Malarious2011-11-06 07:11:00
So where is Lusternia going at this time?
Recent events have included very bad "bug fixes" such as making beastmastery no longer useful for blocking because its unreliable. Shrines stopping cubixes, given while we are discussing how they are too influential (this change was undone).
Good things though too! We are removing esteem from most every item, this will be a huge change to database size I imagine as we must have many many thousands of items. Stockrooms no longer trigger GMCP, some people caused lag, and at least one person could crash the server. Lots of new stuff! Ghodak, the Tessera or however its spelled, vengeance, etc. We have reports on several major issues coming up though how "major" they are is questionable in some instances.
Now before the above we have moved farther and farther toward anti-raiding. When I first started you could raid as per normal and people would defend. Now its very likely to have free discretionaries (this varies to an extent admittedly though), shrines are hugely powerful, most areas (other than celestia/nil) have very powerful natural denizens, and you build passive insanity on enemy planes.
Are we focusing more toward 1v1? Should we balance to that or expect groups still? As it is combat has all but died with the exception of occassional raids/skirmishes and events such as domoths or revolts. There is no reward for much of this and over time the "pains" have been removed for some. Hallifax and Gaudiguch dont lose power when their very powerful mobs die, but Mag and Celest do when their very weak mobs die. I am curious why these continue to be so contradictory.
So what do you all think? I could be seeing a bad angle of the picture but that is why I ask. Are we intending to move toward 1v1 or group v group more? Is raiding heavily crippled or not crippled enough?
(I wont mention skill balance, with the current envoy system we will never get it)
Recent events have included very bad "bug fixes" such as making beastmastery no longer useful for blocking because its unreliable. Shrines stopping cubixes, given while we are discussing how they are too influential (this change was undone).
Good things though too! We are removing esteem from most every item, this will be a huge change to database size I imagine as we must have many many thousands of items. Stockrooms no longer trigger GMCP, some people caused lag, and at least one person could crash the server. Lots of new stuff! Ghodak, the Tessera or however its spelled, vengeance, etc. We have reports on several major issues coming up though how "major" they are is questionable in some instances.
Now before the above we have moved farther and farther toward anti-raiding. When I first started you could raid as per normal and people would defend. Now its very likely to have free discretionaries (this varies to an extent admittedly though), shrines are hugely powerful, most areas (other than celestia/nil) have very powerful natural denizens, and you build passive insanity on enemy planes.
Are we focusing more toward 1v1? Should we balance to that or expect groups still? As it is combat has all but died with the exception of occassional raids/skirmishes and events such as domoths or revolts. There is no reward for much of this and over time the "pains" have been removed for some. Hallifax and Gaudiguch dont lose power when their very powerful mobs die, but Mag and Celest do when their very weak mobs die. I am curious why these continue to be so contradictory.
So what do you all think? I could be seeing a bad angle of the picture but that is why I ask. Are we intending to move toward 1v1 or group v group more? Is raiding heavily crippled or not crippled enough?
(I wont mention skill balance, with the current envoy system we will never get it)
Unknown2011-11-06 21:53:23
I'm not sure how others feel about this, but I have always felt that group combat is boring and frustrating, more an exercise in group division and ganking than actual combat skill. Even as a bard I have more fun in small groups or solo combat than in massive raid level battles. (Wargames are my favorite thing)
I honestly don't think it is possible to balance skills around both large group combat and small group/solo combat simultaneously; powerful skills are either made devastating if left unchecked, or useless if some restriction does exist.
I feel that the best way to improve combat in Lusternia, both mechanically and thematically would be to implement some sort of damage reduction/affliction shrugging based on how many people ave attacked you in the past 10 seconds or so, representing large groups targeting a single person as getting in each others way. This would make the combat focus more on small groups and solo combat outside of things like supermobs, and give a definite mechanic to balance around, as well as prevent uberstacking like egobombs or vessels.
I honestly don't think it is possible to balance skills around both large group combat and small group/solo combat simultaneously; powerful skills are either made devastating if left unchecked, or useless if some restriction does exist.
