Vacation Mode and filters for nation search

[Vice]

I know these have been brought up before but revamping vacation mode would be super helpful. Its crazy that people can sit in vacation mode for what seems like forever. This harms active players.

 

Also, the ability to filter search options when looking for nations to raid would also be fantastic. Sort by nations within score range then sort out everyone with recent activity, any other bloc than gray and filter out anyone in an alliance.

It takes so long to find proper inactive raid targets it reduces activity within the game. I know they have probably been suggested before but the filters could be a pretty quick feature change.

[Monti]

3 hours ago, Vice said:

I know these have been brought up before but revamping vacation mode would be super helpful. Its crazy that people can sit in vacation mode for what seems like forever. This harms active players.

 

Also, the ability to filter search options when looking for nations to raid would also be fantastic. Sort by nations within score range then sort out everyone with recent activity, any other bloc than gray and filter out anyone in an alliance.

It takes so long to find proper inactive raid targets it reduces activity within the game. I know they have probably been suggested before but the filters could be a pretty quick feature change.

uh you can "Click Advanced Search"

[Spukey]

26 minutes ago, Montiform said:

uh you can "Click Advanced Search"

A lot of the options they suggested aren’t available

[Vice]

Well that is actually super helpful as I have totally missed that function. It will definitely help! Thank you

 

EDIT: Vacation mode is still stupid.

Edited December 16, 2020 by Vice

[Who Me]

8 hours ago, Vice said:

EDIT: Vacation mode is still stupid.

So if people have something going on IRL they should just delete instead of going into VM?

[BSKsplick]

56 minutes ago, Who Me said:

So if people have something going on IRL they should just delete instead of going into VM?

Yes 

 

:serious:

 

[Vice]

8 hours ago, Who Me said:

So if people have something going on IRL they should just delete instead of going into VM?

Vacation mode for a week or two is understandable. Vacation mode for months and months is insane.

[Guest Zephyr]

7 minutes ago, Vice said:

Vacation mode for a week or two is understandable. Vacation mode for months and months is insane.

What exactly is your issue with people using vacation mode for extended periods?

I've used vacation mode numerous times because I don't want to be concerned about a game when I'm holidaying, and some people even holiday for several months abroad. Others are in the military and hit vacation mode when they're deployed or going through training, and some even hit vacation mode just to focus more on their studies. According to you these people may be mentally deranged. I think you're being absurd.

[katashimon13]

p sure the insane pplz are the ones are the pplz who keep playing this game ;3

rawr

[Vice]

4 hours ago, Zephyr said:

What exactly is your issue with people using vacation mode for extended periods?

I've used vacation mode numerous times because I don't want to be concerned about a game when I'm holidaying, and some people even holiday for several months abroad. Others are in the military and hit vacation mode when they're deployed or going through training, and some even hit vacation mode just to focus more on their studies. According to you these people may be mentally deranged. I think you're being absurd.

You make valid points. Its a pretty small percentage of players that would actually need vacation mode for such an extended period of time. People are complaining about lack of nations to raid and I think VM is a part of that issue. any nation under 2000NS with any sort of infra gets triple slotted for inactive raiding immediately. If the game wants to focus more on raiding then revamp of the VM would probably be a breath of fresh air. If they dont want raiding to be a core mechanic and to prioritize internal income production, then VM is fine as is.

[Polar Bear ArcticExplorer]

Vacation Mode is a necessary part of gameplay. Some nations have irl stuff happening sometimes and as such may need to take a break for a year or two. Also, by forever if you mean the nations that are on VM for hundreds of years, that's because they've passed away.

[Who Me]

9 hours ago, Vice said:

Vacation mode for a week or two is understandable. Vacation mode for months and months is insane.

Quite frankly, unless you are a reroll at 28 days old you really have no idea about anything of how the games works. Perhaps you should learn more about how things work in the game before you voice rather silly ideas like this.

[Vice]

23 minutes ago, Who Me said:

Quite frankly, unless you are a reroll at 28 days old you really have no idea about anything of how the games works. Perhaps you should learn more about how things work in the game before you voice rather silly ideas like this.

Ok. Many players come and go and part of retaining newer players is keeping them both active and engaged. Raiding is a huge part of the game especially for c10 and below. The intent on limiting VM is to increase raiding for lower tier cities. Idk why people are salty over a suggestion. Also the game is not THAT complex. I understand the core mechanics.

could even enable length of VM allowed relative to city score. It doesn’t need to be completely removed. 

Edited December 17, 2020 by Vice

[Guest Zephyr]

9 hours ago, Vice said:

You make valid points. Its a pretty small percentage of players that would actually need vacation mode for such an extended period of time.

