Salem

It seems to be an inevitable fate for every group I have been in, and probably every group I will ever be in.

group is going great at the beginning, in the case of EXP we were definitely one of the top 10 groups
we're steam rolling, got 7 active players who are on every day

X happens
everybody gets discouraged or disinterested in game because of Y or Z
people see that less and less people are logging in
snowball effect, they become less active due to people being less active creating a feed back loop
everyone stops playing

Its really shocking how strong and advanced our group was, only to be completely wiped out due to the smallest setbacks. We weren't noobs either, most were hermits that have been playing for 1-2 years, with the exception of 2 noobs.

In our case it seems like the reason people rage quit was because a couple of pay2win noobs started destroying a few easy to replace things off claim. Then our strongest player gets murdered by some non-noobs. I didn't give much of a fug about the offclaim things, we built them knowing that someone would probably destroy them anyway. They weren't worth the money needed to expand the claim over them.

The worst part about this is the fact that EXP is a temp server that is destined to end, and everything would have destroyed and everyone would have died anyway. The server was suppose to be for fun, not to rage quit after the first unpleasant thing that happens.

I think there is a great irony about this permadeath game... The fact that people can be permanently killed in the game draws people in, and then they simply quit when it happens to them. Dying is part of the game, not the end of the world.

It's the end of your pilgrims world.

You can always hermit witch and try to end the server

seems to me the games design is for folks to start off strong in expeditions, and when 90% inevitably get killed in some manner they rage quit like always, but this time they rage quit back to providence instead of from the game. then a few months later the next expedition comes out, rinse repeat. that is why providence is the permanent server where it is difficult to be a bad guy and the expeditions are intended to be fast paced so that a new one is always just around the corner.

your friends probably have nothing to speak of on providence, thus the other half of the scale is not there for them. or maybe they just need to "go back to wow maaaan".

Darwoth wrote:seems to me the games design is for folks to start off strong in expeditions, and when 90% inevitably get killed in some manner they rage quit like always, but this time they rage quit back to providence instead of from the game. then a few months later the next expedition comes out, rinse repeat. that is why providence is the permanent server where it is difficult to be a bad guy and the expeditions are intended to be fast paced so that a new one is always just around the corner.

your friends probably have nothing to speak of on providence, thus the other half of the scale is not there for them. or maybe they just need to "go back to wow maaaan".

I know this section of the forum is not meant for serious discussion, but since this thread was posted here and there is a small possibility that at least a few other people choose to reply in a serious manner, I'll make a serious post here.

The term "ragequit" is accurate at times but in most cases it is simply a term used to ridicule. The departures described by the thread starter do not necessarily point out that there is any actual rage involved; the only possible rage hinted is the one by the thread starter himself when he uses the term "p2w noobs", because it hints about a possibility of rage towards those who both are "noobs" and pay to "win".

As for "World of Warcraft": that game is not known for having excellent PvP. Games that are known for having excellent PvP in 2015 are Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Defense of the Ancients 2 and League of Legends. Honorable mentions to Smite, Starcraft 2, Starcraft: Brood War and Super Smash Bros.

In common for the three first examples of excellent PvP is that they have decent matchmaking, focus heavily on balance and on having a lucrative E-Sport section. For a PvP game to grow large, the people losing need to feel that they lost in a "fair manner". Most people do not feel that they lost in a "fair manner" when the predominant reason for why they lost is that the other party used outside means to buy an advantage or when a bug caused them to lose. It is also important, for the sake of the growth, that the person losing in PvP does not only lose but also has some wins so that the person doesn't feel the PvP is pointless. To solve the "losing too often" issue, there are matchmaking systems to pair up people with people in similar position.

As a sidenote, there is certainly a similar effect at the opposite side of the spectrum though: if people have a far too high win ratio as a consequence of being matched with people who are far below them, those winners in general will lose interest as well. Of course, there are people who can find sufficient enjoyment from not the PvP win itself, but from ridiculing the people over whom they won.