I feel that the best way to improve combat in Lusternia, both mechanically and thematically would be to implement some sort of damage reduction/affliction shrugging based on how many people ave attacked you in the past 10 seconds or so, representing large groups targeting a single person as getting in each others way. This would make the combat focus more on small groups and solo combat outside of things like supermobs, and give a definite mechanic to balance around, as well as prevent uberstacking like egobombs or vessels.
Calixa2011-11-06 23:25:47
First off, what's wrong with blocking? Looked back about 20 announces, all I see is a message change?
If there is anything wrong with Lusternia, it's that I see people getting demotivated left and right. Yes, the game has been around some years, it's reaching the natural lifespan where the veterans are really quite done. But I see the same in new players, too. And, after just a year and a half play, and surely having quite a lot left to do, I have periods where I feel very "meh" about the game.
One thing that stands out to me is a complaint that there are not enough combatants. Yet some of the people that say this also act in such a way that I -personally- do not feel like getting into combat. Not to mention that non-combatants are being looked upon as inferior. Group combat requires a deal of trust, a knowing that when it comes to it, the other has got your back. You don't foster that by yelling at people that they should "do something" without even as much explaining what. It may be really obvious to you, because you've done it a million times, but look at who you are yelling at and ask yourself just a moment how much combat you've seen them do.
Now, not everyone is like this, the majority of people I interact with ingame have the best intentions in mind. But they then seem to lack in the knowledge department. MUDs may be a different beast than MMO's, but something I find very lacking in Lusternia is the existence of throughout and accurate guides. I don't know if this is due to information hoarding in fear that "the enemy" may get their hands on it, but it also seems to be ingrained in how the game is run. I absolutely LOVE Bodyscan, and I really like people like Janalon who go out of their way to test mechanics. But these seem to be exceptions rather than rule. Now, I'm not saying the admins have to make the game open-source. But I do think opening up more information, or giving players the means to do this, would be helpful.
This leads me on to the next point. As we have an Envoy system, I assume the administration likes to harness the power of players. I've seen our new coder implement things based on player feedback. This is a trend I'd personally like to see built on more. The idea behind the Envoy system is nice, but it has the downside that it can be used as a metagame. I like the idea of electing a player to represent the players. But it seems like endless harping on now about what is and what isn't important. And that is and endless road.
I think a good point is being made here about group combat. It's not very fun. First off, it's such a stream of spam you need to apply all kinds of highlights to so you'd have somewhat an idea of what is going on. And then there are indeed ways where stacking certain skills just can't be overcome. I've never seen zerging, or blobbing, to borrow names from two other games, lead to anything good. It might give the victors a temporary feel of glory, as they steamroll the other side into oblivion, but longterm it only works destructive. People start giving up. Which means the losing side loses it's only way to possibly strike back. And the winning side? They either grow bored and stop doing it, or start fighting amongst each other, so then the other side regroups themselves until they steamroll the old victors into oblivion because they're bitter about the old defeats. And so it keeps repeating itself.
I am also of the opinion that defeat should never lead to unenjoyable gameplay. It's not going to motivate anyone to get power, to take an example I have first-hand experience with, if doing their very best means instead of a ton of negative power drain, you get somewhat less negative power drain. Why try and delay the inevitable if you can't escape it. Instead, reward people more for doing well, but in such a way that it does not tip the scale over and puts the victor at a severe advantage. A good example is this: Org A and Orb B each have quest, that if not done, does not yield anything. However, if Org A does it, and Org B doesn't, Org A gets a full advantage. But, if Org A and Org B start competing on it, each gets an advantage according to their effort put in. There is a protection on this however. If one Org does consistently very well, their advantage starts to diminish, and it also becomes easier for Org B to strike back. That way, if Org A wants to stay at the top, they have to keep doing better and better.
