M57 wrote:

...

I also like the idea of letting Premium members give themselves special monikers that could perhaps appear under their name (instead of "Premium Member"). 

Are you thinking something different from the Achievements titles proposed in the other threads?

Let me start off by saying: I disagree with the OP's original premise (that Premium gives unfair advantage).

AdamN wrote:
I was only mentioning the option of moving starting a game on a single popular board behind the firewall so to speak.

Despite that, I understand what you're trying to accomplish, but fear that the suggestion would actually lend more credence to his complaint.

I think the point of Premium is to give people a means to trade a nominal number of $$ for some extra features, but not to effect any given player's ability to climb the ranks of the WG hierarchy.  Moving a board behind the Premium curtain would limit the ability of a Standard to get board championship points and make it more difficult for them climb the Global Ranking ladder (top ranked Premium members could easily hide from the lower ranking Standards by only playing on the curtained boards so as to protect their high ranking from the up and comers).  I like dividing "add-ons" between Standard/Premium, but not at the cost of hurting a poor Standard Players ability to compete against the best of the best.

As a matter of fact, I don't believe that asking "What will lure newbies to pay Premium" is the most lucrative business plan.  I think we should be asking ourselves "What lured a paying member of a different site away from that site and to this one," because it is those people who have the most contact with other willing-to-pay potential customers.  And I can tell you that my #1 reason for moving here from ToS was that WG was equal opportunity on starting games for Standard/Premium.  And it was this same reasoning that I used to bring 8 other people with me when I moved.

What I'd rather see is some of the fundamental "site enhancements" be moved to Premium only.  One example that leaps to mind is (when it's available) making the mobile device apps only available to Premiums.  Or making the "Scenario Label on Games List" feature becoming premium only.  I'm sure there are a dozen that have been added in the recent past (which don't really effect gameplay at all) that could be moved.

EDIT: (Sorry for being so long-winded)

Hugh wrote:

I might be wrong: Maybe people are hooked with a 10 game limit and know they need more and that's what gets them... but I wonder.

I am using up all my +1's on this comment. So

+10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.

10 game limit cuts both ways... preventing both addiction to the site and willingness to shell out $$ for premium, the latter of which Hugh was pointing out.

... more tactfully than I.

I yield to the prior discussion.

AttilaTheHun wrote:

M57 wrote:

...

I also like the idea of letting Premium members give themselves special monikers that could perhaps appear under their name (instead of "Premium Member"). 

Are you thinking something different from the Achievements titles proposed in the other threads?

I'm talking about a player actually making up their title.   E.g., Commander, Endgame Specialist, Destroyer Extraordinaire, etc.    On the other hand, maybe that ability should go to players who have played more than x games, or are in the top 5% of players.  There are all kinds of ways to structure it.

mongrel, stop drinking and typing again!

weathertop wrote:

mongrel, stop drinking and typing again!

haha.  I was also thinking something along those lines.

Drunk on conviction.

Mongrel wrote:

I yield to the prior discussion.

Drunk on conviction and high on C-SPAN...

BorisTheFrugal wrote:

As a matter of fact, I don't believe that asking "What will lure newbies to pay Premium" is the most lucrative business plan.  I think we should be asking ourselves "What lured a paying member of a different site away from that site and to this one," because it is those people who have the most contact with other willing-to-pay potential customers.  And I can tell you that my #1 reason for moving here from ToS was that WG was equal opportunity on starting games for Standard/Premium.  And it was this same reasoning that I used to bring 8 other people with me when I moved.

This is where our perceptions differ. Without hard numbers, we're just speculating. But, "What lured a paying member of a different site towards this one?" assumes that the online Risk clone expansion is essentially over. All that is left is the battle for that pool of players.

I believe "What will lure newbies to pay Premium?" is the right question to ask because eventually the hooked move on to other activities. New members await and when they arrive you want to hook em.

(BTW - though you couldn't start games on any map you like on ToS, you could join open games. There is _some_ effect on the overall competition this way, but not as much as a 10 game limit.)

I don't mean to be monday morning quarterbacking here. These are just thoughts and impressions, nothing more. I'd love it if the site were expanding just fine the way it is, and if so, you gotta go with "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

And of course, Oz's multithread push for new Premium features independent of the "main structure" is important and something we can influence right now.

Hugh wrote:

BorisTheFrugal wrote:

As a matter of fact, I don't believe that asking "What will lure newbies to pay Premium" is the most lucrative business plan.  I think we should be asking ourselves "What lured a paying member of a different site away from that site and to this one," because it is those people who have the most contact with other willing-to-pay potential customers.  And I can tell you that my #1 reason for moving here from ToS was that WG was equal opportunity on starting games for Standard/Premium.  And it was this same reasoning that I used to bring 8 other people with me when I moved.

This is where our perceptions differ. Without hard numbers, we're just speculating. But, "What lured a paying member of a different site towards this one?" assumes that the online Risk clone expansion is essentially over. All that is left is the battle for that pool of players.

I believe "What will lure newbies to pay Premium?" is the right question to ask because eventually the hooked move on to other activities. New members await and when they arrive you want to hook em.

(BTW - though you couldn't start games on any map you like on ToS, you could join open games. There is _some_ effect on the overall competition this way, but not as much as a 10 game limit.)

I don't mean to be monday morning quarterbacking here. These are just thoughts and impressions, nothing more. I'd love it if the site were expanding just fine the way it is, and if so, you gotta go with "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

And of course, Oz's multithread push for new Premium features independent of the "main structure" is important and something we can influence right now.

This site is doing a good job of catering not only to the Risk clone-seekers but also many other games.  Pretty unique in that regard.

Have to admit you have all convinced me I was wrong. That rarely happens. Have a nice day or week or month e.tc.

Hugh wrote:

Mongrel wrote:

I yield to the prior discussion.

Drunk on conviction and high on C-SPAN...

Haha.

Knosken wrote:

Have to admit you have all convinced me I was wrong. That rarely happens. Have a nice day or week or month e.tc.

That is nice of you to say.... I really appreciate the conversation it sparked and I hope you will continue to contribute.  Look forward to playing you.

I am sorry. 30 bucks for a year? That's one night at the bar, and you'll play more than 5 hours in a year. Stop complaining and just chip in. Sounds like some cheapskate whining to me.

be nice.  Knosken already said we had convinced him he was wrong, which online is the about the equivalent of a unicorn sighting.

Our new motto should be: "WarGear: The friendlier side of the Internet..."