Prohibit Welcome Telegrams in Feeders

[Mexar]

You're overstating the power of 40 seconds.

But does anyone not click that quickly? Fairly certain for almost all people, the first telegram they'll read (besides the NS one) is going to be their feeder welcome telegram. As any recruiter can tell you, the first one they read is by far the most important - the earlier the better. There's no way the influence of Welcome Telegrams can be denied because every single new nation reads them before even getting their first recruitment telegram. It's huge. 40 is far more than enough time - if all my recruitment telegrams landed that early, the Versutian Federation would probably be triple the size it is now.

When I create a new nation, I look at the nation page a bit before I click on a TG. Often, by the time I click, there are already several recruitment TGs, which reading top-down, I see before the welcome TG.

[Evil Lord Sauron]

Also, I just refounded this nation. It got four TGs within 10 seconds.

-Cerian Quilor

There is no staggering with refounded nations.

Founded nations take a few hours for all the telegrams to come through.

[Cerb]

Also, I just refounded this nation. It got four TGs within 10 seconds.

-Cerian Quilor

Maybe refounds are different. I just created a nation and while it did receive 1 recruitment TG a few seconds after I saw the welcome TG, it took 4 more minutes to get 4 total user sent telegrams.


I will say it seemed a lot shorter than 50 seconds before the nation received recruitment TGs

[DWAsnia]

Also, I just refounded this nation. It got four TGs within 10 seconds.

-Cerian Quilor

Maybe refounds are different. I just created a nation and while it did receive 1 recruitment TG a few seconds after I saw the welcome TG, it took 4 more minutes to get 4 total user sent telegrams.


I will say it seemed a lot shorter than 50 seconds before the nation received recruitment TGs

I just refounded a nation and got 5 Recruitment TG's and 1 Welcome TG within a minute. Also, the Welcome was wedged in halfway between the Recruitment TG's.

[The Black Hat Guy]

You are correct that GCR population fluctuation isn't random; it is linked to two specific time periods, the summer and winter holidays. Whilst average GCR population varies with total NS population, within that the trend is for an increase in the periods August-November, a decrease in December-January, an increase in February-May, and a decrease in June-July. Overall GCR population has followed total NS population, and is lower in 2013 than in 2012 by roughly a thousand nations per GCR.

We are in a growth period for GCR's, and as such it would be against the historical trend for GCR population to be falling in October. Should, come December and the arrival of the decline period, GCR population continue to rise contrary to the historical trend then I will agree that the welcome telegram has had a dramatic effect. Until then, growth in the growth period is most logically attributed to the growth period.

This trend of growth and decline, however, is not simply a link to feeders. According to NSDossier, it is not the solely the population of Feeders that follows this trend, but NS as a whole. This would imply that the pattern of growth and decline in these seasons is not an inherent pattern of Feeders in and of itself, but rather a result of the fluctuation of the NS population that is then followed by the feeders. Given this information, the changes within that pattern, such as the current decline of the NS population, would generally be followed by GCRs - even without the data (which we have in any case), this is intuitively correct: Feeders take in new nations, and if there are less new nations, Feeders will shrink. This is not what we have seen. GCRs are growing, contrary to NS as a whole, which is shrinking. This aberration from the normal pattern implies an outside force acting to change that pattern, or a coincidence, and given that this happened almost immediately after a proposed outside force was introduced, we have substantial evidence to suggest that that outside force is increasing the retention rate of Feeders.

[South Pacific Belschaft]

You are correct that GCR population fluctuation isn't random; it is linked to two specific time periods, the summer and winter holidays. Whilst average GCR population varies with total NS population, within that the trend is for an increase in the periods August-November, a decrease in December-January, an increase in February-May, and a decrease in June-July. Overall GCR population has followed total NS population, and is lower in 2013 than in 2012 by roughly a thousand nations per GCR.

We are in a growth period for GCR's, and as such it would be against the historical trend for GCR population to be falling in October. Should, come December and the arrival of the decline period, GCR population continue to rise contrary to the historical trend then I will agree that the welcome telegram has had a dramatic effect. Until then, growth in the growth period is most logically attributed to the growth period.