Lastly, a personal gripe is that I feel there are certain extremes possible that lead to some very unfair results. Case in point, stacking bonuses of achievement goals + aetherhunting + lips. Yes, I think it is pure genius that some players have managed to get this done and attain Demigod in a matter of days. But how is that fair if the average player is looking at months of work. Same deal with aetherhunting as a whole. Even a slow and shitty group gets double-triple the experience per hour than a player hunting on their own. I've tried what I can yet I can't break 6% per hour solo hunting. My regular average is 5% per hour rolling through easy :censor:. Fighitng stronger mobs more suites for my level is actually worse. With some rooms getting mob clusters, I push about 4% on Undervault trash. Astral is even worse :) Yes, I know, I rolled a Nihilist, should have rolled a monk or a warrior and powergame with that. But what if that is not what I want? What if I feel that in a roleplaying game choices should be made based on that and players should not be horribly gimped because they pick a class? I'm not even getting in to races. I think human is a very solid option if I ever saw one, and I'm not sure what race could be even better.
So why rant about my leveling experiences? Well, because Demi, gimped as some think it is, does bring a lot to the table. As someone put it, Demi is not the goal, Demi is the way to get things done. Demi is how you get the best hunting and the best influencing done, which you use to buffer yourself up, so you can PK all day long. Honestly, if getting killed wouldn't have a penalty in terms of XP loss, I think it'd change PVP around a lot already. Then Demi would be just a tool to get more credits, rather than also what keeps your combat performance consistent. Because pre-Demi combat can very well cost you some levels which can affect your performance quite a bit.
To get back to raiding, I think it's a very complex problem, that can't just be blamed on one or two factors. I think everything pointed out so far, by others, as well as the things I've raked up, all have a hand in it. And there is probably a lot more. And that's what I want to add in closing. That the game as a whole is connected. And that if something, somewhere, is not performing as it should, not only is the cause probably a multitude of things, but it also affects a multitude of others.
Lusternia is a great game, and I'd like it to stick around another good while. So I hope that its direction will be a positive one. One that can include a variety of players and play-styles. One that is not partial, nor doesn't allow players to be partial to, certain aspects. One that does not force you to be and act a certain way or miss out. A game that loves it players, so the players can love the game. Sorry to get so long-winded, and possibly expand the topic beyond what the OP intended, but had to get that off my chest.
If there is anything wrong with Lusternia, it's that I see people getting demotivated left and right. Yes, the game has been around some years, it's reaching the natural lifespan where the veterans are really quite done. But I see the same in new players, too. And, after just a year and a half play, and surely having quite a lot left to do, I have periods where I feel very "meh" about the game.
One thing that stands out to me is a complaint that there are not enough combatants. Yet some of the people that say this also act in such a way that I -personally- do not feel like getting into combat. Not to mention that non-combatants are being looked upon as inferior. Group combat requires a deal of trust, a knowing that when it comes to it, the other has got your back. You don't foster that by yelling at people that they should "do something" without even as much explaining what. It may be really obvious to you, because you've done it a million times, but look at who you are yelling at and ask yourself just a moment how much combat you've seen them do.
Now, not everyone is like this, the majority of people I interact with ingame have the best intentions in mind. But they then seem to lack in the knowledge department. MUDs may be a different beast than MMO's, but something I find very lacking in Lusternia is the existence of throughout and accurate guides. I don't know if this is due to information hoarding in fear that "the enemy" may get their hands on it, but it also seems to be ingrained in how the game is run. I absolutely LOVE Bodyscan, and I really like people like Janalon who go out of their way to test mechanics. But these seem to be exceptions rather than rule. Now, I'm not saying the admins have to make the game open-source. But I do think opening up more information, or giving players the means to do this, would be helpful.
This leads me on to the next point. As we have an Envoy system, I assume the administration likes to harness the power of players. I've seen our new coder implement things based on player feedback. This is a trend I'd personally like to see built on more. The idea behind the Envoy system is nice, but it has the downside that it can be used as a metagame. I like the idea of electing a player to represent the players. But it seems like endless harping on now about what is and what isn't important. And that is and endless road.
