits have to do with the topic at hand, other than you make clear you disapprove of such. I'm a hermit but I don't think someone who has a village with three or four villagers is really in any different position here. The majority of time, there is going to be no one on any particular deed. The majority of time, these raids would have no interaction with the players. Either you are a helpless victim to something you never had any chance to react to, or you are a live participant to an event that -- for good or for bad -- causes a sense of urgency and reaction. Whether there is only one of you, or an alliance with 50 people, you are actually interacting somehow. Which as far as I can tell is the only point to having such a "feature". There is no adrenaline to coming back and finding someone trashed your place while you were gone, and you have perhaps lost things not possible to replace. It really doesn't matter if 10 people live there, or just one. There is no fear, no excitement, no sense of something happening. At this stage we might as well allow also people to lockpick your stuff and bash your fences while you are gone, and have everything be PvP again, and bring back also the mine tunneling mobs as well. Passive Helpless Victim does not equal Excitement. This is why I think such raids -- if we have them at all -- should not be on unattended deeds. No one is running around in a panic saying whatdoido, whatdoido ...

It's not something you will still remember three years later and tell stories about, if it is just some unseen thing that trashed your stuff while you were on vacation.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Brash_Endeavors

[Busted 289]

Just want to point out that this is your opinion which your trying pass over as fact. Here is a neet fact for you...very few, if any, games allow NPC AI mob to raid player housing. This is especially try with non PvP type game.

Sure, it's my opinion, but it's also a sensible conclusion to draw. Rolf wants to make money to pay his bills, go on holiday etc. More interesting content = more players = more money. Nobody invests this amount of time and effort into a hobby unless they have a day job to pay the bills.

I'm pretty sure this is Rolfs day job.

As for the other point, Wurm isn't like most other MMO games. It's not aimed at the mainstream market, which makes it a niche game and niche games don't have to play by the same rules as the mainstream. Wurm isn't trying to be mainstream, so it's players shouldn't expect a mainstream experience from it.

This frees Rolf to follow his vision, confused though it may be at times. Whatever that end vision is, it has a lot more paying customers than right now and to get that he needs to make the game appealing to more people without dumbing the game down or pandering to the timid.