Is CC Declining?

[ManBungalow]

I always think the homepage is a bit crappy. There's a .gif doing its thing with poorly-scaled images from a couple of maps and an overall sense of overwhelmingness (wat) with all the different things happening, which might turn a few potential new players away.

[qwert]

i think that add twiter and facebook in home page,are wrong move,because you distract new people from main idea here.Actualy Lack advertise Twiter and Facebook,instead to focus on hes site. Before even implement these two advertise, never number of active player drop so low.
These is mine oppinion,maybe im wrong and maybe no>

[Symmetry]

Yeah- again I know I'm not going to be popular for saying this, but the main attraction of this site is for people who like playing Risk. Fewer people play that game now, but the reason it was so succesful was that it was fun to play.

Most people who know me know that I've always been freemium, and that I stopped playing a while ago, while still posting in the community forums. One of the reasons I stopped playing was that the types of games grew distant from the basic game. It was increasingly hard to find a map that followed the basic tactics. And it was increasingly hard to find a set of rules that stuck to the basics.

Most new players here are likely to be confused. Fog of war rules, bombardment, speed games, instant victories? Join the site and you will lose your first game, not because you are bad at Risk, but because you have no idea how to play the map that players on this site created, and you don't know how the rules work.

You will lose points to those people, and your first experience will be a loss in ranking. Not the best introduction.

[PLAYER57832]

You make some decent points, though I disagree, or rather the heavy Risk emphasis was not necessarily by CC's choice. CC has become much, much more. If there is a problem, it is that by tying itself to Risk, folks can be dissappointed if that is what they seek.

I have LONG thought the maps needed to be differentiated by play better. I worked up a list, a few people liked it, but because it was not tied to Risk, (more or less), it met with opposition.

CC cannot be a "Risk" site. Hasbro won't allow it, AND it just is not necessary. CC has become much, much MUCH more. However, it does need to market what it IS better so that people who want what CC has will stay.

Gotta go, so that's it for now, will add more later.

[Symmetry]

You make some decent points, though I disagree, or rather the heavy Risk emphasis was not necessarily by CC's choice. CC has become much, much more. If there is a problem, it is that by tying itself to Risk, folks can be dissappointed if that is what they seek.

I have LONG thought the maps needed to be differentiated by play better. I worked up a list, a few people liked it, but because it was not tied to Risk, (more or less), it met with opposition.

CC cannot be a "Risk" site. Hasbro won't allow it, AND it just is not necessary. CC has become much, much MUCH more. However, it does need to market what it IS better so that people who want what CC has will stay.

Gotta go, so that's it for now, will add more later.

But that's how it started out, what it was based on. I appreciate the copyright problems, but the basic game mechanics are the same. I'm not sure if this is a relevant comparison or not, but it's as if this site based itself on chess, wants to attract people interested in chess, and then rewarded people who are good at that 3-D chess game on StarTrek.

I don't think that this needs to be Risk, just that it needs to be what worked. I find innovations on the site as interesting as anyone, but they usually add complexity to a game that was actually pretty successful and popular in its own right.

[iamkoolerthanu]

But it's not like adding new features takes away from the risk aspect. You can still play classic map, esc spoils, no fog, etc... You can play classic settings, that is still an option. But if all they had was the classic settings, and only a few 'basic' maps, I bet you 75 percent of the CC population would get bored and leave much sooner than they leave now.. Sure you might get a few more people to join, but when people leave twice as fast as they are coming in, is it really worth it?

[Symmetry]

But it's not like adding new features takes away from the risk aspect. You can still play classic map, esc spoils, no fog, etc... You can play classic settings, that is still an option. But if all they had was the classic settings, and only a few 'basic' maps, I bet you 75 percent of the CC population would get bored and leave much sooner than they leave now.. Sure you might get a few more people to join, but when people leave twice as fast as they are coming in, is it really worth it?

I think you're right, and that basically it comes down to how the site caters to new members vs how the site caters to established members. Attracting people to the site isn't enough if they won't stay.

[Army of GOD]

You make some decent points, though I disagree, or rather the heavy Risk emphasis was not necessarily by CC's choice. CC has become much, much more. If there is a problem, it is that by tying itself to Risk, folks can be dissappointed if that is what they seek.

I have LONG thought the maps needed to be differentiated by play better. I worked up a list, a few people liked it, but because it was not tied to Risk, (more or less), it met with opposition.

CC cannot be a "Risk" site. Hasbro won't allow it, AND it just is not necessary. CC has become much, much MUCH more. However, it does need to market what it IS better so that people who want what CC has will stay.