I think a good point is being made here about group combat. It's not very fun. First off, it's such a stream of spam you need to apply all kinds of highlights to so you'd have somewhat an idea of what is going on. And then there are indeed ways where stacking certain skills just can't be overcome. I've never seen zerging, or blobbing, to borrow names from two other games, lead to anything good. It might give the victors a temporary feel of glory, as they steamroll the other side into oblivion, but longterm it only works destructive. People start giving up. Which means the losing side loses it's only way to possibly strike back. And the winning side? They either grow bored and stop doing it, or start fighting amongst each other, so then the other side regroups themselves until they steamroll the old victors into oblivion because they're bitter about the old defeats. And so it keeps repeating itself.
I am also of the opinion that defeat should never lead to unenjoyable gameplay. It's not going to motivate anyone to get power, to take an example I have first-hand experience with, if doing their very best means instead of a ton of negative power drain, you get somewhat less negative power drain. Why try and delay the inevitable if you can't escape it. Instead, reward people more for doing well, but in such a way that it does not tip the scale over and puts the victor at a severe advantage. A good example is this: Org A and Orb B each have quest, that if not done, does not yield anything. However, if Org A does it, and Org B doesn't, Org A gets a full advantage. But, if Org A and Org B start competing on it, each gets an advantage according to their effort put in. There is a protection on this however. If one Org does consistently very well, their advantage starts to diminish, and it also becomes easier for Org B to strike back. That way, if Org A wants to stay at the top, they have to keep doing better and better.
Lastly, a personal gripe is that I feel there are certain extremes possible that lead to some very unfair results. Case in point, stacking bonuses of achievement goals + aetherhunting + lips. Yes, I think it is pure genius that some players have managed to get this done and attain Demigod in a matter of days. But how is that fair if the average player is looking at months of work. Same deal with aetherhunting as a whole. Even a slow and shitty group gets double-triple the experience per hour than a player hunting on their own. I've tried what I can yet I can't break 6% per hour solo hunting. My regular average is 5% per hour rolling through easy :censor:. Fighitng stronger mobs more suites for my level is actually worse. With some rooms getting mob clusters, I push about 4% on Undervault trash. Astral is even worse :) Yes, I know, I rolled a Nihilist, should have rolled a monk or a warrior and powergame with that. But what if that is not what I want? What if I feel that in a roleplaying game choices should be made based on that and players should not be horribly gimped because they pick a class? I'm not even getting in to races. I think human is a very solid option if I ever saw one, and I'm not sure what race could be even better.
So why rant about my leveling experiences? Well, because Demi, gimped as some think it is, does bring a lot to the table. As someone put it, Demi is not the goal, Demi is the way to get things done. Demi is how you get the best hunting and the best influencing done, which you use to buffer yourself up, so you can PK all day long. Honestly, if getting killed wouldn't have a penalty in terms of XP loss, I think it'd change PVP around a lot already. Then Demi would be just a tool to get more credits, rather than also what keeps your combat performance consistent. Because pre-Demi combat can very well cost you some levels which can affect your performance quite a bit.
To get back to raiding, I think it's a very complex problem, that can't just be blamed on one or two factors. I think everything pointed out so far, by others, as well as the things I've raked up, all have a hand in it. And there is probably a lot more. And that's what I want to add in closing. That the game as a whole is connected. And that if something, somewhere, is not performing as it should, not only is the cause probably a multitude of things, but it also affects a multitude of others.
Lusternia is a great game, and I'd like it to stick around another good while. So I hope that its direction will be a positive one. One that can include a variety of players and play-styles. One that is not partial, nor doesn't allow players to be partial to, certain aspects. One that does not force you to be and act a certain way or miss out. A game that loves it players, so the players can love the game. Sorry to get so long-winded, and possibly expand the topic beyond what the OP intended, but had to get that off my chest.
Malarious2011-11-06 23:35:47
Firm was removed from blocking for beastmastery, which means you would no longer reliably stop people from escaping. I bugged this as the report that added the "firm" option to blocking stated in the comments (Nydekion I believe was the original poster of the time), with heavy support, that it should extend to beastmastery. This was "bug fixed" so beastmastery will not work in this way anymore. I bugged that we requested as such and was told it was a bug because the administration had not taken the opinion that it was to work with beastmastery and we should use envoys if we want to fix it.
