CorvusCorvax, on 09 June 2018 - 02:01 PM, said:
Folks, try to follow along here.
I will make up numbers, to simulate what the claim I'm making here is. First off, I will make the assumption that if you provide a 1.4, not all the players who left will come back. They will have moved on to other things, and just never bother to check back. In fact, I am guessing that the majority of those who have permanently left will not be back. (For the sake of discussion, those are the folks who left and never check back.) But, for the sake of argument, I will suggest that 70% of them return. That 70% will never set foot in the 2.x mode. (again, to make matters simple). Also, assume that some amount of the current 2.x folks decide they aren't going to play 2.x ever again. From discussions in the forums, I'm going to say 15% (which I don't believe is even close, the real number is lower.) Then there are going to be the folks who will play both modes. (I'm one of those.) That is the only population where if you dilute one mode, you concentrate the other. They will play the same amount, but split their time. The other populations are already set.
But here's the deal - even if you drag back 70% of the original players (and I doubt that would be possible) and transfer 15% of the current players permanently, then 10% of the other players go both ways, you still don't have 100% of the original 1.9 population (original population diluted) and you've reduced the population of the new game. Both populations diluted. Yes, you have more total players, but maintaining two modes costs more money than maintaining one mode. So, for that cost, what is the monetary return? Free game population is an interesting stat, but it doesn't keep the lights on. Without the cash flow stats, there is really nothing to discuss, because a business decision cannot be made without it. Even my completely rosy picture of how many of the 1.x crew you could get back doesn't bring that entire population back, and you will have few human players, which will lead to less play (if we are to believe the folks here who prefer human opponents.)
Hi Corvus
I do understand what you are saying at least in essence. However there are a few additional factors here that come into play.
First, a 1.9 mode does not have to be housed on an additional server to run with a 2.0. As I stated before the box may just need to be upgraded slightly.
Second, Bear in mind that the addition I am describing is a global change. Not just NA. The Russian servers had a substantially higher following in 1.9. Same for the EU server.
Third, The player base for 1.9 appeared to be generally older and with a fair amount more of disposable income. The game format of putting in the time and grinding up the ladder was understood and appealed to the player base there. 2.0 appeals to a more 'jump in and be able to play right away' crowd that seems to be younger. (Granted these are just my impressions....but I don't think I am wrong here.). This is supported by the appeal of the versions to two different player mindset types (as per the surveys and comments).
Fourth, My intention here (as previously stated) was to provide an additional level for newer players to advance to but to do it with 2.0 as the initial level. Thus gaining the aircraft, some of the needed experience, and tactics so they don't get seal-clubbed when they advance to 1.9 mode. Also note that the advancement to 1.9 mode is not required. If 2.0 is the players preference then they would be able to stay and enjoy that version of the game. The same would apply for those that prefer to stay on the 1.9 version or those that would like to float between the two.
Fifth, Since 2.0 DOES appeal to a particular type of player it therefore still makes it a marketable addition as well as an excellent entry path to the game. The goal is to retain them instead of just creating an endless churn of 'in for a while then gone to the next thing'. Indications are that 2.0 has not shown much in the way of retention beyond 1.9. It seems to get its numbers from a general churn of players.
Sixth, With two modes WG has an opportunity to embrace both modes and their respective player bases. I have suggested here before that contests & tournaments could be created pitting the two player groups against each other in a (more or less) friendly competition. Each respective player group would take turns playing in the others format (2.0 & 1.9) on an alternating basis for each battle. WG could create an open forum where a (little bit) of smack-talk back and forth could encourage the competition.
Initial Summation, Whereas the point Corvus is making is correct and valid, it is effectively based on a static test case model and an assumption of base numbers that do not allow for the dynamics I am including here or the participation and growth potential. There are additional points I have but this will do now for an overall view.
Focke, Corvus, Ace, trikke, Thankyou for your research, efforts, and contributions on this and Thankyou to everyone else contributing to try to finally bring this idea to reality for all those concerned.
Edited by soshootmenow, 09 June 2018 - 05:35 PM.
5
