Hey man, you got Squall.

which has been nerfed due to whining despite it really being a skill with easy counters (walls, distort, being smart enough to just walk back in the room)

Things may have reached a tipping point here in Lusty, Magnagora has 12 / 90 players right now and I don't think any of us are fighters. The other organizations on the losing side are probably pretty similar. The problem is more than just a bit of skill imbalance or some bad attitudes. I would be suprirsed if anything could salvage things besides some major changes to how PvP works or massively imbalancing things in favor of the downed and out organizations in the game. Personally I don't like seeing this situation happen to the game every few years.

I wasn't being serious >_>

... Glomdoring has 13 on right now, so... no?

Check CULTURE, Serenwilde has the bulk of players (as usual).

Seriously, stop throwing up the 'omg people are QQing there is nobody in the organization they all moved to the others' argument when it is so easy to disprove with one command.

bah, I missed the sarcasm, my bad

Oh god before this gets fouled by misinformation and feeds fuel to the envoy fire, badluck does not tick on nonhostile eq taking actions, it only ticks on all balance actions, hostile eq taking actions, and focus taking actions. Nonhostile eq actions is unaffected.




People have already pointed out that just because you whore it out, it doesn't mean it's imbalanced. Because if that were the cases, please delete all warriors for whoring strikes, hacks and lunges (shining gems of the warrior class).

Also delete melders, whoring their melds (shining gem of being a melder class).

Etc.

I've been sick as a dog for several days and so have just been able to skim this thread but I think there are thoughtful points and I am impressed by the relatively civil discussion.

As for complaints about admin-player communication, I think we try as much as possible. I know we've been giving more detailed reasons for rejecting an envoy report. In any event, I believe that there are some people who believe they know what 'pressing' issues/imbalances need to be addressed because they and their friends have talked about it (and thus 'everyone' agrees its a problem). However, when we do discuss it with envoys or other groups of players (on forums, for example), suddenly there are multiple views over whether it's really a bug or issue, and heated debate over what should be done, if anything. Then, some players get mad at the admin for not just cutting through all that and see the problem for what it is and fix it, i.e., implement the obvious solution (which coincidentally is their solution). For that matter, admin have been accused of listening to players too much (you always listen to the and no one else, etc.).

It may be blazingly obvious to you that Magnagora should be buffed, Glomdoring should be nerfed, Serenwilde should be protected, Celest should have it easier, and Gaudiguch and Hallifax need extra admin help/oversight, but, trust me, not everyone will share your view. That doesn't mean your view is invalid but it does mean that to get the admin to see your POV, you need to be patient and persistent, by going through the envoys, make logical arguments that sway envoys not in your org (and be prepared to revise based on THEIR logical arguments), and find solutions that are clear, simple and RP appropriate.

Sometimes I wonder if players wouldn't like to elect one player to give us a list of what to do to 'fix' what 'everyone' perceives as Lusternia's main issues/imbalances. Would there be someone every org could agree on? A master envoy? Geb? Xenthos? Iasmos? If so, I may consider doing that one month. I will note, when I have approached one person to help on certain projects, it has not been quite the resounding success that we had hoped but no reason we couldn't try again.

Okay, let's try not to devolve this thread into who whores what and just be more general about problems. Sahmiam mentioned that admin-player interaction hasn't always been great and I sort of agree that the game in general could benefit from some closer exchanges. I should say though, that I have seen attempts at this, and it really is a good thing to see.

As for the envoy system being broken, I sort of think it doesn't -have- to be what it is now. Some good reports come out and it makes me feel good, but there's been some long standing game imbalances that I'm quite shocked haven't been fixed yet. I think us envoys just need to write reports together rather than have one guild write a report and then it gets commented on. I would really like it if we spent time tossing ideas around and making each report a group effort rather than one person speaking on behalf of a guild/commune/side so that we could really tack down on some problems.


Also Shuyin, just to nitpick, I don't think it tics on focus spirit. Just body or mind, but I might be wrong...

I feel like when it comes to specific skill conversations (choke v. crucify v. badluck v. balestone, etc), this isn't a great idea. Even if you have a person who manages to be entirely impartial, there will still be those who feel that the game was rigged unless they get everything they want (in which case everyone else will feel jilted).

In terms of larger more over-arching things, I'd like to see more parity between organization rez skills (which I don't see happening through envoy reports), and there are definitely other large-scale balancing things to look at (melding EthSeren as an example), but there should not be one player in charge of coming up with balance ideas for PvP combat for the game on the whole.

That is what the Envoys are for (presenting arguments one way and the other) with the final decision being in hands that are slightly more impartial than ours. I won't say that Solution 4 isn't rather annoying at times, and frankly there are others when I flatly disagree with the decisions rendered on reports, but... I don't see anything good productive coming from 1 player getting too much into the nitty-gritty powerful skills of organizations. What we have is better, if we can keep the better communication now that we are getting more than 'We don't feel this is necessary'.

PS: Would it be possible for me to send you an email with a few of my past reports and get clarification on why 'we don't feel this is necessary'? I wonder if that might help with some other Envoys as well.

You can start a new thread on the forums so everyone can see.

Thanks, I didn't know that the CULTURE command can show player activity. Still, player activity and PvP player activity/interest are not the same thing, so the readout from the command isn't proof that there isn't a problem.

