Dropping playernumbers

[Yosha_AtaIante]

1 hour ago, NewHorizons_1 said:

equipped Frosty Fir ** on premium ships ...

Back then the xp bonus stacked with fxp and cxp bonuses so you got a total of 250% cpt xp and 200% fxp copared to the 100% bonus of the premium cammo. It was to farm cxp and fxp. Also the cammo is ugly so the faster its used up the better

[POIfection]

On 11/14/2022 at 12:43 AM, ColonelPete said:

What has revenue to do with player numbers?

 

You can extrapolate player numbers from revenue with a few assumptions, and it's not uncommon to show revenue per daily user on an income statement.

 

In general: if revenue (gross) is flat or declining then you have an issue with acquisition and retention of players.

 

Yes: only about 20% of players generate revenue, but the whole system is interconnected, and patterns trend the same for paying and non-paying players.

 

Also, whales are outliners (even though they receive the most attention).

 

[Figment]

17 hours ago, Floofz said:

Omg youre a perfect presentation of the current playerbase, thicker than a bag of concrete. Dude one of the reasons I came back to warships again after my absense was the cosmetic changes, something Ive been asking for for a long time.

And apparently to tell everyone who is not a fashion freak like yourself and who don't use camo's that they're noobs. Because that's how you said you recognise them.

 

Do you even know what you write and imply?

Quote

This is now the second time I tell you that I KNOW that cosmetics doesnt have any performance difference, that WASNT MY POINT. Can you get that throu your thick skull for once?

You did yes, but somehow you double down on 'naked players' being noobs anyway. Which means, NO, you did not accept that you were wrong and have never had a point to make. Can you get THAT through your much thicker skull?

 

 

 

 

YOU, not us, declared people noobs on the basis of not using camos. The only reason people called non-camo players noobs was because it cost them a couple percentages in concealment and/or dodging (depending on camo, but really, who didn't get the combi?). Now, you could at most point at signals (and later you mentioned stock ships). Instead, you name a number of things that have been rendered irrelevant and some that are choices that a lot of people make consciously. Just because it wouldn't be your choice doesn't mean their choice is bad. Unlike you, they may know how to handle that, exactly because they're good players who are confident they can play with a minor handicap.

 

 

Unfortunately you don't comprehend you implied that not wearing camos and you recognising such people as being a noob means you conclude they'll be performing worse for being in the nude.

 

Considering you in the same breath connected it to signals and flags - where flags have never been an indicator of anything player performance wise - and since you're a returning player from before the camo change and discriminate on that basis, your implications are obvious. The funny thing is you simultaneously double down and at the same time suggest you knew all this.

 

 

Point is, you thought you could still call 'naked' players noobs and you just can't admit you were wrong to say so.

Quote

I said, not using a large part of the game is USUALLY an indictator that you dont know how the game works. For the same exact reason people who play world of warcraft and dont use the transmog system are usually bad players. I didnt say it was evidence, I said it was an indicator.

That's not what you said - and I quote:

On 11/13/2022 at 9:27 PM, Floofz said:

Its a combo thing. Not running camo, signals or flags usually means you have no idea how the game works, or you dont care, either way its never a good sign.

It's never a good sign when people make such dumb observations. The combo you mentioned is irrelevant and has been for months.

 

 

Besides, it's not a large part of the game, it's an unnecessary expense in a game that's quite costly in silver to many without premium at the higher tiers.

 

 

So no. All it is is a cost saving. And no. A lot of people with higher skills play on low quality resolutions in many games to optimize their screens fps output. Camos are textures that need to be loaded. It's a potential graphical drain. So no, not using it is no indicator whatsoever.

 

 

You may not have noticed, but we've had threads about people selling off all their excess camos for a return of millions of silver. Instead, you go and insult them for making a conscious choice to not use this now pointless part of the game. Cosmetics are not interesting to most players who are about performance and optimizing. But you don't want to recognize this.

Quote

Flags do not cost silver.

Nor have they in any way shape or form ever improved anyone's ability to play. It's an extra cosmetic that at most hampers graphic performance due to being rendered.

Quote

If people wanna save on signals then I have to question their intelligence. If they want to save on Camos, flags and signals at the same time, then I question their knowledge of the game.

Why would you question their intelligence? IF they want to save them for getting a higher performance in ranked or clan wars, because they're running out in the new economy scheme WG introduced, then it's their conscious decision to pick when they improve their ship's performance. In some cases, they may not even have a choice because they're out of flags. In some cases, they would be good gamers if they recognise the signal would be better spend in a different match on a different ship.

 

 

You have no point. All you do is insult people who know how to play better than your poor understanding of the economics of this game in its current state.

Quote

An oppinion can never be wrong. A statement can be wrong.

Do you even hear yourself? Are you taking the piss? Statements are a subset of opinions, namely those you've expressed towards others. And you, made a statement.

 

Opinions can be objectively wrong. They can be (among others):

Prejudiced, selectively biased, ill-conceived, ignorant, stupid, manipulated, deceited, overbearing, assumptive, arrogant, overestimating or underestimating, .

 

It could be "your opinion" that the sun revolves around the earth or that the earth is flat. You don't need to express that opinion to be verifiably wrong. The problem starts to occur when someone has been verifiably wrong and doubles down. At that point they lose all respect from their peers.

 

 

Hi. That's you.

[ColonelPete]

3 hours ago, POIfection said:

 

You can extrapolate player numbers from revenue with a few assumptions, and it's not uncommon to show revenue per daily user on an income statement.

 

In general: if revenue (gross) is flat or declining then you have an issue with acquisition and retention of players.

 

Yes: only about 20% of players generate revenue, but the whole system is interconnected, and patterns trend the same for paying and non-paying players.

 

Also, whales are outliners (even though they receive the most attention).

