• 23 posts
  • Page 1 of 2
4myGod wrote:
It seems we get a great deal of new members who come and go. They were obviously interested in risk, but they weren't captivated enough by the site to stay. I feel if they could only play a game they would see how great it is and be hooked. The problem is they usually join a game, if that and then never even come back to play their first turn.

What can we do to get members into it? I need ideas, because now the advertising is starting to pick up quite a bit of new members, but they bounce off of the site, with the exception of a few who make it through that first leap.

I have a few ideas, please tell me what you think as well as post your own ideas:

- Single Player Games This would allow new players to come and test out the game on their own right away, without having to wait for games to start or fill up. It would take a lot of work to create a bot to play the game against, but I think it's possible, as well, if I did create the bot, then when people get kicked from games for missing too many turns we can have their color replaced with the bot, instead of a sea of neutrals when new players all abandon 8 player games.

- Youtube video A nice action filled youtube video on the front page. This was originally the plan, my computer was just too slow to make it. However a video to build enthusiasm for the game, showing how the in game action works, kind of a mini how-to as well as a showing them what the game is about. This youtube video would be put on the home page. You can see where we have the image of the world map, that would be the background for the youtube video.

- New Site Graphics Perhaps more pictures and action would get people into the game feel of it. Instead of all this black white gray red we get some soldier images and maybe change the entire graphics to a more colorful and engaging design. I could hire a professional to make the next graphics. We can change all of the game options into images. So instead of saying fog of war, we can just have an image for it. Make it more like a game instead of a bunch of text and lines.
thaithai wrote:
i will try to join game with new member.help 4mygod, play with member ,don't let they wait to long.
lionheart wrote:
To be honest i think your always going to get that 4my, its the same on conquer. Lots of people are looking for immediate satisfaction, 24hr risk takes a very patient type of person and no matter how good the website is there will always be those people that leave before they get into it.

Having said that your idea about bots sounds pretty sweet
4myGod wrote:
Perhaps bots would allow them to have that instant satisfaction while also getting them into the game so they can play the 24hr turn games.

lionheart wrote:
yeah I definitely agree the bots could work well for the site and could reduce the leavers

Its just there are a lot of people that don't have the patience to play a purely strategy based game like risk, especially over 24 hr turns. They are players that go for games like the all so popular call of duty, your target market is a niche market so there will always be people poking there heads in realising they cant blow the heads off of 20 people in a few minutes so they leave.

luckily internet provides such a large customer base that you only need a few to stick around
4myGod wrote:
Yeah, that's true, but I would think all of the people who came here actually searched to play risk. I think in the future I will allow free speed games, to get speed games popular.

As well single player gives them something to do while they wait, for those people like you said who want more than a once a day game.

Call of Duty is fun too btw :P
lionheart wrote:
I might sound like an old fart when I am only 22 but cod is just who can press the trigger first, I like a game that makes you thinks.

At least thai thai will be happy with more speed games
4myGod wrote:
lol, though I can see your theory there, I think there can be more to it then pressing the trigger first. When I played it I started a team, and we had team scrimmages against other teams. 5v5 games or 7v7. We used voice chat, and it really matters how you move around the map in situations like that. You have to have plans, you have to work as a team. I was good at pressing the trigger first, but my gosh in team games we would get our butts handed to us. Technically real war is who presses the trigger first too, but you need to aim correctly and see the person in time. Sometimes they pop up in windows you wouldn't expect and they already know where you are and bam your dead. Or you have to send a guy out to get their sniper to try and shoot him, so you can see where their sniper is and have your sniper take him out. It's nuts. Good fun though. In public games though where everyone is trying to rack up kills, then yeah, it's all about grenades and shooting quickly.
lionheart wrote:
to be honest iv only played a couple of games where a mate just threw me into a on line game, obviously I sucked. If I got into it I would probably enjoy and find it tactical however I don't have the time, 5min risk turns during brakes from work and before and after sleep works well for me
WithAQuickness wrote:
I think all the ideas you posted are interesting but lionheart may be right that it requires a certain taste to play this type of game in the first place.
4myGod wrote:
Yeah lionheart, I understand.

WithAQuickness. He does have a point. It does require certain people. The way we advertise though only gets people on this site who searched to play risk online. So they wanted to play this game, like he said though, they probably expected instant satisfaction. Perhaps later when we have 2m-5m turn games that will help, as well as maybe single player games.

I think we can do better though, I just have to keep working and try to continue to make this better and better.
chris wrote:
Yeah. I'm with Lionheart on this one. You'll have a lot of people bouncing in and out. I think the single player games and such will help.

Not sure about redoing the graphics again though. If you keep adding more and more colors and pictures, eventually it'll be too much. I like it now, personally.



Well, of course I'm mad. It makes things a great deal more interesting.
lionheart wrote:
yeah, so basically the site is great, of course improvements are good but don't drastically change the site because of the "bouncers", you cant please everyone.

I want to see if you can make a decent bot, iv played a few single player games and the bots even on difficult settings never pose a challenge. If there good you can give them standings and they might overtake us all ;)
4myGod wrote:
lol, well a bot would be tough. I have a feeling most programmers would be lazy and code a bought that doesn't react. However I would want a bought that reacts. So if you start massing troops he will attack depending on things and all sorts of stuff. It will take a lot of work, and whoever the player before the bot is, the bot will be run on his turn, which might make a slow last load. I would probably have to do an ajax thing.

For example you have to have it run through and check which player is getting the most reinforcements, who has the most troops/territories currently, who has a set, is the set in range for the bot to attack. Does the bot almost have a set himself. All these different things and put priorities on them figuring out how far away and how many troops to attack. Then for some of it, you just can't calculate. For example who is playing matters. If rgen has a continent vs a new guy... A lot to plan out, I'd have to think of a good system. However i think that would pull in users who want instant games.

Yeah I suppose you guys are right though, I won't drastically change anything. I do want to add icons instead of all the word settings for the games.
lionheart wrote:
??? its a good job your doing the programming, il stick to the useless abilities like riddle solving