Well, that's what the 'cheat sheet' is there for, so the tester has explicit instructions from the source (the quest designer) about what to do.

And then maybe make an Ephemeral or another God take a run through, following the sheet, and seeing what problems they run into?

I like the quests here because they usually don't devolve into word hunts and weird adventure game-esque item manipulation like in other muds I've played, but I echo the feeling that sometimes things feel a little glitchy. Xion for example, which thankfully Iosai remedied in a most excellent manner.

Razenth:

Well, that's what the 'cheat sheet' is there for, so the tester has explicit instructions from the source (the quest designer) about what to do.

And then maybe make an Ephemeral or another God take a run through, following the sheet, and seeing what problems they run into?

Yes, that's what we do. And, yes, things still slip through, alas!

I should specify that I am the one who does a walkthrough of almost every area and quest. I point out problems and issues that I find, which obviously isn't everything. Ephemerals aren't really familiar enough with quests to check the things that I check (balance, rewards, etc.).

And just because I'm thinking about it, I truly believe we have a pretty good track record on quests and areas. I think it is unfair to use one or two cases of something really wrong (that's just going to happen no matter what) when there are dozens of areas and quests that went right.

While it is fair to level criticism on the admin, it isn't fair to go about it in such indignant and rude tones.

As been said before, nothing makes an admin stop listening faster than a player being rude and inflammatory.

P.S. I like ascension season, stress and all.

Gimme a chance to play as something that isn't supersquish and I'll gladly test any quests.

Although how much it would help, I don't know. When I did Wend, it had a few bugs, but those bugs were for the most part to do with timing. That is, some stuff reset too quickly for it to be possible to complete. I imagine that can be very difficult to find when you just look at the numbers. Things seem like they should work, but they don't because two numbers in different places don't match up as they should, or don't have a tied-together reset so the player doesn't notice that the timer reset.

In the past, bugged quests highly annoyed me. They still do, but lately they've also been fixed so swiftly, that sometimes I don't have to start the quest all over because the quest was already fixed. Sure, it's annoying to have almost completed a quest, and then find that it is bugged somehow, but nowadays these bugs, when they are bugs, tend to be fixed and fixed fast. Yes, Esty could hire some test-questers, but it's as she said, those test-questers won't be able to participate in the event where the quest is released because they have prior knowledge. Perhaps some would be willing to give up on it, but I understand her reluctance for anything like that.

And honestly, fights are fun when there's a challenge. One side steam-rolling the other will never be fun, no matter how big a reward you get for said steam-rolling.

BTW, ephemeral applications are open so if you're really willing to help out Lusternia behind the scenes (and test quests and areas!), we'd be more than willing to have you!

Estarra:

What a turn this thread has taken! Honestly, I'm a bit mystified by what these terrible decisions are that I've made that could have been avoided by feedback or testing. I believe I do listen to players and try to address concerns, if warranted. For new skills and whatnot, generally they need to be played live for a period of time before a good evaluation is done. There are issues with test servers insofar that many times we can't allow more than a couple people on at a time and even when we can open it up more, no one shows. (I'm sure some envoys are aware when I've begged for them to get people to test something and end up with just a couple of people logging in.)

When we can announce something before its release that needs player feedback, I will certainly try to do so (and believe we have). Currently, we don't have plans for any major systems to implement. You're welcome to suggest things if you want! While there are some things in the pipeline, they are not of the type that should be announced (in my opinion).

As for earning your respect, I truly regret if you believe I don't deserve it. However, bombast and "telling me like it is" as some form of 'tough love' generally has the opposite effect with me, so take that for what it's worth. Lusternia is my life, much more than yours (believe it or not!), and I'll always work to improve it and myself.

I'll be honest, I don't really remember times when feedback prior to implementation has happened.However, there are times that I remember players raising complaints immediately, that carried on and we're either complained about until you changed it or people just gave up on it.

I do not like that after years of being on the forums I have been trained to believe that the only way change can be affected in this game is by players complaining loudly and constantly on the forums. Because this is consistently what I have observed and participated in. Also the attitude that some admins present on behalf of the admin team, makes me lose faith in the entire team.

Estarra:


Maybe check with Zvoltz on the Hallifax quest? Sometimes we get bugs and if we can't duplicate them, we can't fix them. (Very often for quests, we've found that a bug reported isn't a bug but rather player error.)

We actually do try to test quests and areas before release! However, some quests are so complicated or there are some things we didn't realize may happen that bugs do occur. However, I really don't see how it would be possible to have players test areas before they're released and have any semblence of an event that may build up to the quest. (Not to mention there would be very little motivation for players to go through the hours of questing on a test server just to have to do it over again when the event releases a quest.)

Do you track deleted bug reports in any way? Large amounts of bug reports being deleted for the same thing may indicate various things. For example, players doing it wrong might translate to poorly communicated directions.