Was the first link on my google search. This same topic was covered in Time magazine. If I took the time to search my back issues I could probably find it.


I feel it's all those afflictions I'm dropping on people.


Awesome.

Isn't REJECT a balance command?

EQ.

If anything, given how badluck seems to work for balance, it should probably also work for nonhostile EQ, but it already gets enough bitching as is, so...

End of the day? It's not a fair argument to browbeat, however politely, someone for not wanting to get punched in the face for another's amusement. If you're in a dominant org, and you want the other side to fight that badly, move there. You can work on whipping them in to shape and have all the fighting challenges you could ever want.


GENERIC SKILLS RANT:
From being on the receiving end of both, I'll take being beaten silly in a geo meld by a ninjakari or getting cruci'd over choke any day. Its one of the reasons I've avoided playing in orgs fighting glom. I mean, I still got stomped by Fillin, or monked by Malarious when he was in mag. I even got killed by one of Fillin's undead minion thingies. (It was the last hit in a group gank, but STILL.)

But I'll take that every time over lolchoke. And no, having it effect the caster does not mean it's balanced. Especially against a shadowdancer. Choke is like saying "I can make us both fight under water, so this is fair. However, I get to choose when we get dunked in, and also, I get scuba gear."

And then there's stuff like brumetower, the fact that glom synergizes with bleed and mana kills as it's "theme", which is a really good thing to synergize with, the fact that a very large proportion of the org can fly (even more than Halli! O.o) Sure, other orgs have nice stuff, but in Seren, even when Glom was losing, it always felt like their skills are just better. So I decided, forget that. If I could like the feel of glom's concepts, I'd probably have moved there. But the most passable thing I came up with was sort of a warped around not-doing-it-right-but-not-really-wrong-either concept centered around crow.

I said whoring is an indication of imbalance, not that it means something is imbalanced. Hence the "you're almost" bit. Don't put words into my mouth. Coughing is an indication of the flu, but it could also be a cold, person trying to get attention, itchy throat, etc. I'm aware of what I said. Whoring is an indicator because it means the other options are less beneficial.


@Sidd. I don't pay attention to envoy reports that much anymore, but I gave an example of the same format. It still boils down to one side saying one thing and the other saying the opposite. Trample/sac may have been a good nerf, but I do know that certain comments made on that report were out of place and illogical.

@Estarra. I'm guilty of thinking the envoy system is ineffective as well as that the player-admin communication is very bad. I'll be the first to admit that I'm not perfect and that my logic isn't always sound, but I can say that a lot of the arguments/comments in envoy reports was/is? are not logical. Debates happen rarely with any progress, and I do think it's a problem when a report is "too long" because people were detailed in its effects. I've offered to help many times and been ignored or dismissed almost every time. I don't mind being disagreed with either. Almost all of my respect for envoys and the will for a balanced game was lost, however, when the response to my suggestions on how to improve the system was met with "If you don't like it, just quit." You like to say how much a lot of people are volunteers, but don't forget, that the envoys are volunteers too, and it's those type of comments that give the admin a bad reputation. I realize that mistakes happen, bugs happen, that no one is perfect. However, I can only tolerate so much, and if I genuinely believed that a serious effort was happening to make things right, I'd be supportive. I'd be glad to admit that I was wrong.

I am also guilty of talking to my friends about balance, but just because people talk to their friends doesn't mean that they're trying to be blatantly biased. Quite frankly, it's not blatantly obvious that Magnagora should be buffed or that Glomdoring should be nerfed. The only thing that is obvious is that there are problems, either real or perceived, that are not being addressed. Hyperactive is a key example of a skill I'm talking about.

I do appreciate the more detailed responses on the reports. Things may have changed since I left envoy, and I hope they have. I just hope that you aren't automatically assuming that a report is so biased that a problem isn't there, or that certain envoys always give good arguments. I can tell you that all sides are guilty of finger-pointing, misleading, and bad logic. Even if the comments/reports are worded nicely or sound unbiased, it doesn't mean that the person is right. I can give you examples of where a comment/report had an invalid argument and argue why.

Has anyone considered the internal equibilibrium/attitudes of orgs as a contributing factor? The psycology does matter.

90% of this thread is discussion about the psychology of the organizations.

As much as it goes against my general feelings as expressed in my sig, since I've said repeatedly that I personally feel the envoy system to be horridly broken anyway, probably worth a shot.



Despite my colourful disagreements with him over badluck, if he were active, not a terrible choice.

The other two you mentioned, whatever their virtues/faults, are largely one-org-wonders. While I may like, even (LeGasp) enjoy their company as players, I wouldn't trust anyone so strongly married to one org with any over-arcing oversight. Let alone getting narritive power over "what is wrong with the game".


How about Shuyin? I mean, I don't agree with him nearly all the time, and his ideas about armour degredation generated insta-idea-hate from me, but he's been around a bit now, is active, and generally has a cool head about things. And he probably won't do anything too nutso. Nobody with an opinion is free of bias, so you're never going to escape that. Everyone is guilty, even if they're doing their level best to be objective. If that makes me sound like a deranged Spanish Inquisition flunkie, so be it. But I'm not actually racking people or burning them alive over it, just asking it to be taken in to account.