In Eco by Strange Loop Games, players can make their own world (or server) and welcome other players to share their dream. The value of a an Eco world comes from the number and quality of players who contribute to this dream. There are, however, common mistakes and mishaps from administrators that can easily turn happy citizens to deserters.
I make a world and ruin it. So what ? I just reload and get new people. In fact, there are many players of Eco out there. Why bother?
Well, my server do not have the settings that suits every Eco player (ex.: collaboration level, presence of mods, etc.). This reduces the amount of potential players. Next, Eco requires a lot of time and you can never be sure every player will be there until the end. Also, many players out there do not yet have the skills and empathy needed for a cooperative game, which further reduces the list or quality players. Many active people are already playing on other servers and my server is not the only one that will open today. Finally, unless the server has exceptional community management (such as Le Village, Les Franquois or Maiestas Haven), I should expect waves of desertion and I want a good number of people to work on the resources-intense projects at the end.
So the real pool of potential players is smaller than you think. If you want a proof, just look at few random servers listed in Eco right now and look up the number of people who logged in in the last 24 hours. How often does it go over 5 players with servers older than 5 days? Now 10 days? Perhaps a bit of caution is necessary after all...
Common mistakes and mishaps shared in this post are divided in two categories. The first one is based on what players expect from the server, which usually comes from the server's description and rules. The second one is mainly related to the way the administrator behaves and rules his world. I won't go into details of community management: just things the admin fully controls.
Server settings and description
Its seems that most active servers are those with a description. The first use of a description is to show others we care enough about the server to write something (!). It is also the ideal place to describe what players should expect about the world.
1) No goal
Why was this server made ? Was it to build the perfect city or to rush and destroy the asteroid? Is this server part of a larger community of gamers? Is it a test just to discover how the game works? Is it a long term server or a weekend experience?
If my server is just a test and people didn't know about it, they will feel I made them loose their time and will be reluctant to join again when the "real" server opens.
Surely, I have some kind of vision for this server. Some administrators write things like "have fun", "work together" or "friendly". Others are more serious and focus on "trade" and "economy". Some will inspire with "let's destroy the asteroid" or relax with "no collaboration needed" or "do what you want".
In my opinion, these are not sufficient descriptions, but at least it's something. I prefer when admins tell me more about their ideal world and even the ideal playtime or level of focus on trade.
So a common mishap here is when administrators fail to communicate a clear goal and end up with players with very different objectives about the game (or at least very different from their view). At worst, this can lead to endless arguing, bullying, sabotage and, frankly, a very boring game.
Obviously, rules and visions must go with mechanisms to enforce them.
2) World size too big
Eco is a cooperative game and works better if we can bring people close to work together. I can create a perfectly good game on a world of 1 km or smaller with 25 active players. Going over 2 km is better suited for specific scenarios (ex.: multiple towns) and well-established servers who expect dozens of returning players. Also, beginners tend to settle far so 3-4 km is pretty much an automatic fail for most of them.
The bigger the world, the higher the chances that people will settle apart and fail to collaborate enough. I would need a lot of people to make all the necessary roads and compensate for time lost in transport between biomes. How likely will I find such a group of dedicated players?
3) Hidden collaboration status
It's my server and I decide the collaboration status. However, it is also possible to change other settings such as XP bonus, level cost, basic amount per recipe, etc. These settings are not visible to the players until they land in the world. However, they have a direct effect on the collaboration level. Even things like stockpile distance and size have an effect. If I don't mention these changes in the server's description, a lot of players will log in and leave shortly after they realize the settings are not what they expected. Is that a problem? Well, another thing potential players see is the ratio of active players vs the total amount of players who logged at least once. A low ratio indicate something is wrong on the server, so it's bad publicity.
This is not medium settings !
4) No asteroid
The asteroid is a powerful incentive to work together. It's okay to remove it, but it's better to replace it equally inspiring incentives for cooperation. What will they be ? Individual building contests may brings competitive behaviors by the way.
5) No server's duration or wipe conditions
Playing an entire game of Eco is a commitment. The most successful servers I have seen out there are those who include in the description some information about when and how the world resets. Perhaps players feel more confident about joining when they have some information on this subject?
I may write that I'll be the only judge for world reset... or follow the official Strange Loop Games servers and indicate the starting and ending date of the server. Big communities also have a voting system and trigger conditions for a vote. In any case, I also have to uphold this engagement.
There are no such things as "no wipe"or "no plan for wiping"... The server will close eventually...
6) No mention about etiquette and rules
How far apart should people settle? How do I want people to handle pollution? These two subjects seems to spawn a lot of problems, so I might want to address them in the server's description. Banning someone because he is leaving 2 stockpiles of tailing next to a farmer is actually long and annoying: the farmer nearby leaves the game because it's no longer fun, we give warnings, arguments, people taking sides, banning process (and angry people returning using another account), clean, unclaim land, etc. If I have any special expectations about this world, it's time to write it.
