Why isn't this place bigger and more well-known?

[paul4763]

Don't take the title of this thread any other way, it's a compliment. I've only been registered for about 3 or 4 days and already I've found what I've been searching for for years - a dedicated website to these strategy type games that I love. I can't understand why there aren't more active members. I'll be honest, I'm not sure exactly how many there are, but however many there are, there should be more.

Well done on a brilliant effort to bring this popular and beloved board game to the modern era (I've noticed that nowhere on Major Command the R-word isn't said anywhere, that copyright or something?) Also, when did this project begin as I noticed the BETA at the top of the page.

 

[ORBOTRON]

You found the answer to your question near the end of your statement, haha. The site is, as you noticed, in Beta testing, and there is a limit of 1000 active users at the moment. There are a LOT of people being turned away from joining the site daily. Stick around and you'll see the bugs being worked out, features being implemented and eventually, the public release of MC 1.0, a historic moment we are all eagerly awaiting!

 

[Badorties]

Yes, what Orbo said. there are nearly 5k people on the waiting list. http://www.majorcommand.com/MailingListSignup.php

 

[paul4763]

Is the public release date in site? Or is it like when people say "We're getting married soon!" and you wait and wait and wait for the day when you can get drunk at your brothers wedding, but sadly, that day never comes. I've been waiting 3 years, still waiting...

 

[coolname]

Yes, what Orbo said. there are nearly 5k people on the waiting list. http://www.majorcommand.com/MailingListSignup.php

Wow, that is awesome, 5000 in the queue (well worth the wait I might add).

Is the public release date in site? Or is it like when people say "We're getting married soon!" and you wait and wait and wait for the day when you can get drunk at your brothers wedding, but sadly, that day never comes. I've been waiting 3 years, still waiting...

Funny you use the upcoming wedding analogy. Check out the domain for this overview that samular made for a previous tournament http://samandsarahgetmarried.info/chaosprelim.html

 

[Cardinalsrule]

its gonna be awesome the day that 5k new people join, SO many new players to play against. Bado, do you have any plans of things to ask the current players? Maybe try to get everybody to start or join one game so that all the games have an 'experienced' player to monitor and/or help the newbies with questions?

I'd hate to be an admin that day.... trying to get all the new peeps accounts put in the right place, making people strategist class, etc. Sounds like DAYS of work.

 

[Tree-of-Souls]

I'd hate to be an admin that day.... trying to get all the new peeps accounts put in the right place, making people strategist class, etc. Sounds like DAYS of work.

I think the idea is that people will be paying for Strategist... gotta make money!

 

[Cardinalsrule]

yes, I understand that, tree; but someone has to do the admin work when the people pay, which was my point.....

 

[Badorties]

Once we are out of beta I think its best to gradual increase the active cap, like 500 people a week until we have a handle on things. We also get about 100 users a day who try to sign up but don't get in, per day.

There are a few things that can be done to on board new users, having there be plenty of open games from vets is a good idea.

 

[Tree-of-Souls]

yes, I understand that, tree; but someone has to do the admin work when the people pay, which was my point.....

It'd be an automated system... silly not to. I'm just guessing, but it's common sense.

Once we are out of beta I think its best to gradual increase the active cap, like 500 people a week until we have a handle on things. We also get about 100 users a day who try to sign up but don't get in, per day.

There are a few things that can be done to on board new users, having there be plenty of open games from vets is a good idea.

That does sound like the best option. Especially the weekly cap.

 

[mapguy]

I think that new players should should be pitted against each other for their first 6 games or so. This way they get to learn how to navigate around a bit before being thrown into the pit of lions. I believe that this would serve well in many ways. It will help to retain more new players, as they will not likely be destroyed so much by better players in the beginning. A lot of new players are so demolished their first few games that they give up and quit. This would also help to tamp down the activities of Newbie Farmers. Also, it would weed out the large amount of newb AWOLers that sign up and join a bunch of games and then for one reason or another, never return to take their turns. Let the newbs that bother to stick around gain those easy wins. That will help to boost their confidence, and entice them to hang around.

 

[Shepherd]

I agree, mapguy. Part of what's plaguing new recruits is that, with the membership cap, newbs join in very small batches so they have no coice but to play vets. As a result they jump into games with difficult settings (Massive map, unlimited/anywhere reinforcements, escalating cards) which take some getting used to and get clobbered by somebody who knows the system. Same with team games - you play dubs or trips with a bunch of new players, somebody is going to be screwed quickyl when their partner AWOLs.

In addition to limited WHO a new recruit can play, I'd also like to see some limits on WHAT they can play. I don't think it's so much about giving them some easy wins (in a 6p newb game five will still have to lose!) but about putting them in games in which they can learn the system and be somewhat competitive.

 

[mapguy]

In addition to limited WHO a new recruit can play, I'd also like to see some limits on WHAT they can play. I don't think it's so much about giving them some easy wins (in a 6p newb game five will still have to lose!)

Well not really. only 2-4 will loose as 1-3 will AWOL. I do not see any good reason to limit their game type, or map. Just let everyone delve into the game as they see fit.

 

[paul4763]

Since I've been here I've played a handful of games. I'm currently in a very interesting doubles match, but my partner has just decided to go AWOL, now I'm screwed. Same with a few other maps, people just go AWOL and it ruins the game. I know there isn't a fix for this, but it definitely makes the games more frustrating.

 

[Badorties]

some good ideas here. one idea that has been tossed around is to have a persistant noob game type only available to people below a certain rank. say classic evolved, 6 players escalated, one reinforcement. once this game, which is labeled as a New Players game is filled, then another game is automatically created with the same settings.

Also, paul, that is irratating for sure. the general advice is to pick your doubles partner wisely, but it may be beneficial to limit team games to strategist and higher, thus ensuring more active players.

 

[coolname]

some good ideas here. one idea that has been tossed around is to have a persistant noob game type only available to people below a certain rank. say classic evolved, 6 players escalated, one reinforcement. once this game, which is labeled as a New Players game is filled, then another game is automatically created with the same settings.

I think the automatic creation of noob-games is very good. Then there will always be games available, newbies will be nudged to game-type that will teach them the ropes (I would use escalite though, not escalate)

 

[Badorties]

Escalate is the same as the original Risk rules.

 

[coolname]

Escalate is the same as the original Risk rules.

Really? The (Dutch) version of the Risk board game I used to play gave you 4 troops for 3 artillery-cards, 6 for 3 infantry-cards, 8 for 3 cavalry and 10 for 1 artillery, 1 infantry and 1 cavalry-card.

How do you keep track of the number of troops for a set in the board game? Was there a special counter?

 

[Jewmowrestler]

i think there also needs to be an tutorial/intro with regard to diplomatic relations. to me, a huge part of the game is working with other people and the backstabbing involved

 

[coolname]

i think there also needs to be an tutorial/intro with regard to diplomatic relations. to me, a huge part of the game is working with other people and the backstabbing involved

I know one player who totally disagrees with you, who is completely against treachery (it is mapguy, see this thread: http://www.majorcommand.com/forums/threads/2073-Tweak-to-diplo-breach-warning?p=22493#post22493). I think it is interesting to see how different players value different aspects of the game.

What information on diplomacy are you currently missing?