- Subscribers:
- Visitors:
- Players:
Games Direct Message (to Do)
Community Feedback
We're listening. For players who wish to have a voice in the future of Evernight, this is the place to talk to management. This is the newsgroup we'll be actively monitoring on a daily basis.
PLayer History & Stats
Submitted by BlueSky 7/4/2012 7:06:00 PM {time} ago in Community Feedback
I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting. Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing. Picking a player, being able to see that information. Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common. I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
We definitely want to recover historical data as can be found.
It is specifically our intent to incorporate that kind of functionality into the game interface.
Searchability of historical game data, player data, etc.
We want to reassemble as much of the historical data we're able to find.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
yes... :) any thing more than 3 months and keep an option to show all.
wyrm
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
I would have said a year, but could as easily be three months. If you log back in you are active again for another three months...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
I took a look at the data:
Unique Aliases that have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 551 6 mo: 300 3 mo: 219
Unique Aliases that have at least 1 game played and have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 416 6 mo: 239 3 mo: 156
We can try a year, see how the list looks, and then decide if we want to make an adjustment.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I would have said a year, but could as easily be three months. If you log back in you are active again for another three months...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
Wow that's a lot more than I expected. The year sounds just fine.
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I took a look at the data:
Unique Aliases that have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 551 6 mo: 300 3 mo: 219
Unique Aliases that have at least 1 game played and have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 416 6 mo: 239 3 mo: 156
We can try a year, see how the list looks, and then decide if we want to make an adjustment.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I would have said a year, but could as easily be three months. If you log back in you are active again for another three months...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
If there are 551 unique aliases logging in during 1 year, and only about 40 active players, that should speak volumes about this game.
Namely that people are coming and then leaving because they find nothing appealing. The game must definitely change if it wishes to do well.
Lunar Savage
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Wow that's a lot more than I expected. The year sounds just fine.
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I took a look at the data:
Unique Aliases that have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 551 6 mo: 300 3 mo: 219
Unique Aliases that have at least 1 game played and have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 416 6 mo: 239 3 mo: 156
We can try a year, see how the list looks, and then decide if we want to make an adjustment.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I would have said a year, but could as easily be three months. If you log back in you are active again for another three months...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
For the purpose of making an intitial decision on a cutoff age to use for the top players list, these numbers are good enough.
For analytical purposes I'd want to segment and filter the data with a bit more granularity.
For example, I'm sure there are:
Some number of older players who simply pop in from time to time in pure lurk mode.
Some number of players who have logged in with more than one alias.
Some number of players with extremely low meaningful participation for various reasons.
-------Original Message-------
Lunar Savage wrote: If there are 551 unique aliases logging in during 1 year, and only about 40 active players, that should speak volumes about this game.
Namely that people are coming and then leaving because they find nothing appealing. The game must definitely change if it wishes to do well.
Lunar Savage
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Wow that's a lot more than I expected. The year sounds just fine.
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I took a look at the data:
Unique Aliases that have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 551 6 mo: 300 3 mo: 219
Unique Aliases that have at least 1 game played and have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 416 6 mo: 239 3 mo: 156
We can try a year, see how the list looks, and then decide if we want to make an adjustment.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I would have said a year, but could as easily be three months. If you log back in you are active again for another three months...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
The first two should be easy enough to identify. Old aliases should have some kind of creation date or maybe XP, skill rating, reviews, etc. attached to the account.
The second, should be as simple as identifying IP addresses (assuming you have that ability, which I think you should, no?).
The third, much harder to identify if players are making new aliases, but I think it'd be safe to say that any not in the first two categories could go here. But good luck trying to discover the reasons for leaving. I'm still going to wager game speed and aesthetics for being the cause of 70% of that. The rest coming from matters of gameplay, whether it be diplomacy or archaic forms of interaction with the game on the basic level. Like having to reload each section of the map or zoom functions. Also, the learning curve. Hell at first. Kind of boring once you get past the curve though.
Lunar Savage
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
For the purpose of making an intitial decision on a cutoff age to use for the top players list, these numbers are good enough.
For analytical purposes I'd want to segment and filter the data with a bit more granularity.
For example, I'm sure there are:
Some number of older players who simply pop in from time to time in pure lurk mode.
Some number of players who have logged in with more than one alias.
Some number of players with extremely low meaningful participation for various reasons.
-------Original Message-------
Lunar Savage wrote: If there are 551 unique aliases logging in during 1 year, and only about 40 active players, that should speak volumes about this game.
Namely that people are coming and then leaving because they find nothing appealing. The game must definitely change if it wishes to do well.
Lunar Savage
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: Wow that's a lot more than I expected. The year sounds just fine.
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
I took a look at the data:
Unique Aliases that have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 551 6 mo: 300 3 mo: 219
Unique Aliases that have at least 1 game played and have logged in at least once in the last,
Year: 416 6 mo: 239 3 mo: 156
We can try a year, see how the list looks, and then decide if we want to make an adjustment.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I would have said a year, but could as easily be three months. If you log back in you are active again for another three months...
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
I think for a paying customer the inactive status should happen when thier subscription expires and they should be labeled inactive.
-------Original Message-------
Management wrote:
This sounds like a good idea to me.
Players who haven't logged for "X" amount of time are deemed inactive and filtered out of the list.
Maybe selector: "Active Only" / "Show All" (defaulting to Active only)
I would expect this could be reasonably easy to implement.
Any suggestions on what kind of time period to be deemed inactive? 3 months, 6 months, a year? Longer?
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: There are so many inactive players still at this point in the rankings, can they be removed from the list? As an option perhaps?
Would make sense that only active players are in the rankings, and while there is a button for subscribed players, would be better done as active players.
Joining the game and being 8,935th in the rankings is not as good as joining and being 120th...
There are only 18 listed paying subscribers right now, and probably another 30-40 playing, or having logged in in the past year, would make sense to rank and only show those players that have logged on at least once in the past year.
-------Original Message-------
BlueSky wrote: I used to track player history, every game by every player and put out a great deal of statistics that were very interesting.
Keeping after a game is finished a record by player of how they did in that game, place, regions, number of forms, final income, religion, etc.. is really a good thing.
Picking a player, being able to see that information.
Picking two players and seeing what games they had in common.
I can probably list off the stats I used to do, they were pretty significant, I still have the tool so it might be possible.
Connect With Us