Fostering an Accountable Community
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
Since this thread is mostly negative things, here is a positive. Bravo to the IMMS for the DS raid on the southlands. One of the best mob raids I have seen and kept us jumping! More of this!
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
When Feneon mentioned this to Staff, I said "oof" out loud. It's another example of the min-maxing that has been mentioned before. And sure, people got the goodies faster, but something like this does make the entire event anti-climactic for both imms and players.
There are only so many tools at the immortals' disposal to balance channelers in particular. We are well beyond the limits of what we can do with the game to create balance, especially in live situations. The most sure-fire way is no-channel, or blocking channelers from participating altogether, which is obviously not an option we want to take. Or we will just have to start using those fun 100% hide gray man mobs. See what I'm getting at here? There are only unfun solutions for imms to take here.
Most players have been around long enough to know nothing in a live event stands up to a group of channelers like that. If players want the fun, start making other choices and as players, looping back to accountability, actively point this out to other players. I know there are several players with channeler who have no alts, to which I would say: make up a reason on why you can't use all of your sps. If you're a Yellow, you will "need to save some in case someone needs Healing". If you're a Green, "there may be other threats forthcoming".
Take some accountability here.
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
^^ (edit: to Feneon's post)
There's a LOT to unpack in that post. Just some of my thoughts.
1. The players make and break this game. In the age of 200 on wholist, a lot of the negative noise (and also broken game mechanics) wasdrowned out by the sheer activity that created lots of different things to do and places to go. With small wholists, if Player A always does the same lame dung to me in PK, and Player B is always rude AF to me, and there is really only Player C and D left (one's statting!), then why would I want to log on and engage that? I don't think there's anything wrong with a player opting to not play because of other players.
2. Just like IRL, if you have a toxic friend who is showing no signs of improving and always drags you down, you move on and spend your time with a friend who will build you up and encourage you (constructive criticism is important in this kind of relationship). We've all learned this as we're mostly all well into the adulting phase of life. No one is as incentivized on the MUD to treat each other well (like we might be IRL) because we're all nerds on the other side of a keyboard. I've always thought if I could sit down and have a beer with Player A and B, we'd probably have a great time and come away from it in a better position and understanding of why each other do what we do. But that's hard to do on a game.
3. "Forced PK and forced RP should be expectations." - see Rule #3 - "Role playing on this mud is by choice" I understand when you join a clan there's a different expectation. I don't know that it's defined in the rules - you need to adhere to, at least, the minimum amount of RP so you don't stick out like a sore thumb. You can receive the negative repurcussions of breaking clan RP (CoL & Tower grouping, etc.)... but, I believe active participation is still optional so long as you're not breaking those basic tenants. No? To be clear here, because someone is likely to try and call me out on this, I'm not back-lashing at the fact that one of my chars got audited and needs heavy PK QPs for advancement, and another one of my chars got audited and needs heavy RP QPs for advancement. P.S. can I send some of those RP QPs from char 2 to char 1 and some PK QPs from char 1 to char 2?
4. Channies wizkilling, group composition vs. PvE, etc. - it sucks, and it would be great if we were more self accountable here, but realistically, this is the game's fault. The game should be coded in a way in which it can handle this. Sure, mobol can negate some channeling, but then it makes it too hard for other classes, but in other games, PvE encounters are created in a way in which all classes can participate and enjoy, and at relatively similar challenge levels. Like I said, it sucks, and seems like there's no way to fix it, but it's really the coding's fault. Honestly the same can be said about abusing loopholes to make things easier - gamers are going to game. It's the game's job to remove those loopholes. (And again, sorry imms, we know you don't have the tools to do so, so it creates an impasse.) Also, probably, the PK group imbalance is coding's fault - at least in the way I think about it compared to other PvP games, where a "balanced" group of classes is usually strictly optimal. It sucks here though, I agree. Then again, other PvP games balance sides with equal number of players (and often elo), so I guess that doesn't strictly apply here. I guess, essentially, I think making "game balance" each player's responsibility is just unfortunately bad game design. And imms are doing pretty good here w/ the tools they have.
P.S. Always been a fan of mob raids and the engagement they bring. I'm bummed I missed being #39. I know activity dies down right after them, but if it went 10 online most days to 12 online because of the mob raid, then awesome!
There's a LOT to unpack in that post. Just some of my thoughts.
1. The players make and break this game. In the age of 200 on wholist, a lot of the negative noise (and also broken game mechanics) wasdrowned out by the sheer activity that created lots of different things to do and places to go. With small wholists, if Player A always does the same lame dung to me in PK, and Player B is always rude AF to me, and there is really only Player C and D left (one's statting!), then why would I want to log on and engage that? I don't think there's anything wrong with a player opting to not play because of other players.
