Procreate my boy, procreate

@MMitchell, again, refusing to accept refugees to our little island of diplomacy??

Part of the issue is not being able to even get a game going; http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=183389

So I am not going to read through 11 pages of this, but I'm going to point out that back in 2011 GhostRating left players who hadn't played games in a long time on the list. GR has gone through multiple code changes since then which alter the time drop off for users to make it shorter. A year ago I pulled the actual database numbers and they did not show this drop off. So if we have a problem it's that GR is not a consistently accurate measurement for the player base.

yea I thought GR was good for 6 months before you fell off, that's not true anymore.

I think it's 3 now

so really everyone is still on the site, they just don't play games.

that's much better.

Can confirm.

Boy, started this whole conversation for no reason. What a goof. Everybody is still here. We are all fine here. Everything's good. How are you?

People showing up in old GR on a month to month basis or at a single point in time was no clear indicator they had played a game recently. Just as people posting on the forum isn't a clear indicator of it either. So seasonal players, or players who have been around for ages but who don't play a ton of games all the time are far less likely to be caught by the GR numbers even though they could be just as active as always.

Is there a drop off in the past year, maybe, I don't have those numbers. But if you want to have an 11 page freak-out thread using the real data instead of numbers that aren't actually representative seems like an intelligent idea...

While perhaps the issue has been resolved by new data... I am entering in the discussion as the last remaining active Mod at the Facebook site(s.) Our numbers are down so far as to be non-existant. The old FBsite has around 30 ACTIVE players, and the new improved site around 15. I don't believe that is a sustainable mass. Most of the 30 and 15 are also involved in at least one of the bigger sites. Not sure what all that means. But I doubt any of the facebook crowd would object to advertising from the better-populated sites.

Why don't you try to get them over here? Just a thought.

As for the "we're here but not playing games" bit... yeah, pretty much. I'm in a total of 1 game right now, and don't plan on going above ~2 for the future. The forum and Mafia are what keep me coming back.

@Chaqa... most of them are already here. They tend to play two or three (or four) games over there at a time... and singles games at the other sites.

(my conclusion after UNscientific analysis...)

I played a game that lasted 3 months and change, the current turnover of GR list is too fast. It should reflect active players - shouldn't drop someone that is checking the site daily and writing messages but prefers to play one game at a time.

I don't think the GR list should drop players at all. Perhaps a "last played" column.

But then, GR has many other problems besides that.

Yeah, I haven't been on GR for several months.

To be fair, I don't play much Diplomacy any more.

I have no problem that I get dropped off the active GR list as long as I don't lose my rating points while inactive. Like Gen. Lee, I tend to play fewer but longer games, so I pop on and off. It doesn't really impact anything, so I don't mind.

I'm not sure what the new data is that's meant to be so calming. If jmo has found some I'd be delighted to see it.

What worries me the most is the little "logged on" stat at the bottom of the screen. I used to use that, when I first joined, as a gauge to how likely it was that a live game would start. As a rule of thumb, when there were 100+ people about you stood a good chance. When there were well over 100 people about it was damned easy.

Looking at it recently it has struggled to get to 100 even at peak times. That is worrying.

I've had a glance at the GR data, and it wasn't very reassuring. As a quick demonstration sample, I looked only at August GR figures for the last few years, and counted only games that finished in September. This avoids seasonal variations, and as it's looking at only the most recent month it gets around the problem that old GR kept people on the books for longer.

So, the August GR snapshots of number of members who'd finished their last game in September.

September 2013: 1157
September 2014: 1069
September 2015: 886
September 2016: 585

That's kinda terrifying, and I look forward to someone pointing out the obvious mistake :)

@Oct, I said I'd pulled data a year ago that didn't show significant decline. I do not have the data from this previous year. And I don't see any noticeable issues with how you pulled that data aside from it only being a 1 month snapshot. Still concerning though.

If you guys want to break in a new player:
http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?viewthread=1398554#1398554

At this point I would like to direct everyone to the thread #webDiplomacy http://webdiplomacy.net/forum.php?viewthread=1398568#1398568 in which I posted up to date usage comparisons for 2016 vs 2015.

I remember being upset that webdiplomacy didn't follow me back on twitter, this is a grave mistake.

I don't think there needs to be a time limit on NMRS but rather a turn or game limit. Something like 100 turns or 5-10 games would be sufficient imo. It would showcase your recent history and not your entire past.

Sorry for the analogy but even rape has a statute of limitations, why not NMRs?

You want to increase players: four letters: PPSC

haha, just kidding.

(but, seriously, I'm not kidding)

You're kidding.

I'm going to bump this because of the comments on "why is PlayDip doing better" in regards to new player retention and total users, and I'll offer some outside looking in advice from someone who primarily plays over there.

It comes down to one, very simple thing. They don't just look for "diplomacy players who want to play diplomacy online". They acitvly look for players who never have played the game before, hell never even heard of it, and facilitate actually teaching them the game. Their "mentor" games as they are called fill up fairly rapidly, and involve 7 newbies and a game teacher instructing them on how the game works, both mechanically and meta wise. That's the sort of thing you need to get people to come and stay.

Their use of a traditional forum layout also surely helps, as it means it's much easier to, for instance, look up specific strategy advice, because strategy advice is all sorted into it's own sub forum. Or look for a replacement to a Civil Disorder, because again, that has it's own specific subforum. I know there's questions about how a new forum software would interface with the site, but it is something that would be needed to help bring new players in, even if it's something as simple as vbulletin.

Lastly, and I think this is less of an issue, but still a minor niggle, the ability to have a seperate adjuncation length for orders phases and build/retreat phases goes a long way, as it means you can enter a 2-3 day game, knowing the 2-3 days will be negotiation days about orders, while the game won't sit till Friday if Italy can't decide where to send its dislodged unit in Sweeden of all places.

Just my two cents from an outsider perspective.