Where did everyone go?

[greekguy]

i just don't get it. back in Term 2, polls were getting close to 30 votes easily and discussions were at least 2 pages long. In Term 3, polls were pulling around 20 votes. Now in this Term i noticed not a single poll has gotten 20 votes. I have a poll up right now with 1 day left, and it only has 7 votes. how has participation dropped so much? i know there been discussion about this already, but i really would like to come back next DG. but what fun would it be if there are only about 20 people who are playing seriously. to get people to come back, we all need to make a serious effort to help keep people involved and informed about the going-on's of the game.

 

[GenMarshall]

My guess is that this game has gone for nearly three years now and some of the oldies have became bored with the game and left. Some are still in school or getting their nose to the grind stone for exams for High School. Another guess is the difficulty level is set to high and scared off potential newbies to the game.

 

[Double Stack]

Another guess is the difficulty level is set to high and scared off potential newbies to the game.

I disagree. We still getting people signing up as citzens. Just that most don't post. Even I don't play higher than Regent. Playing Emperor in Demogame is a lot funner than by myself when I tried.

I think the fact that the game seems won, even if we haven't reach cultral victory, we defintely can reach a few other victory in a Turnchat or two. That what makes Cultural victory a grind. Conquest can be done in 10 turns or so. Domination, 2 or 3 turns. Just got to capture a city. Diplomatic victory is won once we build the UN, Space Race is when we get all the techs.

So what the point playing DG6 when someone can get started on DG7?

DG6 is losing interest because we just passing time for culture per turn rather than trying to figure out how to win. WE WON! Soon(TM)...

 

[Furiey]

Just busy at the moment...

 

[zyxy]

If you look back at the previous DG's, then this is what always happens. The game is basically won, and people lose interest. I don't really think that the problem is that the active participants are not providing enough information or something like that, the problem lies with the inactive people themselves. I'll bet they return when DG7 starts. In short: ditto DoubleStack.

Getting new people to become active is something entirely different, and I haven't got a clue how to do this. I only started a few months ago, and I can remember how difficult that first post was. The anxiety about whether you'll be accepted in the group, and about posting your views, possibly opposing the views of established citizens can be quite a hurdle. The only thing I can say about this is: we all started like this (presumably), and yes, you will be accepted, and your views are valued, no matter how dumb you might think they are. And you don't need to be comfortable with emperor level to join. Many of the active people here are not.

PS: I could imagine that threads like this are not really helpful in encouraging people to join....

 

[Ranger99]

its not as interesting as it was in the begining when we had somev ery nice wars, and some actual challenges, but now that we are basically the rulers of the world it not as fun anymore, all the strategic, and tactical decsions have been replaced by moving the most forces that we can to the traget area.

it was better with limited forces and a weak navy, so that we had to figure out both a tactical AND a strategic way to move our military to different parts of the world.

 

[greekguy]

Another guess is the difficulty level is set to high and scared off potential newbies to the game.

the problem with the difficulty level is that some people get bored and want to play a higher difficulty, while some people won't even sign up unless the diff. level is lowered. that i don't get though. this game is emperor and i'm a regent player when i play solo. but when you play as a group, difficulty level shouldn't be as important. since everyone has their own civ skills, you can contribute no matter what level you play normally.

I only started a few months ago, and I can remember how difficult that first post was. The anxiety about whether you'll be accepted in the group, and about posting your views, possibly opposing the views of established citizens can be quite a hurdle.

i agree with you there. i was also nervous when i first started too. i would vote on polls and post a little here, a little there. but as i became more comfortable, i started to get more involved, express my opinions more, and now i'm in the government. people just need to realize that they will be accepted, because this a Democracy Game and everyone's opinion matters.

 

[Chieftess]

This tends to happen.

Early game - lots of participation.
Mid-to-late game - Little participation.
End game - Lots of participation and cheering.

