Introducing Regional United States Battlegroups
-
- Anvar
- Archmage
Gabriel
For those of us who are visual people, here's how the US is split up according to GA. The numbers are the average energy gathered per campaign according to the scores reported to me... which means Montana, the Dakotas, Delaware, and second BGs are not taken into account.
As you can see, the energy distribution is actually fairly even the way GA did. I would have liked to see some more states in US South Central and out of US Midwest and Mountain, but otherwise, 2,100,000 energy average per region.
Keep in mind, guys, that Canada is just as wide as the US and is not split regionally.
I'm going to be sefish here and point out that the "South Central" regional is dominated by Texas. They probably make 50% of that score.
Edited by Anvar (Nov. 28, 2011 02:06:38)
-
- FeRaLcHiLdE
- Magister
Anvar
I'm going to be sefish here and point out that the "South Central" regional is dominated by Texas. They probably make 50% of that score.
Heaven forbid the demographics should change and cause us another nightmare in our social network here for the future...
Edited by FeRaLcHiLdE (Nov. 28, 2011 02:26:35)
-
- Sixdegrees
- Seeker
Obviously, GA based it (however loosely), on the map that the government groups the census by. Only, they grouped Midwest and Mountain (STUPID idea), added Maryland to NE atlantic... and some other stuff. Map is here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Census_Regions_and_Division_of_the_United_States.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Census_Regions_and_Division_of_the_United_States.svg
-
- GiantDong
- Enlightened
GA take note: real analysis done with real data, informed by an awareness of how players think about and play the game. THIS is how ideas should be generated not by randomly flinging "crap" on the wall to see what sticks.
Great work Kieri!
Great work Kieri!
Kieri
I think regional battlegroups are a much more workable idea than the utterly failed "experiment" we are currently taking part in, but I still think these battlegroups are too big. I have put together my own idea of regions based on regional cultures and battlegroup activity level, as derived from total average energy (thanks to Gabriel's score thread!). I tried to keep each regions’ energy output between three-quarters of a million and 1.25 million energy per campaign (I was not totally successful in this). I have 10 regions, which I think is a good number between the 51 we used to have and the 5 you are using now. I think this map allows for more active gameplay while not becoming overwhelming, even as the game grows. I'm hoping you are still open to fine-tuning the battlegroups so we get to an arrangement that works well for all.
-
- Gabriel
- Awakened
Anvar
I'm going to be sefish here and point out that the "South Central" regional is dominated by Texas. They probably make 50% of that score.
About 33%. I'm going to counter your selfishness by pointing out you have the smallest energy-gathering BG and actually have a chance to put up a fight. I'm in the biggest.
Average Campaign Energy Breakdown by Academy:
US Northeast
942,677 / 1,153,913
Difference of 211,235
US South Atlantic
1,052,702 / 1,056,945
Difference of 4,243
US South Central
686,083 / 807,250
Difference of 121,166
US Midwest and Mountain
1,447,251 / 1,866,575
Difference of 419,324
US Pacific
952,928 / 1,277,758
Difference of 324,830
Edited by Gabriel (Nov. 28, 2011 03:47:36)
-
- Shekkara
- Archmage
GA: I'd really like to know your reasoning for defining the Midwest/Mountain region as you did. It makes so little sense to actual Americans.
-
- SerottaCSi
- Archmage
First, comparisons to Canada aren't appropriate. The USA is roughly 9 times the population of Canada, so each BG would be roughly twice the size of the canadian BG. Canada is a large BG, yes, but smaller than the population of California by itself.
It's time to acknowledge that this company needs guidance from the US players community on tweaks to US game play. And, more broadly, guidance from all players on general game play issues. Random experiments like this show little understanding of the culture that has developed in the US, nor customer preferences. I predict this change will alter the kind of players that play the game, making the game less social and more anonymous. With that comes more trolling, less cooperation, and a loss of tight-knit communities in favor of a gamer culture favoring less talk, more play among the highest-scoring players while new players languish for the most part.
I suggest that if you find these changes unpalatable, you go to the iTunes store and give the game a poor rating after you try the new arrangement. I also suggest you withhold in-app purchases if you are unsatisfied with this arrogant, clueless manipulation of loyal communities.
It's time to acknowledge that this company needs guidance from the US players community on tweaks to US game play. And, more broadly, guidance from all players on general game play issues. Random experiments like this show little understanding of the culture that has developed in the US, nor customer preferences. I predict this change will alter the kind of players that play the game, making the game less social and more anonymous. With that comes more trolling, less cooperation, and a loss of tight-knit communities in favor of a gamer culture favoring less talk, more play among the highest-scoring players while new players languish for the most part.
I suggest that if you find these changes unpalatable, you go to the iTunes store and give the game a poor rating after you try the new arrangement. I also suggest you withhold in-app purchases if you are unsatisfied with this arrogant, clueless manipulation of loyal communities.
Edited by SerottaCSi (Nov. 28, 2011 05:03:59)