I imagine allowing players to take a break and resume later is great for player retention, instead of forcing them to entirely restart which would be uninspiring.

9 hours ago, Vice said:

People are complaining about lack of nations to raid and I think VM is a part of that issue. any nation under 2000NS with any sort of infra gets triple slotted for inactive raiding immediately.

I think right now raiding of inactive unaligned nations is best in the 1 through 3 city range roughly, with possibly options still up to about 5 cities (it's been a while since I chose to look and settle myself at 3 cities). You have 10 cities and are member to TFP, so it makes sense you will likely have few or even no raid options in your range.

9 hours ago, Vice said:

If the game wants to focus more on raiding then revamp of the VM would probably be a breath of fresh air. If they dont want raiding to be a core mechanic and to prioritize internal income production, then VM is fine as is.

I don't think the game should focus on raiding, it's simply a consequence of being inadequately defended.

You should also note that the reason there are so many more easy raid options in the micro and low tiers is because there are many players that try the game for a few days or even only a single hour before abandoning it. Naturally these nations don't progress very far, so they're small, and many don't even get to the stage of joining an alliance, or they fail to complete alliance application processes, or are kicked for inactivity. That is, many players determine that the game doesn't interest them fairly early on.

Next we should note that the game does not actually prohibit you from raiding nations in your range, so your argument is really that you feel the game environment should produce easy raid targets for you (otherwise you would go where the action is and have sat at fewer cities raiding micro tier, or joined Arrgh and raided the way they do). You want raid options to come to you because you feel entitled to the benefits of raiding without the effort.

4 hours ago, Vice said:

Ok. Many players come and go and part of retaining newer players is keeping them both active and engaged. Raiding is a huge part of the game especially for c10 and below. The intent on limiting VM is to increase raiding for lower tier cities. Idk why people are salty over a suggestion. Also the game is not THAT complex. I understand the core mechanics.

could even enable length of VM allowed relative to city score. It doesn’t need to be completely removed. 

Well now I'm confused, you understand why raiding exists but yet you still maintain your entitlement? And you propose it be at the cost of players who have prioritised focusing on their personal life over the game? Why exactly do they deserve this punishment just for your convenience of easy raid targets? Do you honestly think this is a fair way to treat other players?

Vacation mode may arguably be 'abused' during wartime, but I still think it's more valuable to have and enable players to take a break and prioritise on their personal lives than to remove or limit it and unnecessarily force players to choose between the two. Players shouldn't feel trapped in constant engagement under threat of losing the nation they spent so long developing if they dare take time out for themselves, even if it is for a year.

[Deborah Kobayashi]

Many long term VM nations are people that quit the game, but know they may return one day, if those people didnt have the option to VM, theyd probably just delete.

I was VMed over a year, and then came back, though i decided to delete and reroll anyways. I Dont really think this really helps us raiders that much, i mean you might get a few more targets possibly but i dont see it as that game changing.

Also since your new maybe you do not realize, but nations automatically go into VM when they are inactive for an extended period, so first off most of those VMed long term people you are seeing are auto VMed inactives that are in the autodeletion process, and second those nations that wouldnt be able to vm for more than two months would auto VM anyways.

[Vice]

9 hours ago, Zephyr said:

I imagine allowing players to take a break and resume later is great for player retention, instead of forcing them to entirely restart which would be uninspiring.

I think right now raiding of inactive unaligned nations is best in the 1 through 3 city range roughly, with possibly options still up to about 5 cities (it's been a while since I chose to look and settle myself at 3 cities). You have 10 cities and are member to TFP, so it makes sense you will likely have few or even no raid options in your range.

I don't think the game should focus on raiding, it's simply a consequence of being inadequately defended.

You should also note that the reason there are so many more easy raid options in the micro and low tiers is because there are many players that try the game for a few days or even only a single hour before abandoning it. Naturally these nations don't progress very far, so they're small, and many don't even get to the stage of joining an alliance, or they fail to complete alliance application processes, or are kicked for inactivity. That is, many players determine that the game doesn't interest them fairly early on.

Next we should note that the game does not actually prohibit you from raiding nations in your range, so your argument is really that you feel the game environment should produce easy raid targets for you (otherwise you would go where the action is and have sat at fewer cities raiding micro tier, or joined Arrgh and raided the way they do). You want raid options to come to you because you feel entitled to the benefits of raiding without the effort.

Well now I'm confused, you understand why raiding exists but yet you still maintain your entitlement? And you propose it be at the cost of players who have prioritised focusing on their personal life over the game? Why exactly do they deserve this punishment just for your convenience of easy raid targets? Do you honestly think this is a fair way to treat other players?