Salem made a good choice in the sense that it allows increased growth of population, by creating two game modes, one that is heavily PvE focused and another one that is heavily PvP focused. How popular the PvP focused one becomes on the merits of its actual PvP, follow same principles as the PvP in LoL, CS:GO and DotA 2.

Sad story bro.

andinuad2 wrote:

Darwoth wrote:seems to me the games design is for folks to start off strong in expeditions, and when 90% inevitably get killed in some manner they rage quit like always, but this time they rage quit back to providence instead of from the game. then a few months later the next expedition comes out, rinse repeat. that is why providence is the permanent server where it is difficult to be a bad guy and the expeditions are intended to be fast paced so that a new one is always just around the corner.

your friends probably have nothing to speak of on providence, thus the other half of the scale is not there for them. or maybe they just need to "go back to wow maaaan".

I know this section of the forum is not meant for serious discussion, but since this thread was posted here and there is a small possibility that at least a few other people choose to reply in a serious manner, I'll make a serious post here.

The term "ragequit" is accurate at times but in most cases it is simply a term used to ridicule. The departures described by the thread starter do not necessarily point out that there is any actual rage involved; the only possible rage hinted is the one by the thread starter himself when he uses the term "p2w noobs", because it hints about a possibility of rage towards those who both are "noobs" and pay to "win".

As for "World of Warcraft": that game is not known for having excellent PvP. Games that are known for having excellent PvP in 2015 are Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, Defense of the Ancients 2 and League of Legends. Honorable mentions to Smite, Starcraft 2, Starcraft: Brood War and Super Smash Bros.

In common for the three first examples of excellent PvP is that they have decent matchmaking, focus heavily on balance and on having a lucrative E-Sport section. For a PvP game to grow large, the people losing need to feel that they lost in a "fair manner". Most people do not feel that they lost in a "fair manner" when the predominant reason for why they lost is that the other party used outside means to buy an advantage or when a bug caused them to lose. It is also important, for the sake of the growth, that the person losing in PvP does not only lose but also has some wins so that the person doesn't feel the PvP is pointless. To solve the "losing too often" issue, there are matchmaking systems to pair up people with people in similar position.

As a sidenote, there is certainly a similar effect at the opposite side of the spectrum though: if people have a far too high win ratio as a consequence of being matched with people who are far below them, those winners in general will lose interest as well. Of course, there are people who can find sufficient enjoyment from not the PvP win itself, but from ridiculing the people over whom they won.

Salem made a good choice in the sense that it allows increased growth of population, by creating two game modes, one that is heavily PvE focused and another one that is heavily PvP focused. How popular the PvP focused one becomes on the merits of its actual PvP, follow same principles as the PvP in LoL, CS:GO and DotA 2.

This game is 100% not for you. You also have massive delusions on what pvp is.

Back to World of Warcraft with you

Dallane wrote:
This game is 100% not for you. You also have massive delusions on what pvp is.

PvP stands for "Player versus Player" which is a form of competition in which a player directly competes against another player. A common implementation of PvP is direct physical combat between two players, but it can also be economical combat and other forms.

You are welcome to point out those alleged massive delusions.

As for "this game is 100% not for you": you mean "Either I am trolling you or I am guessing that you posses certain attributes that you didn't directly state but that I am inferring from what you've posted and will therefore use exaggerations such as "100%" because I find it amusing."

andinuad2 wrote:

Dallane wrote:
This game is 100% not for you. You also have massive delusions on what pvp is.

PvP stands for "Player versus Player" which is a form of competition in which a player directly competes against another player. A common implementation of PvP is direct physical combat between two players, but it can also be economical combat and other forms.

You are welcome to point out those alleged massive delusions.

As for "this game is 100% not for you": you mean "Either I am trolling you or I am guessing that you posses certain attributes that you didn't directly state but that I am inferring from what you've posted and will therefore use exaggerations such as "100%" because I find it amusing."

You clearly need to have a themepark type game to meet your pvp needs. There are many great ones on the market currently. I'm sorry that you don't see what happened as fair but the other players were more competitive and made a stronger character. You could of done the same but chose not to.