Gotta go, so that's it for now, will add more later.

CC IS RISK. It's not even debatable. It's just a lot more complex and diverse than basic RISK.

Also, the colors on the whole site are kind of eye-dissolving.

[PLAYER57832]

But it's not like adding new features takes away from the risk aspect. You can still play classic map, esc spoils, no fog, etc... You can play classic settings, that is still an option. But if all they had was the classic settings, and only a few 'basic' maps, I bet you 75 percent of the CC population would get bored and leave much sooner than they leave now.. Sure you might get a few more people to join, but when people leave twice as fast as they are coming in, is it really worth it?

I think you're right, and that basically it comes down to how the site caters to new members vs how the site caters to established members. Attracting people to the site isn't enough if they won't stay.

This is it. However, you also have to realize that any site like this is going to lose members in time. I have been here for a LONG time CC-wise (others have been here longer, but still...). That means I have "shown up" every single day for years. I did take a couple of breaks, definitely spend time in the forums, etc.

AND.. even though I came here for RISK, in fact found it through googling Risk... I have long since decided I much prefer AOR2, a lot of other maps. I really detest playing classic, particularly since its not really "classic' any more.

The thing is, CC HAS to change and grow. Holding onto "we are just Risk".. while a good baseline is not going to keep people here. People who will stay here are those who enjoy many different maps, not just thsoe who want to play classic.

What I DO dislike, extremely is the new rating system (total waste of time.. worse than nothing, as far as I am concerned.. and have said so basically from the time it changed) and some of the stuff that has gone on in the forums. I also think the emphasis on farming is off, though I am not saying we need a "free for all" on new players.

[greenoaks]

i don't think it matters too much if cc has 21 or 18 thousand members.

what i'd like to know is how many are premium? we pay for this site so are our numbers increasing, decreasing or stagnating?

[Pirlo]

I think it's more interesting to have more people. at least games will fill faster. but the most thing I'm concerned of is the very high turnover of newcomers. if 2 out 5 newcomers would accept the fact that they have to wait one day to take the next turn, there's a big chance they will change mind and quit when they are put in a game with other 3 newcomers who choose to not come back again. why? because those 2 will have to wait days rather than hours until the leaving three deadbeat.

[BigBallinStalin]

But it's not like adding new features takes away from the risk aspect. You can still play classic map, esc spoils, no fog, etc... You can play classic settings, that is still an option. But if all they had was the classic settings, and only a few 'basic' maps, I bet you 75 percent of the CC population would get bored and leave much sooner than they leave now.. Sure you might get a few more people to join, but when people leave twice as fast as they are coming in, is it really worth it?

I think you're right, and that basically it comes down to how the site caters to new members vs how the site caters to established members. Attracting people to the site isn't enough if they won't stay.

CC seems to lack effective marketing in order to increase its growth. Why? I don't think they know what they're doing, OR they don't care, or maybe they're satisfied with the status quo, but have no idea what the long-term looks like.

[Bruceswar]

I feel that it is

I disagree. Sure while some have left, there is new blood flowing in. The 1st page is harder to get on than ever. This is a game where people can only play so long before they tire of it. With that said, CC is still fine even with a slight summer decline in people. It will start picking up again soon.

finally reconsidering your earlier statements that by like 6 months ago we would see majors on the front page again?

6 months ago it surely seemed like it. We were 30 points away I think? Now not even close.

[Army of GOD]

But it's not like adding new features takes away from the risk aspect. You can still play classic map, esc spoils, no fog, etc... You can play classic settings, that is still an option. But if all they had was the classic settings, and only a few 'basic' maps, I bet you 75 percent of the CC population would get bored and leave much sooner than they leave now.. Sure you might get a few more people to join, but when people leave twice as fast as they are coming in, is it really worth it?

I think you're right, and that basically it comes down to how the site caters to new members vs how the site caters to established members. Attracting people to the site isn't enough if they won't stay.

CC seems to lack effective marketing in order to increase its growth. Why? I don't think they know what they're doing, OR they don't care, or maybe they're satisfied with the status quo, but have no idea what the long-term looks like.

I feel like I remember some Team CC member saying lack doesn't like doing advertising.

I agree with PLAYER though. CC needs to expand the base of its foundation. I'm not really sure how it can be done, but like I said in the other thread, there are just so many people who like playing RISK.

[patrickaa317]

http://apexwebgaming.com/news2/70246464/Interview-with-Developer-Lackattack

Lack sure makes it seem here that he wants to improve the site and attract more people but actions speak louder than words I guess.