Yay being told to envoy a reversed envoy report. It was a bug to them but does not seem like one to me. I wish we would stop playing patty cake and just sit down and fix things. We add new stuff and continue to abandon the old problems. We are working to fix some of that but the combat paradigm will remain flawed until we come to an agreement on whats needed versus whats wanted.
Yay being told to envoy a reversed envoy report. It was a bug to them but does not seem like one to me. I wish we would stop playing patty cake and just sit down and fix things. We add new stuff and continue to abandon the old problems. We are working to fix some of that but the combat paradigm will remain flawed until we come to an agreement on whats needed versus whats wanted.
Everiine2011-11-07 03:39:39
In the admins' defense, the past two months have been MAJOR releases of bug fixes up the whazzoo. To say that we are releasing new things without fixing the old is closing one eye and only reading what's in one column. It seems like every other day a new announce post is being made with a good list of bugs that have been fixed. I tip my hat to the coders who are churning these things out at breakneck speed. THANK YOU.
Unfortunately, I think the current direction that Lusternia is headed in is not Lusternia's fault, or the admins' fault. IRE has reversed it's former policy of working to provide excellent, quality games. Instead, corporate is focusing on gimmicking as many new players as possible to raise populations as fast as possible without regard to the effect these commercially-minded policies have on the games. The new website, forums, and unbearable, neverending promotions are symptoms of this new thinking. That's what burns me out in the game. Instead of deep events and personal interactions, the admins are being told to code all of this.... junk.
But I've made this argument a dozen times before, so I'll just leave it at that.
Unfortunately, I think the current direction that Lusternia is headed in is not Lusternia's fault, or the admins' fault. IRE has reversed it's former policy of working to provide excellent, quality games. Instead, corporate is focusing on gimmicking as many new players as possible to raise populations as fast as possible without regard to the effect these commercially-minded policies have on the games. The new website, forums, and unbearable, neverending promotions are symptoms of this new thinking. That's what burns me out in the game. Instead of deep events and personal interactions, the admins are being told to code all of this.... junk.
But I've made this argument a dozen times before, so I'll just leave it at that.
Iosai2011-11-07 13:13:46
I would just like to refute the comment that we are ignoring past problems, complementing Everiine's post by letting everyone know that we recently managed to get a place where there were zero pending bugs (hence why new bug reports have such low numbers!).
To reply to Malarious's concern about "reversing an envoy report", I have to refute this wholeheartedly. The report was specifically aimed at adjusting Athletics Blocking and Beastmastery was only added as a subsidiary comment. The approval of the report never specified affecting Beastmastery, and it was in fact an oversight that beasts could ever block firm.
To reply to Malarious's concern about "reversing an envoy report", I have to refute this wholeheartedly. The report was specifically aimed at adjusting Athletics Blocking and Beastmastery was only added as a subsidiary comment. The approval of the report never specified affecting Beastmastery, and it was in fact an oversight that beasts could ever block firm.
Rivius2011-11-07 13:40:24
I think that's fair, personally. Regular blocking is still somewhat potent and so is being able to do it on beast balance instead of your own.
Siam2011-11-07 13:49:26
Your bug #27 has been updated. Take a look at LISTBUGS to see your current bug list or SHOWBUG 27 to
view it in more detail.
^This happened within the last five minutes. This bodes well for Lusternia, really.
view it in more detail.
^This happened within the last five minutes. This bodes well for Lusternia, really.
Unknown2011-11-07 16:39:51
I certainly don't think that the admins are ignoring past problems, I think instead that Lusternia does so many different things that they are impossible to balance against one another. That said, I feel that a game that tries to have lots of flavor and interesting mechanics is more fun than a game that is nothing more than copypasted sludge for classes, expansive, boring grinding areas, and quests with no element past "Kill 10 Sasquatches".
I think that the problems that Lusternia faces are really the problems of a maturing playerbase; everyone has access to everything, meaning that powerful skills are commonplace in combat; races now have to be balanced around demigod, since so many people can get there thanks to better bashing like aetherspace; older players can produce gold and commodities so quickly that the economy starts failing, ect.