This trend of growth and decline, however, is not simply a link to feeders. According to NSDossier, it is not the solely the population of Feeders that follows this trend, but NS as a whole. This would imply that the pattern of growth and decline in these seasons is not an inherent pattern of Feeders in and of itself, but rather a result of the fluctuation of the NS population that is then followed by the feeders. Given this information, the changes within that pattern, such as the current decline of the NS population, would generally be followed by GCRs - even without the data (which we have in any case), this is intuitively correct: Feeders take in new nations, and if there are less new nations, Feeders will shrink. This is not what we have seen. GCRs are growing, contrary to NS as a whole, which is shrinking. This aberration from the normal pattern implies an outside force acting to change that pattern, or a coincidence, and given that this happened almost immediately after a proposed outside force was introduced, we have substantial evidence to suggest that that outside force is increasing the retention rate of Feeders.

Except that this highlighted section is a blatant lie; your own data shows that the current GCR growth period began before the introduction of the welcome TG.

[The Black Hat Guy]

Except that this highlighted section is a blatant lie; your own data shows that the current GCR growth period began before the introduction of the welcome TG.

That's not true at all. Let's go through them individually.

TP: Already had slightly positive slope, increased dramatically after introduction of Welcome TGs

TEP: Declining on average until introduction of Welcome TGs, then started to increase

TWP: Mostly stagnant, slight negative curve, then started to increase

TSP: Negative slope, became a positive slope after introduction of Welcome TGs.

TNP: Positive slope, slope stayed mostly constant after introduction of Welcome TGs.

Your statement only holds true for a single region: TNP. It's true in part for TP, but the slope increased dramatically after the introduction of welcome TGs, suggesting an effect. Overall, most Feeders were still declining or stagnant before the introduction of Welcome TGs.

[Cerb]

Maybe refounds are different. I just created a nation and while it did receive 1 recruitment TG a few seconds after I saw the welcome TG, it took 4 more minutes to get 4 total user sent telegrams.


I will say it seemed a lot shorter than 50 seconds before the nation received recruitment TGs

I just refounded a nation and got 5 Recruitment TG's and 1 Welcome TG within a minute. Also, the Welcome was wedged in halfway between the Recruitment TG's.

Yes, from what I understand refoundings are not in the same delayed queue as new nations. Makes sense if you think about it as most refounds already know the score about recruiting.

[Milograd]

This isn't a bad thing. If you're upset that you're not bringing in as many recruits as you could, take a stab at writing a better telegram.

If a nation is hit by a bunch of telegrams, finds a feeder's/sinker's TG to be the best of them, and chooses to stay there, we should be glad about that. They've obviously found a place they want to stay in, and we are more likely to retain players if they find a place that suits them best amongst the most options possible. This proposal seems like nothing more than a userite being bothered by the fact that players are actually being informed about the regions they start in as being potential places to play in too, rather than temporary pit-stops for new nations.

Besides, UCRs are clearly maintaining desirable sizes -- OP's region has over 550 nations, for example.

[Gest]

Besides, UCRs are clearly maintaining desirable sizes -- OP's region has over 550 nations, for example.

Except that we, unlike the GCR mooches, are paying for our recruitment. It's great to see my money going to subsidize NS' self-appointed nobility. I get to pay and I also get to at best always be second in line. Do I also have to till the GCR's land as well?

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

[The Black Hat Guy]

This isn't a bad thing. If you're upset that you're not bringing in as many recruits as you could, take a stab at writing a better telegram.

If a nation is hit by a bunch of telegrams, finds a feeder's/sinker's TG to be the best of them, and chooses to stay there, we should be glad about that. They've obviously found a place they want to stay in, and we are more likely to retain players if they find a place that suits them best amongst the most options possible. This proposal seems like nothing more than a userite being bothered by the fact that players are actually being informed about the regions they start in as being potential places to play in too, rather than temporary pit-stops for new nations.

This issue is far more complex that simply "writing a better telegram". Other factors play a role, the pertinent one being the order in which telegrams are seen. If nations were hit by a bunch of telegrams, Feeder/Sinker Welcome Telegrams among them in a random order, and then decided to stay, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

But people are not perfectly rational beings. The order in which telegrams are seen matters. As of now, Welcome Telegrams from Feeders are seen approximately 40 seconds before any other telegram, lending a significant advantage to their goals. Ergo, the situation is not as you describe, with new nations reading new telegrams as, if not equal, random supplements to each other, arriving at measured intervals. Welcome Telegrams are seen first and are therefore able to imprint their propaganda/advertisement/statement upon the new nation first, which any recruiter will tell you has a significant effect - that's why scripts rushed to send telegrams to nations as soon as they were created, one of the reasons for the switch to a new system.

