I've mentioned this a couple of times on other threads, but no one responded and the idea kind of got buried.
Start a contest every Monday and have it end 11 days later on Friday. There will always be one contest active, and sometimes two.
Contests are attractive to new and intermediate players. These are the guys who should be catered to, not committed advanced players. This is analogous to advertisers targeting teens, not because they are superior people, but because their shopping habits are not fixed and they may be persuaded to use the advertiser's product. New and intermediate players are not committed to KL, and should be targeted with features attractive to them.
And while this feature is especially attractive to new players, there's no reason why anyone should object to it, as long as the developers can make the effort.
Overlapping contests - what do you think?
Moderator: moderators
-
Guest
It may work on realm 1 but not on realm 2, yet. The problem is cash flow. I remember when they started having contasts on realm 2 and it didn't go over well because of the lack of cash flow.
I could see it being a problem on realm 1 aswell. Most companies spend billions to get near the top. (A large amount of those companies cut down on expantion and other things that temporary hurt their companies for awhile after the contest is over, too.) If we doubled the contest amounts you will probably see slower growth, meaning less cash comming into the game, and lower prices on contest items. (I would guess the same companies would go into both contests and split their money between them.)
I could see it being a problem on realm 1 aswell. Most companies spend billions to get near the top. (A large amount of those companies cut down on expantion and other things that temporary hurt their companies for awhile after the contest is over, too.) If we doubled the contest amounts you will probably see slower growth, meaning less cash comming into the game, and lower prices on contest items. (I would guess the same companies would go into both contests and split their money between them.)
-
Guest
I agree with that and the smaller companies would earn less money in the process.Azer Productions wrote:...
If we doubled the contest amounts you will probably see slower growth, meaning less cash comming into the game, and lower prices on contest items. (I would guess the same companies would go into both contests and split their money between them.)
-
Guest
I agree that top companies are spending too much money for medals, but they've got the money and that's their business. It shows that advanced companies are reaching for something to do.
I don't grasp the argument that more contests would hurt the economy. Isn't money spent on contests already superfluous and just being held in cash by big firms? You can't put money to work except in fixed assets or horse trading, and horse trading is a zero sum game. I doubt that money is being diverted from desired expansion to contests. Contests can only attract whatever money is available and that money "trickles down" to small firms. The more contests the merrier, as far as I can see. Could someone provide analysis of how more contests would damage the economy?
Overlapping contests have the merit of eliminating the dead periods between contests and thus maintaining continuous interest in the game.
I don't grasp the argument that more contests would hurt the economy. Isn't money spent on contests already superfluous and just being held in cash by big firms? You can't put money to work except in fixed assets or horse trading, and horse trading is a zero sum game. I doubt that money is being diverted from desired expansion to contests. Contests can only attract whatever money is available and that money "trickles down" to small firms. The more contests the merrier, as far as I can see. Could someone provide analysis of how more contests would damage the economy?
Overlapping contests have the merit of eliminating the dead periods between contests and thus maintaining continuous interest in the game.