CC is declining again!

[Dukasaur]

9600

[Army of GOD]

9645

[WILLIAMS5232]

9658

[ConfederateSS]

You want a lot of people that left.. back.or new comers.High Command.The many styles of play are o.k...But you have to put things back to the game of risk...In real life a turn is about 5 mins..2-6 play..If people want to play 1 vs the bot(s)..Kool..Return speed games to 5 min..flat...Make the games up to 6 players flat in the public sector(except Battle Royals ..1,000,000..games etc.),dump the 8-12 player games ..The games would fill up faster...People wouldn't feel the lag..The point,rank,medal chasers be damned ..Return the game we love ..to the people who love the game.....if you build it ..they will come..ConfederateSS ..out!!!!!!!!!!!! ..P.S.Is all the add on crap..the reason we no longer get the Kool Holiday dice..I sure would like those back..instead of 8-12 player games..I loved to see what dice were going to pop up..Come on people.. REVOLT..

[jimboy]

All this chat about how much CC is worth. You guys are all missing a significant source of CC's revenue. ADVERTISING. I have no idea how much CC actually collects from it but I think it throws the number of 64K for a ride and makes CC much more profitable than the estimates you guys were giving it.

[BigBallinStalin]

All this chat about how much CC is worth. You guys are all missing a significant source of CC's revenue. ADVERTISING. I have no idea how much CC actually collects from it but I think it throws the number of 64K for a ride and makes CC much more profitable than the estimates you guys were giving it.

Roughly 50% of CC members are premium, so they don't see the ads (right?). That leaves 4500 to potentially click ads. Of that percent, I assume most don't care about ads--some percent may install AdBlock+ and WhatNot. So, that leaves a minority of users clicking on ads x-amount of times per day. ($/click = unknown, maybe $0.01?).

Assumptions A:
(.2)(4500) = 900 ad clickers
Click rate: 1/day.
REV/click: $0.01

basic formula: 900*1*0.01*365
Total: $9*365 = $3285 per year.

Assumptions B (double the clickers):
basic formula: 1800*1*0.01*365
total: $6570

Assumptions C (now, 5 cents per click):
basic formula: 1800*1*0.05*365
total: $32,850


Assumptions D (now, double the click-rate):
basic formula: 1800*2*0.05*365
total: $65,700


Looks great, huh? It depends on the accuracy of the assumptions.

My best guess:
900*1*0.05*365 = $16,425 per year

[ConfederateSS]

YAP ALL YOU WANT...THE VALUE OF CONQUER CLUB.. LIES IN IT'S MEMBERS.....PLAIN AND SIMPLE..NUFF SAID......CLOSE THE BOOK...COW'S LEFT THE BARN.DID YOU GET THAT?... ConfederateSS..out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dukasaur]

YAP ALL YOU WANT...THE VALUE OF CONQUER CLUB.. LIES IN IT'S MEMBERS.....PLAIN AND SIMPLE..NUFF SAID......CLOSE THE BOOK...COW'S LEFT THE BARN.DID YOU GET THAT?... ConfederateSS..out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's still cows in the barn.

Come join some tournaments...

[WILLIAMS5232]

9656

[fishydance]

9656

Compare that to the post by Pirlo 3 years ago ...

When I look at the number of online users, I see it's like only 60% of the number I used to find a year ago.

This indicates CC is not even stable and non-growing; rather, it's declining!

17315 are the current users. I think they used to be +20.000 last year.

[firstholliday]

rip cc

[Keefie]

9695

[jlassen]

New blood here.

I just thought I would offer up some thoughts, as someone who recently discovered CC.

I'm a long time risk board game player... got a hair up my ass to try and find a computer version... Human or computer... just wanted to waste a couple of hours. After being unhappy with AI on a couple of clone/flash based versions, I discovered this site, via google searching.

I've been playing an online moderated version of Diplomacy for a few years now (Droidippy) and immediately recognized the benefits of large user base, rankings and game finding features that CC offers. Obviously large user base was also a big draw.

The front page did not turn me off, but I was already looking for a "risk" clone. What drew me in was the forms, and sense of community. the rankings and medals seemed cool, as did the idea of clans. The chat channels also added to my sense of getting to know the community as a lurker first.