Again, I have no problem with the system you describe. Feeders and Sinkers can and should be able to send telegrams into the stack along with recruitment telegrams. But not with any special priority.

[Milograd]

Besides, UCRs are clearly maintaining desirable sizes -- OP's region has over 550 nations, for example.

Except that we, unlike the GCR mooches, are paying for our recruitment. It's great to see my money going to subsidize NS' self-appointed nobility. I get to pay and I also get to at best always be second in line. Do I also have to till the GCR's land as well?

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

I think it's a lot fairer than you portray it; our regions are recruited from more than any others in the game.

It's one telegram in a sea of >20, and only nations in our region receive them.

[The Black Hat Guy]

I think it's a lot fairer than you portray it; our regions are recruited from more than any others in the game.

It's one telegram in a sea of >20, and only nations in our region receive them.

However, you have the biggest institutionalized advantage in the game, which is that you receive new nations. The monstrous size of Feeders only serves to prove that this advantage is already far larger than any other: even after having your new nations spammed with telegrams, Feeders are still 5/5 the largest regions, followed by Sinkers. You don't need yet another institutionalized advantage when the one you already have sets you ahead so far.

[Parhe]

After Parhe's ridiculous nation farms and such, nations are a really poor measure of activity or population shifts. WA nations would be much better.

After? Population size never was a good indicator before.

Though to most recruiters you guys send telegrams, paid for or not, at your own risk. At least I stopped responding with telegrams such as "I'm sorry but I like my current region" among others.

Though in all honestly the nations spawning randomly in regions is pretty troublesome. Would regions have an opt in or out option? Or what if the region that chooses to has little to engage the player, who in turn loses interest in NS entirely, having received little to know other recruitment telegrams being in a non GCR?
I do agree that perhaps recruitment and welcome telegrams shouldn't be discriminated on based on what kind of region sent them. Honestly I did some recruiting in the past and I actually enjoyed doing it manually. Unfortunately it seems we cannot go back.

[Parhe]

Stop calling them recruitment TG's. They are not recruitment TG's. It is physically impossible for us to recruit someone already in our regions.

The welcome TG is a means of communication between government and resident in any region; ergo, it is an internal matter. I would like to invite the UCRites to but the hell out of GCR internal matters and stop trying to make it harder for us to communicate with people.

Bel, you got mad when GCRs were excluded from the Arnhelm Declaration, which was specifically created for UCRs. Please don't talk to us about butting out of GCR business, especially when anyone with eyes can see the welcome TGs the GCRs have cooked up are all dedicated to making sure as many nations as possible stay.

You mean doing exactly what welcome telegrams are suppose to do?

[Hobbesistan]

Bel, you got mad when GCRs were excluded from the Arnhelm Declaration, which was specifically created for UCRs. Please don't talk to us about butting out of GCR business, especially when anyone with eyes can see the welcome TGs the GCRs have cooked up are all dedicated to making sure as many nations as possible stay.

You mean doing exactly what welcome telegrams are suppose to do?

Ding ding ding, We have a winner folks!

[ErasmoGnome]

Bel, you got mad when GCRs were excluded from the Arnhelm Declaration, which was specifically created for UCRs. Please don't talk to us about butting out of GCR business, especially when anyone with eyes can see the welcome TGs the GCRs have cooked up are all dedicated to making sure as many nations as possible stay.

You mean doing exactly what welcome telegrams are suppose to do?

Yes, doing exactly what welcome telegrams are supposed to do. Why did you feel the need to point that out? The entire premise of this debate is that welcome telegrams are an advantage to GCRs in that they will now get more nations. I'm not begrudging them for the effort - I would do the same thing. But then we have Bel trying to argue that Welcome Telegrams have not allowed GCRs to grow at all, which is a falsehood based not only on the data TBHG has so kindly presented but also on their point to begin with - they are designed and sent out to increase retention. It should be a surprise if they didn't work, yet people are arguing that they don't.

[Cerian Quilor]

Besides, UCRs are clearly maintaining desirable sizes -- OP's region has over 550 nations, for example.

Except that we, unlike the GCR mooches, are paying for our recruitment. It's great to see my money going to subsidize NS' self-appointed nobility. I get to pay and I also get to at best always be second in line. Do I also have to till the GCR's land as well?

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

Though I still don't support the change, Gest makes a good point.

[Unibot III]

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

Gest makes a good point. Either there is no advantage (so evening all of the speeds could be done just to make everyone comfortable with the system), or there is an advantage and it has to be justified.