2. Just like IRL, if you have a toxic friend who is showing no signs of improving and always drags you down, you move on and spend your time with a friend who will build you up and encourage you (constructive criticism is important in this kind of relationship). We've all learned this as we're mostly all well into the adulting phase of life. No one is as incentivized on the MUD to treat each other well (like we might be IRL) because we're all nerds on the other side of a keyboard. I've always thought if I could sit down and have a beer with Player A and B, we'd probably have a great time and come away from it in a better position and understanding of why each other do what we do. But that's hard to do on a game.
3. "Forced PK and forced RP should be expectations." - see Rule #3 - "Role playing on this mud is by choice" I understand when you join a clan there's a different expectation. I don't know that it's defined in the rules - you need to adhere to, at least, the minimum amount of RP so you don't stick out like a sore thumb. You can receive the negative repurcussions of breaking clan RP (CoL & Tower grouping, etc.)... but, I believe active participation is still optional so long as you're not breaking those basic tenants. No? To be clear here, because someone is likely to try and call me out on this, I'm not back-lashing at the fact that one of my chars got audited and needs heavy PK QPs for advancement, and another one of my chars got audited and needs heavy RP QPs for advancement. P.S. can I send some of those RP QPs from char 2 to char 1 and some PK QPs from char 1 to char 2?
4. Channies wizkilling, group composition vs. PvE, etc. - it sucks, and it would be great if we were more self accountable here, but realistically, this is the game's fault. The game should be coded in a way in which it can handle this. Sure, mobol can negate some channeling, but then it makes it too hard for other classes, but in other games, PvE encounters are created in a way in which all classes can participate and enjoy, and at relatively similar challenge levels. Like I said, it sucks, and seems like there's no way to fix it, but it's really the coding's fault. Honestly the same can be said about abusing loopholes to make things easier - gamers are going to game. It's the game's job to remove those loopholes. (And again, sorry imms, we know you don't have the tools to do so, so it creates an impasse.) Also, probably, the PK group imbalance is coding's fault - at least in the way I think about it compared to other PvP games, where a "balanced" group of classes is usually strictly optimal. It sucks here though, I agree. Then again, other PvP games balance sides with equal number of players (and often elo), so I guess that doesn't strictly apply here. I guess, essentially, I think making "game balance" each player's responsibility is just unfortunately bad game design. And imms are doing pretty good here w/ the tools they have.
P.S. Always been a fan of mob raids and the engagement they bring. I'm bummed I missed being #39. I know activity dies down right after them, but if it went 10 online most days to 12 online because of the mob raid, then awesome!
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
My guess: while your choice to RP is yours, the consequences of things that break RP established by other people/clans, etc. is very much not and never has been. Your actions, whether you're "RPing" or not, can be taken in-character and when that happens, congratulations, RP has been forced upon you. You're either going to be roleplaying a wanted criminal (whether you want to be RPing that or not) or you'll be sending an IC letter to the clan for a pardon.
It's also not a coin-toss. If you walk around swinging your arms "not RPing" and hit someone or something that is "RP", they're going to win 100 percent of the time. RPing is (and generally has been) 100 percent preferred. But that also means if someone is just being a spiteful dickhead and doesn't back it up with basic RP norms, they're veering into Watcher territory.
It's also not a coin-toss. If you walk around swinging your arms "not RPing" and hit someone or something that is "RP", they're going to win 100 percent of the time. RPing is (and generally has been) 100 percent preferred. But that also means if someone is just being a spiteful dickhead and doesn't back it up with basic RP norms, they're veering into Watcher territory.
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
I do love how we are harping on channies being accountable. We used to have that, there were some tower channies that existed with 15 15 mentals back when channies could have up to 350-360 health and could exist in abs and combo. However, certain players complained that they were too powerful so little by little you've whittled the class down to glass cannons, and now your complaining that they are doing exactly what you pigeon-holed them into?
It was a DS raid on the south, what did you think was going to happen? Given how DS decided to capitalize on the last mob raid in ef and killed nearly a dozen of us in a 10 min, I am not surprised people came out in numbers. You've chastised the largest channie clan for holding up rp in the south, then complain when they join in and speed it up.
So please do make up your minds as to how this is going to go. The way I see it, with all the complaints against channies since that raid is, we are damned if we do show, and damned if we don't. Let’s down stabbers to 280 hp and lower their strength, see how they like it...
OR,
If you want a mob to last longer, consider loading it with a Fox head medallion that cannot be taken off the mob, or use Anti channie mechanics, anti-element/weave mechanics.
You could hold the event in a stedding though I am sure we would then get people complaining at how effective channies can be PVE with 2h staves.
Either way, I think perhaps taking a look into the few players who are complaining about the channie class and why, might give you far more insight as to where the hate for the class is coming from.
Something I think would help with Accountability, is perhaps limit players to 1 master/rank 8 each. It would force them to rp and play it effectively and limit the number of min/max characters. Might also breathe life into clans we never see on, if you can only have one master/rank 8 you’re probably going to pick the character you've put the most work into. Perhaps make it One Master/rank 8 per side.