 

[Kentharu]

well i've just come back(never been here long anyway)for the most part i had exams and school work is grinding as hell(parents breathing down my neck all the time about homework) but now that summers here(finally) i can relax.... but i agree with ranger... now we just point and click and the game is won basically... in the beginning yes it is challenging and fun but in mid game when we just have to keep the ball rolling(which isn't hard) maybe with a bigger map and more nations it would be better...

 

[GenMarshall]

Also, we must not neglect the other people whom left us. There are a few people who are dissatisfied with the rule set that they just packed their bags and left. Also, there are some who dont play Civ3 anymore and have gone to do other things in life.

 

[DaveShack]

My participation level varies based on how buried with work I am and what's going on with the family so it doesn't follow Chieftess's model exactly. I do see that pattern even in my solo games, the middle is always a little boring when doing nothing but worker instructions and MM for dozens or hundreds of turns.

 

[Strider]

Ruleset sucks, I don't like it, and I don't want to play under it.

I'll come back for the next one, but if the ruleset completely sucks again, I doubt I'll hang around long.

 

[Black_Hole]

I think most people left under their own will(i.e. not real life based) because of two major reasons:
1. This is the sixth demogame playing the same way... no variants, nothing else that would challenge us
2. We always get the game in the bag early(partly relating to #1) and then participation goes down a cliff...

If we want any substantial participation next game we need an enormous change, the difficulty change and change to conquests wasn't nearly enough...

Now the way I see that we can solve 1 & 2 is to follow DaveShack's idea mostly, but keep it to 2 teams... 1 reason that a multiplayer inter site game might not jump off is the time it takes to play a PBEM game... But if we only have 2 teams, each team can get a DP online at the same time and have them play 10 turns.

We need a drastic change, a seventh demogame of us playing a normal game against computers is gonna kill participation... We need to take advantage of the fact that we are playing with many people, playing a 1 person game isn't taking advantage of this fact.

 

[zyxy]

I think most people left under their own will(i.e. not real life based) because of two major reasons:
1. This is the sixth demogame playing the same way... no variants, nothing else that would challenge us
2. We always get the game in the bag early(partly relating to #1) and then participation goes down a cliff...

If we want any substantial participation next game we need an enormous change, the difficulty change and change to conquests wasn't nearly enough...

Now the way I see that we can solve 1 & 2 is to follow DaveShack's idea mostly, but keep it to 2 teams... 1 reason that a multiplayer inter site game might not jump off is the time it takes to play a PBEM game... But if we only have 2 teams, each team can get a DP online at the same time and have them play 10 turns.

We need a drastic change, a seventh demogame of us playing a normal game against computers is gonna kill participation... We need to take advantage of the fact that we are playing with many people, playing a 1 person game isn't taking advantage of this fact.

Interesting thought. We could even have two teams with each their own constitution, to satisfy a larger crowd...

Another idea would be to play a variant game. Something like: we'll never have more than a dozen or so cities. Would keep the game manageable and interesting for a longer period.

 

[RegentMan]

Also, seeing the ETA to the end of the game being 20 turnchats isn't exactly a morale booster.

 

[Civanator]

How bout have one demogame with a somewhat thought-intensive structure, and then we just wing it as if we were playin in single player by ourselves? I mean, not everyone is gonna stop the game to figure out which city is going to have the highest shield production in the next 10 turns when they can build a wonder in their top producing city now. just a thought. what could be killing this game is that there is too much calculating and analyzing the save to death... i mean with all the crap that people analyze to death we pretty much know we're gonna win even if we start on a one tile desert island in the middle of the ocean.

and the fact that this is the third year of the demogame, it's just plain boring

 

[RegentMan]

I could make a map for you guys for DemoGame VII...

 

[GenMarshall]

I could make a map for you guys for DemoGame VII...

Then that means you wont be able to partisipate in the game. Unless you take a vow of silence .

 

[truckingpete]

Summer Biology, Drivers Ed, camping, nice outside so got to get out more before the weather starts snowing again..hey its North Dakota..anything can happen..

Once Civ 4 comes out, the first DemoGame will be very popular I hope...

 

[Ranger99]

or a scenario, like TETurkahn's test of times with cities, tha one is always kinda hard.