 

But that is the problem: guessing.

And how do you handle situations where food and energy become more expensive and people have less disposable income? Do you assume player numbers go down?

What about veteran players who have all the stuff they need and with enough Doubloons in the game that they do not need to spend money?

[Figment]

3 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

But that is the problem: guessing.

And how do you handle situations where food and energy become more expensive and people have less disposable income? Do you assume player numbers go down?

If people cut down on computer time to save on energy, yes. Personally I think that's a little too abstract cost for most people unless they're in a really dire financial situation.

3 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

What about veteran players who have all the stuff they need and with enough Doubloons in the game that they do not need to spend money?

Those tend to just play for free anyway, doesn't need to affect player numbers.

 

However, boredom and repetitiveness takes a toll on veterans regularly. Especially after intense grinds like the Puerto Rico one.

[ColonelPete]

1 hour ago, Figment said:

If people cut down on computer time to save on energy, yes. Personally I think that's a little too abstract cost for most people unless they're in a really dire financial situation.

It is not about saving energy, it is about not having money to spend on a game. One can still play.

1 hour ago, Figment said:

Those tend to just play for free anyway, doesn't need to affect player numbers.

Which leads to less revenue, which Poifection would interpret as less players...

[POIfection]

7 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

But that is the problem: guessing.

Not really, humans are very good at guessing: I use the weather forecast (guess) all the time and find it very accurate.

 

7 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

And how do you handle situations where food and energy become more expensive and people have less disposable income? Do you assume player numbers go down?

You look at nominal vs. real-terms inflation and consumer confidence index to forecast revenue impact. However, this needs to be analyzed by consumer type and sector: loss of disposable income can have a negative or positive affect e.g., Hospitality may lose (I won't spend 50 euros eating out this week) but Media and Entertainment may gain (I'll continue to spend 10 euro on gaming or perhaps increase to 20 euro, as I'll still be 40 euro better off). 

 

8 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

What about veteran players who have all the stuff they need and with enough Doubloons in the game that they do not need to spend money?

 

This is normal life-time-value behavior: very few players of this type are retained: most active veterans will continue to spend or play fewer games (of course, outliners exist). F2P games are calibrated for monetization over-time ... here comes the content train chu chu.

[ColonelPete]

9 minutes ago, POIfection said:

Not really, humans are very good at guessing: I use the weather forecast (guess) all the time and find it very accurate.

If that were the case, why are people completly wrong all the time? Why do they do guess better? And no, a weather forecast is not guessing... Wrong guees, I guess....

12 minutes ago, POIfection said:

You look at nominal vs. real-terms inflation and consumer confidence index to forecast revenue impact. However, this needs to be analyzed by consumer type and sector: loss of disposable income can have a negative or positive affect e.g., Hospitality may lose (I won't spend 50 euros eating out this week) but Media and Entertainment may gain (I'll continue to spend 10 euro on gaming or perhaps increase to 20 euro, as I'll still be 40 euro better off). 

• that does not sound like guessing
• requires A LOT of additional data

15 minutes ago, POIfection said:

This is normal life-time-value behavior: very few players of this type are retained: most active veterans will continue to spend or play fewer games (of course, outliners exist). F2P games are calibrated for monetization over-time ... here comes the content train chu chu.

Which is again an assumption. It is extremly unlikely that all F2P game share the same numbers (otherwise they all had the same success).

[POIfection]

Your replies are nonsensical.

 

53 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

And no, a weather forecast is not guessing... Wrong guees, I guess...

Forecast = Estimate = Guess (walk into your nearest primary school to confirm)

 

 

57 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

why are people completly wrong all the time?

 

I think you experience this phenomenon because you are often wrong and therefore disagree with others who are correct.

 

56 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

• that does not sound like guessing
• requires A LOT of additional data

Not really, this is basic analysis.

 

 

56 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Which is again an assumption. It is extremly unlikely that all F2P game share the same numbers (otherwise they all had the same success).

 

Incorrect: the financing models for F2P are fairly standardized. 

 

I think you should change your handle to Fluffer: Cheerio.

 

 

 

[ColonelPete]

1 hour ago, POIfection said:

Your replies are nonsensical.

 

Forecast = Estimate = Guess (walk into your nearest primary school to confirm)

I am not surprised that this already too much for you.

And no, a forecast is not a guess. Guess again

1 hour ago, POIfection said:

Not really, this is basic analysis.

Which is obviously not guessing and needs data...

1 hour ago, POIfection said:

Incorrect: the financing models for F2P are fairly standardized.

Stanardized models does not mean same numbers.

Car production is mostly standadized too, but cars have different sizes and attributes and companies earn different amounts of money with their cars.

[POIfection]

2 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

Stanardized models does not mean same numbers

Financing models are very standardized: they use lots common metrics and base units. This is why SAP etc. have standard modules and packages in their ERP systems covering financial planning and reporting. These can be used to forecast (a complex guess) revenue based on ... customer portfolio: and also provide management accountants with a universal method for establishing and comparing KPIs across different companies.

 

In the context of revenue: you would use product model / series / family  to analyse sales performance: I'm not sure what your point is: obviously different models may sell for different amounts and have different characteristics.

 

We are quite off topic now: and I've already answered your original question: the rest of your comments are nonsense.

 

Continue to troll if you wish: I feel kind of sorry for you x.

[ColonelPete]

2 minutes ago, POIfection said:

These can be used to forecast (a complex guess) revenue based on ...

That is still not a guess...

3 minutes ago, POIfection said:

and also provide management accountants with a universal method for establishing and comparing KPIs across different companies.

Which vary wildly across different companies.

4 minutes ago, POIfection said:

 I feel kind of sorry for you x.

That seems to be the only thing you can do. The rest is guessing.