I think that all of these can be addressed in time, but I think at this point some decisions about what balance is in different parts of the game need to be made, preferably with player input. That why I love the envoys system so much, despite it's flaws, and appreciate the chance given to us with this special report.
I certainly don't want the admins to fell like I am ungracious for all the work that they do; I know how difficult design and balance are. Special thanks go out to Iosai; Lusternia has improved rapidly since she showed up.
I think that the problems that Lusternia faces are really the problems of a maturing playerbase; everyone has access to everything, meaning that powerful skills are commonplace in combat; races now have to be balanced around demigod, since so many people can get there thanks to better bashing like aetherspace; older players can produce gold and commodities so quickly that the economy starts failing, ect.
I think that all of these can be addressed in time, but I think at this point some decisions about what balance is in different parts of the game need to be made, preferably with player input. That why I love the envoys system so much, despite it's flaws, and appreciate the chance given to us with this special report.
I certainly don't want the admins to fell like I am ungracious for all the work that they do; I know how difficult design and balance are. Special thanks go out to Iosai; Lusternia has improved rapidly since she showed up.
Tervic2011-11-07 19:29:12
I think a lot of what frustrates me personally is the lack of character-character interaction. Everyone's all about raiding and PK and killing and get demi and blah blah blah but so few people (in my experience at least) are willing to sit around and roleplay, and yet that's what is the major draw to Lusternia for me. I don't care how many bugs there are or how f'd up the mechanics are, if there's no meaningful story for me to engage in, it's not interesting. If I wanted to bash and pvp, I could just go play WoW (not that I'll ever befoul my silicon with such nonsense, but the point remains).
Everiine2011-11-07 22:15:18
You are from x org. We cannot interact. EVER.
/forumrup
/forumrup
Kiradawea2011-11-07 23:17:04
Everiine:
You are from x org. We cannot interact. EVER.
/forumrup
Wait? Really? You're saying I've done it wrong all this time?
Tervic2011-11-07 23:51:51
Everiine:
You are from x org. We cannot interact. EVER.
/forumrup
That would make me so sad :(
Everiine2011-11-08 01:07:59
Yeah, it makes me sad too. I just recently had to suffer through a conversation of, "Why is X talking with Y from Z? I'm not comfortable with that." BUT anyway...
Unknown2011-11-08 04:43:23
Inter-org interaction is the best. Mmm wooing Seren novices. Also, plotting.
Malarious2011-11-08 06:34:44
I agree that bugs have been very well taken care of (as a result expect less posts since they have less to change). I understand the position that it was oversight that beastmastery blocking was changed, however in the past something being in the comments has been acceptable for something to be coded. I believe we have been told admin read the report, the comments, then code it. So can you follow where it seems backward that the poster says he intends it to apply to beastmastery and it does, but its a bug that it does?
As to the envoy system, I think it is currently rather flawed. The main flaw in it is lack of feedback and eye to eye with admin. Several times things have been rejected on the subjective view from admin versus the intended view of the poster. This is not to say it has not worked, that just means sometimes our progress is set back. Nothing irks us more than agreeing on a change, submitting it, and having it spat back at us because our discussion was not part of the admins discussion/decision basis. I would far rather we drop all the gimmicks and do things we used to. Like what you might ask?
- We used to have months we focused on something. This last one was on new content it looked, we made more games inside the game. A former popular one was bug fixing, which we have done very well on as well.
- Envoys, this has not been up for awhile, we liked to have months of double reports. This gave us the chance to progress at a considerably faster pace. I for one would love to see a chance to envoy beastmastery if its agreed to have been a good thing to have.
- Also of great interest, would be if we moved the finished reports to the next stage. Monks, warriors, and some others arent done. But many other things are, can we take those to admin as they are more direct and shouldnt take nearly as long to sort out?
The faster we can adjust problems and concerns through envoys the faster we can reach a point where things are generally happier. Major reports are better, but envoys can adjust things over time more easily. Also, would it be possible to tag a report as Progressive? That is, if it suggests a change in a quantity we are able to review it with admin at a later date to determine if it was good? For example, we buff the damage from warriors and this proves bad, under the current system we would have to wait to re-envoy, if we could mark progressive we could return later. It takes admin time/resources but prevents us from having larger issues later I think.