7) Private server
I was banned once in my years of playing Eco: the admin asked me if I can use his language, which was neither french or english. Then, unceremoniously, "poof". Note that Google translate does miracles as I once discovered with a latvian partner. Briefly, if you discriminate which players can join or if you only want to be with friends, add a password, mention it in the description or hide your server in a manner that prevent strangers from joining.
The same approach applies for small group of friends who leave their server public, but really intent to play between themselves. People will only log in for few hours or few days before discovering there is no hope of collaboration. At best they leave, at worst they get in full-troll mode and make you loose time.
In-game mishaps
1) Cheating
In most individual games cheating is seen as a way to save time or get through a challenge that is deemed less significant. Cheating against the computer in this case only hurts the individual challenge.
In Eco, players are closely linked to each other, so cheating undermines the contribution of one to several players. On the long term, it reduces the essential pressure of working together and the server falls apart. The most important (and fragile) ecosystem in Eco is actually made of the players themselves and how they interact to reach their goals. Working together implies that everyone has a chance to contribute. Most of the time, if players feel the need to cheat, it is because they have not found a way to work together. In a way, the game is already lost.
In Eco, players are usually expecting some equity too. This is not the case if I create elk tacos for myself during the game, give myself every skill, extra land papers, or make my first house out of lumber at day 1. Flying because "I am on admin duty" is frowned upon as it often preludes further cheats and server failure, but it is tolerated if you take video shots or similar projects.
Eco can be long and grinding when there is no collaboration and when people fail to understand core game mechanics. My server may miss a crucial profession too. If a problem arise and cheating is the solution, it's best to consider a discussion with everyone on the server and make sure the solution has a fair impact. A temporary governmental store, equal sharing using the distribution station or similar mechanism can be chosen. However, cheating is likely to put something out of balance sooner or later.
I was invited to join a world recently. The host was doing this for the first time. As it happens often, he gave himself extra skills so "his server won't miss any important job". This actually had the opposite effect as every player just logged in and left, seeing the admin himself was not willing to dependent on other players like everyone. The server failed, obviously.
2) Changing XP levels and conditions
People joined because they choose my world for what it offered. Changing the settings later is like changing a contract once it's been signed. Yes it's my server and I can make anything I want, but I am messing with the trust people have into the server, which is the place I want them to freely dedicate their leisure time for the next 30 days.
Adding a mod mid-course and making autocratic laws without consultation are somewhat far from the basic condition expected on most servers. Changing plant and tree growth has a large impact. All these sudden changes can be considered cheating too. By the way, making a common currency is not a solution to "stimulate" the economy. Changing to a common currency is actually a challenge and if your want to stimulate your economy, it is likely because your community is already challenged enough.
3) Pre-build
Should I create a mint and begin the game with a common currency? Some worlds do and I won't debate the question here. If you choose this option, just remember that every community project is a chance for players to learn to work together, which ultimately helps on the long run. We can also work fine with the bartering system if the goal is not to rob each other and stores are set in a cooperative fashion.
Pre-build is not inherently bad as it removes early difficult challenges that can lead to server failure. But these challenges have a role in promoting collaboration, learning and creating a sense of belonging too. Pre-building the currency and government should be made with a good understanding of how the game works and how to create successful communities: you will need to put in place other mechanisms to promote balance. Overall, it seems to work better on already established communities with experienced players, since many players attained a level of trust and collaboration to face the next challenges. Contrary to many server's descriptions, I believe pre-build currency is detrimental to new players. But hey, it's Eco and everything is possible, right?
Furthermore, I have seen administrators add a huge ashlar stone town hall with decorations and spawn roads around them on day 1. For some reason, these building designs are never nice or grossly exaggerated in size. Town center improvements are actually great tools for balancing the economy and many players around this cheated project are left behind as they can't hope to sell building materials and decorations in the future. They also loose a good community project. Servers who cheat-made race tracks, laser stadiums and other structures likely loose a good occasion to build a stronger collaborative experience as well.
4) Me and my friends...and those who pay
It's my server and I want this to work. So I invite some friends that I trust. It's okay. Really, it's okay...until one of them ask for some additional stars and goodies. It's okay until my friend act as a smartass with everyone else. It's okay until my friend and I work together in a fashion that keeps other players away (ex.: see server-killer teams). It's okay until my friend asks me to take his side in a conflict or is given the biggest contracts in-game (nepotism). Lastly, it's okay until my friend is given free materials to do a "special" project for the server (ex.: sun dial) that doesn't really benefit everyone else and while every other players must work to do theirs.
It's important to make sure our friends share the same objective and follow the same rules before starting the game. Otherwise, consider a private server just for you and your friends with boosted stats.
Selling advantage in-game (ex.: land claims, tools, trucks) in exchange for real money conflicts with the TOS: "selling SLG accounts or entitlements (including virtual currencies and items) without SLG’s permission"
Conclude on server's mishaps
To conclude here, many problems in Eco with regards to admin are related to trust and expectations. When an admin uses his powers to cheat or impose a rule, there is an impact on trust. When big changes are made compared to the original conditions of the server, players react because what they expect about this server is no more true.
Comments
Post a Comment