The large number of maps was intriguing, but the intimidation factor keeps me on the classic board for now.

The user interface took some getting used to, and I made a couple of mistakes in my early games because the UI didn't behave like I anticipated. Which is fine. Anything complex has a bit of a learning curve, UI wise. Very friendly folks here, including the person who whooped my ass on the newbie game inspired me to come back for another try.

Things I'm still not too sure about: What level does/is diplomacy supposed to play? Is there back channel discussions (Messages/chat channels, etc) as part of the planning/strategy, or is the game message system, with public communication that everyone sees where diplomacy is supposed to occure. My games have been mostly silent so far. I don't know if people are chatting up a storm somewhere and I'm just not seeing it.

I know at the table, I can whisper in a payers ear, or go in the other room. Not sure what the digital equivalent is here. In a game like Droidippy, such public/back channel interfaces are the core of the game.

Thoughts on getting CC out there to a wider audience:
Is there a button that says "Tweet my game status" "Post my victory to face book?" Pintirist a photo of current game map? tweet my medals?

Putting the game out there, in various social media channels, with individual player achievements being part of their own social media stream will do more than any amount of banner adds or the like. I would have been hear years ago, if I had seen someone in my twitter timeline announce that they had just conquered North America, or wiped out player x. or turned in a set for 30 armies. If you can't use the name "Risk" in social media tags, at least use game jargon that table top players will recognize and become intrigued by.

Also... its dumb, but an android and ios App (even if its just a web browsing app skinned/optimized to display this web site) would go a long way towards finding people. I scanned the android store for versions of games I know/want to play on a regular basis... Its how I found Droidippy. And being on a mobile device, or at least, more easily being on a mobile device might encourage users to do moves on the road? I don't know. Obviously, mobile web browser works fine, but I think the outreach factor, of having an app in store, by itself would draw more people in.

Just the perspective of a newbie. Obviously, there is a lot of stuff under the surface of CC that I haven't even discovered yet. But I'm intrigued enough to stick around.

[BigBallinStalin]

Things I'm still not too sure about: What level does/is diplomacy supposed to play? Is there back channel discussions (Messages/chat channels, etc) as part of the planning/strategy, or is the game message system, with public communication that everyone sees where diplomacy is supposed to occure. My games have been mostly silent so far. I don't know if people are chatting up a storm somewhere and I'm just not seeing it.

I know at the table, I can whisper in a payers ear, or go in the other room. Not sure what the digital equivalent is here. In a game like Droidippy, such public/back channel interfaces are the core of the game.

Keep all communication open in the game chat, so that everyone can see it. (Of course, keeping closed communication with your team is fine). Agreements made in game chat are not enforceable through ConquerClub, so if someone breaks a truce, it's still not a violation of CC's rules. Secret diplomacy (i.e. not keeping chat open with non-teammates) is illegal and punishable, so using private messages, wall chat, Skype, etc. for making agreements is cheating.

Most people on standard games play silently. I imagine that people tend to avoid clear agreements because the terms of a 'contract' are usually not clearly stated. This ambiguity can lead to potential bickering, which many people want to avoid in the first place. Also, talking 'out loud' may make you a bigger target because you've become more noticeable in players' minds. It can also backfire if you're trying to encourage people to attack someone else (or it may work). The results are mixed and the lack of nonverbal communication makes interpretation more difficult, so most players tend to stay quiet. It's boring, but it makes sense.

Also, generally, silent players can have 'agreements' that are not explicitly stated (nor made through secret diplomacy); it just seems obvious--e.g. why attack each other when the other player is the biggest?

[Dukasaur]

9726.

Up 100 this week.

[venom7878]

i've tried to get friends involved, but they all turn away or forget thanks to the long wait times. I don't think much can be done about that, but that's what I would say prevents Conquer Club from maintaining members.

[stealth99]

I doubt CC's really that profitable now really. Might get enough to stay perhaps partially comfortable but maybe feeling it. Be my guess there.

With 4500 paying members, that amounts to just over $100,000 per year in income. There's not much cost for staffing, but I don't know what the hardware and bandwidth costs are. Still, it's a reasonable income -- for now.