Thank you to Iosai for showing up by the way, shows the admin do want to know what we think of the direction. Any thoughts on the current direction from an admin view Iosai?
Could we maybe look more through IDEAs now by the way? Lots of good things I am sure we could do, or do you just look at the simple ideas thread for those? ;)
As to the envoy system, I think it is currently rather flawed. The main flaw in it is lack of feedback and eye to eye with admin. Several times things have been rejected on the subjective view from admin versus the intended view of the poster. This is not to say it has not worked, that just means sometimes our progress is set back. Nothing irks us more than agreeing on a change, submitting it, and having it spat back at us because our discussion was not part of the admins discussion/decision basis. I would far rather we drop all the gimmicks and do things we used to. Like what you might ask?
- We used to have months we focused on something. This last one was on new content it looked, we made more games inside the game. A former popular one was bug fixing, which we have done very well on as well.
- Envoys, this has not been up for awhile, we liked to have months of double reports. This gave us the chance to progress at a considerably faster pace. I for one would love to see a chance to envoy beastmastery if its agreed to have been a good thing to have.
- Also of great interest, would be if we moved the finished reports to the next stage. Monks, warriors, and some others arent done. But many other things are, can we take those to admin as they are more direct and shouldnt take nearly as long to sort out?
The faster we can adjust problems and concerns through envoys the faster we can reach a point where things are generally happier. Major reports are better, but envoys can adjust things over time more easily. Also, would it be possible to tag a report as Progressive? That is, if it suggests a change in a quantity we are able to review it with admin at a later date to determine if it was good? For example, we buff the damage from warriors and this proves bad, under the current system we would have to wait to re-envoy, if we could mark progressive we could return later. It takes admin time/resources but prevents us from having larger issues later I think.
Thank you to Iosai for showing up by the way, shows the admin do want to know what we think of the direction. Any thoughts on the current direction from an admin view Iosai?
Could we maybe look more through IDEAs now by the way? Lots of good things I am sure we could do, or do you just look at the simple ideas thread for those? ;)
Estarra2011-11-08 17:49:38
Malarious, I've told you before that the admin reserve the right to make all final decisions, that envoys don't trump admin decisions, that even if all envoys agree on something doesn't mean it's the right decision. That's our call to make. Sometimes we make decisions that (*gasp*) we don't consult envoys on--and we are not going to set a precedent or policy where we clear things with envoys before we make decisions.
We agreed that the admin could do better at informing envoys why we've made some decisions and we've been trying to give fuller details on our decisions, not to mention discussions we've had with the envoys on a private channel, so the old meme that the 'admin refuse to communicate' is just not true.
You have a bad habit of thinking that you know what is best and if the admin aren't following your advice then we must be going in the wrong direction or that anything you don't agree with is a "very bad" move that bodes ill for the game as a whole. If you have specific ideas, feel free to start a forum thread on that idea so everyone can have input.
As for beastmastery block, which seems to be the gripe du jour, as I told the envoys, beastmastery is a general skill and athletics is a guild skill. If a skill is similar to a guild skill, the guild skill should trump or somehow be stronger than the general skill, if at all possible. Therefore, firm blocking will be the province of athletics. If you think normal blocking is 'useless' as a beast skill, then don't train your beast to block.
We agreed that the admin could do better at informing envoys why we've made some decisions and we've been trying to give fuller details on our decisions, not to mention discussions we've had with the envoys on a private channel, so the old meme that the 'admin refuse to communicate' is just not true.
You have a bad habit of thinking that you know what is best and if the admin aren't following your advice then we must be going in the wrong direction or that anything you don't agree with is a "very bad" move that bodes ill for the game as a whole. If you have specific ideas, feel free to start a forum thread on that idea so everyone can have input.
As for beastmastery block, which seems to be the gripe du jour, as I told the envoys, beastmastery is a general skill and athletics is a guild skill. If a skill is similar to a guild skill, the guild skill should trump or somehow be stronger than the general skill, if at all possible. Therefore, firm blocking will be the province of athletics. If you think normal blocking is 'useless' as a beast skill, then don't train your beast to block.