EDIT: I should point out I don't think Welcome Telegrams should be abolished, but I could out of fairness, why the welcome telegrams should be put in the same "queue" as other recruitment letters as opposed to being the first telegram received every time.

[Parhe]

Besides, UCRs are clearly maintaining desirable sizes -- OP's region has over 550 nations, for example.

Except that we, unlike the GCR mooches, are paying for our recruitment. It's great to see my money going to subsidize NS' self-appointed nobility. I get to pay and I also get to at best always be second in line. Do I also have to till the GCR's land as well?

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

Um, every region I thought had welcome telegrams. By that wouldn't ever region using them be mooching? Unless I suppose you want every region to pay for welcome telegrams, or you want GCR's to begin recruiting in UCR's for members like happens the other way around. And I don't really think this is to the point of subsidizing "NS' self-appointed nobility." I'm not certain but does NS really need the money from the stamps to keep running? Of course it, I hope, makes it easier at least to keep it running, but I don't think it is to the point that if people stopped buying in protest the server would go down.

[Parhe]

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

Gest makes a good point. Either there is no advantage (so evening all of the speeds could be done just to make everyone comfortable with the system), or there is an advantage and it has to be justified.

I haven't made new nations in batches in weeks, but from what I remember then, though things could have changed, the welcome telegrams didn't catch my eyes any more than the recruitments. Keeping in mind I usually go to the telegram rather quickly after making a nation. With my first nation, and several after that, being new I took some good more time deciding to go there-the telegram box that is. Though if people do believe there is an advantage the best way to fix it if people think it a problem would be by just not having it automatically first. Though, on the one hand, in case a nation in a region GCR or not gets flooded by telegrams from many recruiting regions and one from the region it is in at the time, shouldn't that have some priority? Such as guarantee it would be delivered then?

I was wondering, someone earlier mentioned the nations population going down in a thirty month period. Is that usual for this time of year for it to happen, which I imagine would be possible as schools increase in difficulty, or is it something that might be happening because of a mix of unique conditions brought on by today's system of Welcoming and Recruiting telegrams? If the latter maybe then, in a way, depending on the "demographics" of the nations lost(such as post history, involvement with gameplay or region government, length of existence, etc.), it is a problem that must be fixed to prevent a loss of players.

[Mahaj]

If there's no correlation then GCR's have nothing to fear, players are clearly staying in them because they're so inherently awesome, from having the welcome message get in line with the rest of us.

That's actually a really good point from Gest.

[Bruthannia]

I would be curious to see some data on just how many new nations, upon staying, then proceed to apply for citizenship in the related feeder- and how many only don't move out because they stop caring about the game after 3 minutes of trying to find the "declare war" button.

[Frisbeeteria]

then proceed to apply for citizenship in the related feeder

Does "apply for citizenship" mean "join the offsite forums"? Because the game considers you a citizen in whichever region you're in, so there's no possible way to generate game statistics to support this request.

[Todd McCloud]

I've dug up an old study of GCR population trends by Todd dating back to 2011. It is by far the most extensive study of GCR populations yet conducted, and I invite everyone commenting in this thread to read it. The seven years of data he collected and the conclusions he was able to draw from it conclusively prove the central argument that GCR populations have always gone through simultaneous periods of dramatic decline and gain.

(Image)

The data that TBHG has gathered and presented is not persuasive. By limiting his coverage to one period of decline and growth he has drawn politicized conclusions that are fundamentally incorrect, based on a faulty set of data. Current GCR population trends fit the historic pattern better than the hypothesis that the welcome TG has had a dramatic effect, and until persuasive data is produced otherwise - such as the failure for a new decline period to begin - then the only logical conclusion one can come to is that this is a standard growth period.

In short, the data suggests that we are simply in a standard GCR growth period, which may or may not have been made more dramatic due to the introduction of the welcome TG. However, with the data clearly showing that the growth period began before the introduction of the welcome TG it clearly cannot be attributed solely to said welcome TG.

For what it's worth, I've updated that study about a year ago or so to include Balder and Osiris. The trends kind of remain the same. What may be interesting here is a study done on Feeder Populations vs Userite Populations, but I don't know how much relevancy they'd serve here. EDIT: Frankly I am for keeping welcome TG's in feeder regions, mostly because I am a feederite myself. I cannot say with any degree of certainty how much they would harm / benefit UCRs and GCRs, because there's simply not enough data to see, and too many variables left uncontrolled during that span (in addition to multiple game changes / features that may throw off data nowadays).