It was a DS raid on the south, what did you think was going to happen? Given how DS decided to capitalize on the last mob raid in ef and killed nearly a dozen of us in a 10 min, I am not surprised people came out in numbers. You've chastised the largest channie clan for holding up rp in the south, then complain when they join in and speed it up.
So please do make up your minds as to how this is going to go. The way I see it, with all the complaints against channies since that raid is, we are damned if we do show, and damned if we don't. Let’s down stabbers to 280 hp and lower their strength, see how they like it...
OR,
If you want a mob to last longer, consider loading it with a Fox head medallion that cannot be taken off the mob, or use Anti channie mechanics, anti-element/weave mechanics.
You could hold the event in a stedding though I am sure we would then get people complaining at how effective channies can be PVE with 2h staves.
Either way, I think perhaps taking a look into the few players who are complaining about the channie class and why, might give you far more insight as to where the hate for the class is coming from.
Something I think would help with Accountability, is perhaps limit players to 1 master/rank 8 each. It would force them to rp and play it effectively and limit the number of min/max characters. Might also breathe life into clans we never see on, if you can only have one master/rank 8 you’re probably going to pick the character you've put the most work into. Perhaps make it One Master/rank 8 per side.
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
Chloro, this has nothing to do with who is complaining about the channie class. This isn't a polarizing issue, so don't turn it into one. It has to do with an imm loading a max level mob and it being nuked into the next Age in four rounds. "Just do xyz" is not an option, as Feneon mentioned. Even finding/copy/pasting existing anti-channie mobol would take several ticks. Also, four rounds is not enough to even make a difference with quickly making the room no-channel. There is a limit to what we can do and an even greater limit to what we can do live.
So either:
-immortal prep time goes way up (think weeks for a global quest that lasts a few hours, I kid you not) because we have to pre-plan for every scenario, with the downside that there is less flexibility because no prep-no happen, leading to less live events
-OR players start taking into account how their actions influence things.
So either:
-immortal prep time goes way up (think weeks for a global quest that lasts a few hours, I kid you not) because we have to pre-plan for every scenario, with the downside that there is less flexibility because no prep-no happen, leading to less live events
-OR players start taking into account how their actions influence things.
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
For a SE event and a DSworn master event, it would have been great if people chose to play, where possible , DSworn or DoTs alts. The WG turned up so kudos to them.
What made people not choose those alts? Dead clans, boring RP, other more interesting clans? Just interested.
What made people not choose those alts? Dead clans, boring RP, other more interesting clans? Just interested.
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
It seems like people had fun, so is any of this really an issue?
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
I think like Thore said, this is a problem with the game, not the players. In my opinion, this will have to be addressed through coding changes. I know coding changes are difficult! But I would suggest that changing player behavior is more difficult still.
In any case, I am generally more sympathetic with the players here. The accountability 'rules' are not well defined and are open to interpretation. Each individual will have a different version of what it means to be accountable.
Did the players even realize they were doing something taboo in the moment? I'd wager not; this was probably just a case of friends/clanmates grouping to have fun, and since when has that ever been against the rules. I doubt this was a premeditated attempt to cheese the event or game the system. How can you realistically be upset/frustrated with the players in this situation? Again, if something needs to change here, then it's probably the game's coding.
In any case, I am generally more sympathetic with the players here. The accountability 'rules' are not well defined and are open to interpretation. Each individual will have a different version of what it means to be accountable.
Did the players even realize they were doing something taboo in the moment? I'd wager not; this was probably just a case of friends/clanmates grouping to have fun, and since when has that ever been against the rules. I doubt this was a premeditated attempt to cheese the event or game the system. How can you realistically be upset/frustrated with the players in this situation? Again, if something needs to change here, then it's probably the game's coding.
Re: Fostering an Accountable Community
Elysia wrote: ↑Sun Aug 18, 2024 2:14 amIt has to do with an imm loading a max level mob and it being nuked into the next Age in four rounds.
...
So either:
-immortal prep time goes way up (think weeks for a global quest that lasts a few hours, I kid you not) because we have to pre-plan for every scenario, with the downside that there is less flexibility because no prep-no happen, leading to less live events
-OR players start taking into account how their actions influence things.
-OR remove/lock problematic weave Call Lightning -- Will probably solve quite a few balance issues I imagine.
It does apply a heckton of dmg over a short timer (btw it is much harder to get and maintain Lightning weather under the current weather system vs the old; PS: blodfest weather is on the old system I believe). This should be a (relatively straightforward) solution if speed of previous weave changes are anything to go by (not 100% sure).
Zarth's suggestions about weave targeting on Discord are great but probably requires coding changes.
Last edited by melosa on Sun Aug 18, 2024 10:57 am, edited 2 times in total.