Not really. First, take off the top probably something like 6 to 8% for the bankers' rake-off. The smaller the business, the higher the percentage the banks demand for processing credit-card payments, and for microbusiness (under $100K, which CC is now flirting with) 6 to 8% is not unusual. Okay, so you're down to 92K.

Next, there's other transactional fees. CC accepts Paypal, and Paypal will refund a purchasers money with no questions asked. They don't even consider any evidence that the purchaser got his product already. I've never heard any numbers on CC, but the last internet game I got heavily involved with lost about 20% of Paypal receipts to dishonest people who would buy game credits, use them up, and then file a Paypal complaint and get their money back. If CC has similar problems, with lets say 25% of memberships being Paypal-based and 20% of those being chargebacks, that's another 5K down the toilet. 87K now.

Allow at least 5K for registrations, licenses, mandatory audits, and other government scams. 82K. (That's if you manage to jiggle it so you don't pay any corporate income tax, which can be done but not forever. You can play games with carrying income forward into losing years, but there's limits to how far that will take you.)

Bandwidth and servers. Lackattack was paying something like $3000/month for servers and bandwidth? I think that's the figure I heard tossed around. Now, BW has reduced the cost by using his own servers. Still, the equipment has to be amortized and the bandwidth cost can't be reduced by much, so maybe he got it down to $1500/month. Very unlikely, but let's be optimistic. There's 18K, so you're down to 64K.

64K for two full-time and one part-time admin? Gimme a break. 64K isn't a very good salary for one person, much less two-and-a-half. (Gotta consider salary at true cost, including payroll taxes, liability insurance, and the like. Low for an internet business, but not free.)

Make no mistake. BW is carrying this albatross on his own internal reserves, and he won't carry it forever. I have no idea how long, but I suspect if it doesn't start making money before spring, it's done.

Amazing how two different people can look at the same thing and come to such different conclusions. Obviously one was well thought out, authored by someone qualified to discuss these matters, and coming from a position of being well informed. I enjoyed the read Dukasaur. All the more reason for players who like and appreciate this site, to take some ownership and start giving back or contributing. We do indeed get a pretty big bang for our buck.

[stealth99]

Speaking to whomever it applies and to no one in particular...........

What frustrates and slightly angers me about this discussion is the number of times that players here are speaking for the so-called players who have left CC. Some of you are virtually claiming that these players are dropping off their surveys to you on the way out the door.

News Flash

You having a complaint does not equal you discovering the single cause of CC's alleged decline!!

You having a complaint does not equal you discovering the miracle idea that will rescue CC from this awful despair that you promise will most certainly occur if CC does not smarten up and listen to you!! Basically you are bullying the site and/or the owner in my humble opinion.

How come those of you who have a complaint seem to know so many people who have quit because of the very same problem you are now presenting? Who are all these buddies of yours, that have quit CC?? I don't have any that have quit? I don't hear my friends talking about any of their friends who have quit for any of these reasons. How come all the people quitting for the reasons that you mention happen to also be your buddies?

NOTE: As mentioned above, I am not speaking to anyone in particular. I read a lot of this thread today and noticed a theme in some of the comments.

Seriously, can you please make your suggestion or state your problem without such a shallow and baseless attack on the site? Can you also learn to present your ideas without the embellished cowardly claim that so many others are behind you? Perhaps some of that crap that you are writing is responsible the decline in membership that you speak of. Have any of your studies or surveys measured those results yet?

Understand that when you claim that you know a bunch of people who have left CC for the very thing you are now bringing up, that it does not add strength to your arguments. It very likely does not threaten the owner (but I have never spoken to him so I wouldn't know for sure.....just a hunch). I suspect the added embellishment fools very few. To me it comes across as cheap and vindictive and it appears that you have an axe to grind as opposed to concern for our site. Credibility instantly disappears when outrageous claims are made that appear to be fabricated. Perhaps less is more here because I believe that trying to "beef" up your issue with that crap makes the author feel good but only ends up turning the reader off.

[BigBallinStalin]

How often do the "decline deniers" cite user surveys to back their claims?