Saran:

I have been considering the development mechanic. I am unsure how interesting this would be but it is an idea.

1. Switch off revolts.
   
2. Introduce the ability for each political structure to steal villages (conquest might involve slaughter, religious influencing, commercial questing)
   
3. While an org is in control of a village they are able to designate a member to develop it. Each village has it's own developments as do the orgs, both of which cost an org its own unique resource. The more developed a village is, the more resistant they are to being swayed away.
   
4. Provide method for generating resource (intersections or something that involves active participation)
   

Could be terrible, removes revolts, but hey might be interesting. Each village might have its own unique benefit in amongst general ones that make them attractive to other orgs, but the cost to maintain control of so many villages could grow out of control very quickly and leave them up for grabs.

re-iterating as lost in sea.

Shop stockrooms immediately spring to mind. Admin asking for feedback on certain things isn't unheard off.

And Ephemeral is open? Neat. Maybe I should try applying for that.

Estarra:

BTW, ephemeral applications are open so if you're really willing to help out Lusternia behind the scenes (and test quests and areas!), we'd be more than willing to have you!

I'd consider applying for it, but the fact that you have to cut ALL ties to your mortal character/s is the key thing that puts me off to be completely honest. I've done work on other projects in the past and have been permitted to still retain my character/s and have not had any problems (but then that is just me, obviously me =/= everyone.) When it comes down to it, I've had my characters for too long and have become too attached to them and made too many friends to be able to just give them up short of them being shrubbed, which I have no intention of happening any time soon.

It's just a shame that there is such a steep pre-requisite to become an ephemeral, as I know I am not the only one in this position.

I feel like this thread has sort of lost its way by now.

I don't think anyone really believes that buggy quests are a big reason why people don't stay in Lusternia. Someone mentioned it to use as an example, and Estarra has simply latched on to it to play the martyr rather than focus on the real issue.

I used mainly combat examples to prove my point because that's what I'm familiar with, however, I think the war mechanic - which has seemed to receive the most attention - is by and far the lowest priority of all the combat problems the game has. I think the ever-widening gulf to enter combat at the absolute lowest levels is the single biggest reason why people don't stay and for the most part, the same people who have been playing since 2004 and '05 are the ones that still are in charge in a lot of guilds and organizations.

People continue to argue that the admins aren't transparent, yet Estarra just tells us we're wrong. Guess that ends it then. I don't know why you're mystified about the 'terrible decisions' we're talking about since people have specifically listed them.

While you may not respond well to tough love, I don't respond well to patronizing responses and false claims of innocence. I don't know how often I have to stress it, but no one is blaming volunteer admin for the problems the game has. I've personally blamed volunteer admins for horrible PR, interaction, and attitude, but I'm only blaming the paid staff members for the actual state of Lusternia, which I feel is far below its potential, mainly due to transparency, where Estarra - and I feel you've shown in this thread with your posts already - you feel you simply know better than us. I don't think now, and I've never thought before, that this is a good policy or one I want to play under.

I spend a lot of time complaining, and sometime I get so frustrated that I have to take a long break...but I'm still playing. In Serenwilde. In the Hartstone. Maybe I'm just stubborn. Maybe it's because I don't fight. But the admin have done a lot of things right recently that is being glossed over. I love the entire Icewynd continent. They spent a lot of time and effort on it, and it shows. There are places for hunters, influencers, and its really great for us ecologists! The new weather system was a bit annoying at first, but I like it a lot now. I'm sure tailors do too. Sometimes new things need to be given time before they are judged. Then there's the bug system working really quickly these days, the related changelog thing is a neat idea too.

Icewynd is really amazing in every way (minus being bugged right now).

Okay, I know I said I wouldn't say anything else here, but...

talkans:

I feel like this thread has sort of lost its way by now.

I don't think anyone really believes that buggy quests are a big reason why people don't stay in Lusternia. Someone mentioned it to use as an example, and Estarra has simply latched on to it to play the martyr rather than focus on the real issue.

People mentioned quests being buggy, and Estarra responded to it. And that's a bad thing? You're the one talking about "lack of insight into the admins". If she hadn't responded, I bet you would've complained about that.

talkans:

I used mainly combat examples to prove my point because that's what I'm familiar with, however, I think the war mechanic - which has seemed to receive the most attention - is by and far the lowest priority of all the combat problems the game has. I think the ever-widening gulf to enter combat at the absolute lowest levels is the single biggest reason why people don't stay

I just want to say that the gulf to enter combat at the absolute lowest levels is more of a bridged creek at this point. There are readily available systems for those that want them. For those that don't want to pay for a system, there's Firstaid (which, for all its flaws, is still an awesome tool to use to learn). Can things be improved? Of course they can. Everything can always be improved in some ways. But at the moment there is no massive gulf to enter combat.

talkans:

and for the most part, the same people who have been playing since 2004 and '05 are the ones that still are in charge in a lot of guilds and organizations.