Malarious2011-11-08 19:08:24
Paragraph 1:
Of course admin reserve the right to final decisions. This is also where the popular solution 4 is created. That is not a stab at you or the process, that is just what its called.
Paragraph 2:
You all have done very well with that too :)
Para 3:
I know whats best to me, and if i hear someone second it I make the problem known. It is not that I know best for Lust but when I hear "oh my god I will leave if blah" I tend to bring it up somewhere. I will happily make a thread if something occurs to me to be worth one. This thread is the result of being unsure if we are aiming to move focus toward raiding or away from conflict. We have severely reduced raiding and skills in several areas that has lead to a down turn in both raiding, and active combat/combatants. So this bodes as a concern to me.
Para 4:
Thank you, that explanation makes sense.
Knowing the direction of the admin allows us to adjust envoy reports to match. If the goal is to make raiding rarer we do not need to try to fix any of the things that make raiding a bear. If the focus is on groups we can change more skills to be group specific.
Of course admin reserve the right to final decisions. This is also where the popular solution 4 is created. That is not a stab at you or the process, that is just what its called.
Paragraph 2:
You all have done very well with that too :)
Para 3:
I know whats best to me, and if i hear someone second it I make the problem known. It is not that I know best for Lust but when I hear "oh my god I will leave if blah" I tend to bring it up somewhere. I will happily make a thread if something occurs to me to be worth one. This thread is the result of being unsure if we are aiming to move focus toward raiding or away from conflict. We have severely reduced raiding and skills in several areas that has lead to a down turn in both raiding, and active combat/combatants. So this bodes as a concern to me.
Para 4:
Thank you, that explanation makes sense.
Knowing the direction of the admin allows us to adjust envoy reports to match. If the goal is to make raiding rarer we do not need to try to fix any of the things that make raiding a bear. If the focus is on groups we can change more skills to be group specific.
Unknown2011-11-08 21:26:05
While I understand the need for Admins to be able to make a final decision on reports, amongst other things, I often feel that the admins can be a bit.... out of touch with the day-to-day mechanics of the game. I understand that the admins don't actually deal with things like combat or economy in person, nor really can they, but it is very frustrating when an admin misunderstands how certain mechanics impact the game, or doesn't know the specifics of a given mechanic. I really feel that if what amounts to a large section of the player base more or less unanimously agrees on something, and the admins want to veto it, they should at least talk with the players about why. When its a technical problem all it well and good; we'll have to find a different way to do things, but many times it appears the the admins don't understand how mechanics impact or will impact the game. When this is the case, it would be helpful to both sides if there was a real time discussion about the mechanic; perhaps some enlightenment can be gained on either side.
All of that said, I don't think that the admins are the core problem with the envoys system; rampant partisan politics are. Many envoys seek to empower their own guild/org/archetype, balance be darned! Perhaps the introduction of an admin or peer review system to try and curb such behavior would be helpful.
All of that said, I don't think that the admins are the core problem with the envoys system; rampant partisan politics are. Many envoys seek to empower their own guild/org/archetype, balance be darned! Perhaps the introduction of an admin or peer review system to try and curb such behavior would be helpful.
Unknown2011-11-08 22:19:24
Meh, the envoy complaints have been repeated ad nauseum at this point. What faith I had in the system died the day that unconcionable pyro/aero special report waddled through.
The best policy for envoys isn't giving players more say or power. Because that's what envoys is in the first place. It's keeping big, final, spikey-heeled veto power in the hands of the admin. Everything prior to that is just mucking about in argumenative circles.
Envoys are mostly good for two functions:
The best policy for envoys isn't giving players more say or power. Because that's what envoys is in the first place. It's keeping big, final, spikey-heeled veto power in the hands of the admin. Everything prior to that is just mucking about in argumenative circles.
Envoys are mostly good for two functions:
- Bringing up topics of interest.
- Arguing about contentious topics enough to hopefully get most sides of the argument in the air.
After that, it's mostly just crap.