[Leehar]

Things I'm still not too sure about: What level does/is diplomacy supposed to play? Is there back channel discussions (Messages/chat channels, etc) as part of the planning/strategy, or is the game message system, with public communication that everyone sees where diplomacy is supposed to occure. My games have been mostly silent so far. I don't know if people are chatting up a storm somewhere and I'm just not seeing it.

I know at the table, I can whisper in a payers ear, or go in the other room. Not sure what the digital equivalent is here. In a game like Droidippy, such public/back channel interfaces are the core of the game.

I think the closest equivalent you'd find to that is team games. Obviously it does depend on which teammates you get, but the most likely place to see people chatting up a storm where you're not seeing it is in team chat.

[iAmCaffeine]

You having a complaint does not equal you discovering the single cause of CC's alleged decline!!

No, but obviously changes within the past year, or lack of them, has caused a decline. Complaining is often the start of finding a solution, for what need would there be for a solution if there were no complaints?

How come those of you who have a complaint seem to know so many people who have quit because of the very same problem you are now presenting? Who are all these buddies of yours, that have quit CC?? I don't have any that have quit? I don't hear my friends talking about any of their friends who have quit for any of these reasons. How come all the people quitting for the reasons that you mention happen to also be your buddies?

Shockingly enough, people speak to their friends more than they speak to other people, so they will know about their friends' reasons for leaving/complaining.

Seriously, can you please make your suggestion or state your problem without such a shallow and baseless attack on the site?

Even those that criticise the site still appreciate it to a degree, although you could argue that makes them quite hypocritical.

Can you also learn to present your ideas without the embellished cowardly claim that so many others are behind you? Perhaps some of that crap that you are writing is responsible the decline in membership that you speak of. Have any of your studies or surveys measured those results yet?

I believe flame wars has been brought up several times.

Understand that when you claim that you know a bunch of people who have left CC for the very thing you are now bringing up, that it does not add strength to your arguments. It very likely does not threaten the owner (but I have never spoken to him so I wouldn't know for sure.....just a hunch). I suspect the added embellishment fools very few. To me it comes across as cheap and vindictive and it appears that you have an axe to grind as opposed to concern for our site. Credibility instantly disappears when outrageous claims are made that appear to be fabricated. Perhaps less is more here because I believe that trying to "beef" up your issue with that crap makes the author feel good but only ends up turning the reader off.

Fair point, although mostly addressed above. Something else to consider is that a very, very small percentage of players ever read the forums, and that number will decrease given the navigation re-arrangement.

[owenshooter]

You having a complaint does not equal you discovering the single cause of CC's alleged decline!!

ehhhh... from almost 25K to under 10K (9600-ish) in a few years is not an alleged decline... and if you have been following the thread, many of the "complainers" have offered up ideas to help the site... and if you look deeper at the issue, many of the changes around here now are ideas that were brought up way back when lack was still the owner... Big Wham has been actually productive in doing things like offering tiered membership, mentor games for new players, etc... a lot of the complaints here are about the increased glut of maps (most of which suck, in my opinion), increased game options, rule changes that made the freestyle players jump ship, etc... so, a lot of the thread is actually quite productive and deals with the multiple exodus of players that have occurred on this site... i love CC, but i can't stick my head in the sand and watch the site go down the way i watched the forums go down... prior ownership destroyed the forums and as we all yelled from behind the yellow tape, we were told the same thing that you are saying now. Luckily, Big Wham is trying to bring the forums back, the same way he is trying to bring back the gaming aspect of the site... i for one think there are too many maps, too many game play options, new players should be given limited maps they can play only opening newer/more difficult maps after X amount of games on the basic maps, freemiums should be given open games on Classic, and change the freestyle rules back... most of what is wrong with the site is not Big Wham's doing.. he has the unenviable task of trying to un-knot the mess left behind him...

[iAmCaffeine]

indeed.

[Gweeedo]

CC maps are fascinating when you first enter into this gaming site, options are OK too.
Allowing first timers to engage in bot wars 'only', might give them the feeling of achievement (victory) and capability, competitiveness enticing them to stay and get some enjoyment out of this site oppose to being beat for the first dozen games or so.

Maybe allowing them to gain rank in the first few battle against the bots.
Also, disconnect chat for those players who have a rating of 4.1 or less.
A Newb being pitted against such players does not help...foul mouth bastards!