I actually went through and checked the ages of people in leadership positions in guilds. Of 84 elected positions in guilds, 22 are above 200 years (which would correspond to about 2005). Sure, that's about a quarter, but so what? They know how things work and they know what to expect. They know how to rally people. If they were incompetent as leaders, do you think they would still be around? Or are you saying that their age alone is why they shouldn't be leaders?

talkans:

People continue to argue that the admins aren't transparent, yet Estarra just tells us we're wrong. Guess that ends it then. I don't know why you're mystified about the 'terrible decisions' we're talking about since people have specifically listed them.

People also continue to point out that the admins listen to player feedback. And they do. Not in every case (of course not; that would quickly become extremely bulky and slow), but in many cases. Case in point: The series of special reports being submitted now. Also, I might've skimmed over many posts, but I don't think I've seen a "Top Ten Terrible Decisions" myself.

talkans:

While you may not respond well to tough love, I don't respond well to patronizing responses and false claims of innocence. I don't know how often I have to stress it, but no one is blaming volunteer admin for the problems the game has. I've personally blamed volunteer admins for horrible PR, interaction, and attitude, but I'm only blaming the paid staff members for the actual state of Lusternia, which I feel is far below its potential, mainly due to transparency, where Estarra - and I feel you've shown in this thread with your posts already - you feel you simply know better than us. I don't think now, and I've never thought before, that this is a good policy or one I want to play under.

I won't comment on this, since it's mostly just intangible complaints that can't really be argued.

Yeah, I think this thread has been talked to death. We should just close it.

Arsalil:

Yeah, I think this thread has been talked to death. We should just close it.

Certainly some people are being a bit rude about it, though I feel that we can still have a good dialogue.

Overall, I feel Lusternia has improved drastically in the last six months; in terms of both events and admin responce.

I'm sure high volume events like Ascention are very difficult to fully debug before implementation. You can't really expect the admins to test out the event with 80+ people doing hundreds of different actions. That doesn't excuse everything (an uneven number of people in Justice comes to mind), but that can probably be blamed more on events being run by less experienced ephemerals, or just a slip of the mind.

I don't feel that the admins are directly responcible for the "death" of the Lusternian playerbase.


My two biggest suggestions to finding new players and retaining old players:
1) Change the IRE marketing direction as a whole to emphasise the games as true Role Playing Games. Looking at the new website, nowhere is it stated or even really hinted that Lusternia is a world in which the players play a role, rather than a sprite with stats. Trying to advertise Lusternia as a "free" game is both cliche and rings more than a bit untrue to those novices who are told just how much they will have to invest to enter PvP. Explaining and advertising the virtues of both role play and an active, responsive world would attract the correct sort of player to the niche market that MUDs occupy.

2) Implement mechanics that discourage political and combat stagnation by increasing the difficulty of "winning" for long periods (>1 year) time. Further, implement incentives, events if need be, for orgs to re-evaluate alliances and ease tension between old enemies.

1. Agree
2. Disagree.

AquaNeos:

2. Disagree.

I really don't understand people who equate always winning with fun. When I play offline games, particularly 1v1 games, if I find myself repeatedly winning, I will progressivly handicap myself until the game is sufficiently challenging that I lose as often as a win, if not more so. I find coming up from behind and overcoming hardship more fun that blasting my opposition every time it comes to conflict and sitting on my big pile of victories until my opponent quits.

Think about it this way: If Enyalida and I are playing Super Smash Brothers Brawl, and I repeatedly win, to the point that she gets not a single significant hit on me for several matches straight, how long do you really think she is going to continue playing with me? On the othe hand, if I choose a weaker character, and perhaps allow her to choose stages that benefit her playstyle, and she wins something around 40% of the games, how long do you think we are going to pay then? The answer is longer. The same holds true for Lusternia, on a larger scale. How long do you think players who repeatedly lose in every important conflict are going to keep playing?

Speaking from personal experience, events that force players to 're-evaluate' their alliances end with bitterness on behalf of players, and a lot of angst of admin 'forcing' things and taking away 'player-controlled politics' and all of the usual suspects, in terms of complaints and gripes. Having been on this side for several, I can say that it would take a lot of cajoling to get me to design, plan, prep and run an event that intentionally runs a schism between Celest/Glomdoring or Celest/Gaudiguch or Seren/Mag or (etc etc), with the intention of making them contemplate changing sides.

Frankly, from the past four years of watching Celest, I rather suspect they'd fight such an attempt tooth and nail, because of past experiences with Seren/Hallifax, and the comfortable nature of their association with Glomdoring. I suspect other orgs feel this way as well. I can't count the number of times I've heard them say, in numerous venues, that Glomdoring is simply much more pleasant to be aligned with than Serenwilde (whether or not that's true, I don't really have an opinion). The sort of dramatic affair that would be required for such a shake-up to be forced would be met with much gnashing of teeth and bemoaning.