Vacation mode may arguably be 'abused' during wartime, but I still think it's more valuable to have and enable players to take a break and prioritise on their personal lives than to remove or limit it and unnecessarily force players to choose between the two. Players shouldn't feel trapped in constant engagement under threat of losing the nation they spent so long developing if they dare take time out for themselves, even if it is for a year.

Its not an entitlement thing. The creator of the game said he wants better player retention. Having more targets for people who are in lower levels will keep them invested in the game and less likely to quit. Thats why I dont care that much about raiding at my level personally. I am not asking to DELETE VM which seems to be a confusion. I dont see the harm in shortening VM for lower tier cities. I think Deborah makes a good point that most of the cities that are in VM mode are lower levels that were auto VM'd and likely dont have infra or money after their inactivity queue. This was just a chance to open up discussion about keeping a backlog of things for newer players to do while they get settled. Raiding is a way to make it feel like you are being productive because the game can quickly get to a point where you are waiting without a lot to do before you next major war, project, city, etc. Sorry if i didnt elaborate enough on the original post that it was an angle to increase participation and retain players by taking a look at VM mode.

[Guest Zephyr]

2 hours ago, Vice said:

Having more targets for people who are in lower levels will keep them invested in the game and less likely to quit.

I only raid unaligned inactive nations and pre-war was getting regular targets to fill my slots, so I'm not sure this is really an issue. It might be that people aren't looking well enough or don't have access to the tools to find them. It's only a few days post-war, maybe I am yet to discover this issue myself.

I don't actually know how the game currently handles inactives, maybe @Alex could outline exactly the process inactive nations go through before being deleted. If they are being placed into vacation mode, maybe this approach could be revised as long as it's not touching any nation placed into vacation mode by the player themselves.

2 hours ago, Vice said:

I dont see the harm in shortening VM for lower tier cities.

I don't understand why access to vacation mode should be limited based on city count given that the purpose of vacation mode has nothing to do with this variable.

[Vice]

1 hour ago, Zephyr said:

I only raid unaligned inactive nations and pre-war was getting regular targets to fill my slots, so I'm not sure this is really an issue. It might be that people aren't looking well enough or don't have access to the tools to find them. It's only a few days post-war, maybe I am yet to discover this issue myself.

I don't actually know how the game currently handles inactives, maybe @Alex could outline exactly the process inactive nations go through before being deleted. If they are being placed into vacation mode, maybe this approach could be revised as long as it's not touching any nation placed into vacation mode by the player themselves.

I don't understand why access to vacation mode should be limited based on city count given that the purpose of vacation mode has nothing to do with this variable.

It was mostly that a C3 coming back from extended stay has a less daunting task of getting back to pre VM status than a C19. 

[Who Me]

if you want more raids, go sit on none for a bit, I'm sure you will have all the raids you can handle.

[Guest Zephyr]

8 hours ago, Vice said:

It was mostly that a C3 coming back from extended stay has a less daunting task of getting back to pre VM status than a C19. 

Bugger me if I want to hold on to my stats then, huh (I don't actually care that much about stats, but the point is some do)?

[Alex]

On 12/18/2020 at 11:31 AM, Zephyr said:

I only raid unaligned inactive nations and pre-war was getting regular targets to fill my slots, so I'm not sure this is really an issue. It might be that people aren't looking well enough or don't have access to the tools to find them. It's only a few days post-war, maybe I am yet to discover this issue myself.

I don't actually know how the game currently handles inactives, maybe @Alex could outline exactly the process inactive nations go through before being deleted. If they are being placed into vacation mode, maybe this approach could be revised as long as it's not touching any nation placed into vacation mode by the player themselves.

I don't understand why access to vacation mode should be limited based on city count given that the purpose of vacation mode has nothing to do with this variable.

After 90 days of inactivity, nations are placed into Vacation Mode automatically for another 180 days, giving players a chance to come back and save their nation before it is ultimately deleted automatically for inactivity (for forever.)

[Guest Zephyr]

On 12/22/2020 at 12:46 AM, Alex said:

After 90 days of inactivity, nations are placed into Vacation Mode automatically for another 180 days, giving players a chance to come back and save their nation before it is ultimately deleted automatically for inactivity (for forever.)

Do vacation mode nations still contribute to the total nation count we see on nation pages? For example, "Mountania is #3,577 of 17,748 Nations".

[Ketya]

17k nations excluding VM nations. 31K nations including the VM ones; according to the ‘nations search’ page.