mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by mehtastic on Nov 6, 2023 21:45:03 GMT -5
They've gone and done it again: found a new way to assign credit scores to the 130 people playing violins rebabs on the Titanic.
- Karma scale is now 0-10. - Shadowboarders can no longer troll the game by creating new accounts to create dwarves to kill people at the Gaj like qwerty said, because dwarves are 1 karma now. - The 3-karma crew of l33t roleplayers (Shalooonsh, X-D, etc.) will now have 6 karma. 2-karma players go to 4, 1 karma players go to 2. Collect your complimentary box of tissues at the logout screen.
- Staff members now have to pay more attention to reward karma to the players, because if there is anything the staff are known for, it is paying attention to what's going on in the game.
Discuss/laugh as needed.
|
|
punished ppurg
GDB Superstar
Why are we still here? Just to suffer?
Posts: 1,098 
|
Post by punished ppurg on Nov 6, 2023 22:34:06 GMT -5
At first blush, it reminds me of Nyr's MMH inital ruleset. Read through these rules with the mindset of, how do we prevent as many people as possible from playing these high power characters? (Without simply swallowing the bullet and restricting them.) You have a chance of getting 1 karma point every three months. It takes 4 karma to app to be a noble, 6 to app to be a Templar. 10 to "specapp" a psionicist, and be considered for sorcerer rolecalls. A new player joining Armageddon New Year's 2024 will have a chance, if he plays his cards right, and jumps through all these hoops, of apping for a Mul (8 karma) in 2 years minimum. Oh, maybe he can burn his special app on a chance to be a mul after a perfect track record of 1 year. How does anyone swallow that? And how can you see it as anything other than tightening the noose on these higher karma concepts? Someone pointed out on the GDB that with this conversion rate, 3 nowkarma -> 6 newkarma, it is going to take the best and most karma rich players of the Armageddon community 1 full year, of perfect reviews, to earn the 10 newkarma it takes to be a psionicist. With the work that it would take to jump through these hoops, someone could work a mundane job and pay an online DM $30 a session to get an explicit tailored experience that far surpasses Armageddon, and without idling at the bar or grinding skills. What stories are being told that secure Armageddon as a worthy investment of one's time? Maybe this change will be the one to get the "Arm skyrim" types to balk. Edit: One of the copes is that now the admin culture will be to "hand out karma" in observance of good play. This is the cultivation of a longing-loop that was documented in other MUDs of this kind, where the players are intended to train towards a playing reality where you should be at your best, at all times, because who knows who could be watching to reward you...  Something about the staff team's track record makes me doubt that this positive conditioning will turn out positively. |
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by mehtastic on Nov 7, 2023 5:21:33 GMT -5
The assumption I have to make is that the producers, in general, do not like how the 3-karma players are playing the game. And tbh they're probably justified in that to some degree. There are definitely a bunch of players who fall upward! The current people on staff are proof of that. It stands to reason there are also many players that have weaseled their way to 3 karma but can barely write a sentence, primarily use socials, and grief every PC they see. There are people playing nobles and templars who don't even grasp the basics of writing and involving others in their plots. They see this revamp as a means to force those players to shape up or leave. They are hoping that Armageddon's RP-encouraged quality of writing is going to be a self-correcting problem. On the flip side, they are also hoping that the "good players" will take it in stride because they've repeatedly demonstrated they are willing to kneel no matter what you do to them. But when even mansa is saying "I hate this", producers done fucked up. This is just the logical conclusion of decades of staff disrespecting the players and players continuing to play where they are clearly not wanted. In the immortal words of Nessalin, "This game would be great if it weren't for the players." Soon, Armageddon will be greater in Nessalin's eyes.
Edit to add that Halaster leaving just days before this announcement is hilarious. Dude undoubtedly worked on the system and got out knowing that this system would be released and discussed soon after.
|
|
|
|
Post by blahblahblah on Nov 7, 2023 13:07:16 GMT -5
Hmm.. Yeah, this is business as usual.
Policy changes in that game can be likened to an elephant rolling over. When it decides to move, not much can stop it from flattening whatever unfortunate thing it lands on. And getting it to flop back over before it smothers and kills what is beneath it is a herculean task.
We've seen it with Tuluk's closure, despite people flailing to stop it. We saw it with the banking changes, and again, people were freaking out. We saw it with sworn oaths in Merchant Houses, with people that played there decrying the change. When that elephant rolls over, you don't get much say in where or how it lands. Then you have to bear with it, and struggle until the elephant realizes it's squished you completely flat. I don't know why they bother asking for feedback, because no arguments will stop them from doing what they want to do anyway.
At the heart of it, it does show their complete unwillingness to censor or punish the people that are causing issues. Even Brokkr said so, stating discomfort in dealing with hurt feelings. They'd rather the hurt be shared around, or other people be hurt rather than the people causing an issue. And they're STILL gonna have to have those tough conversations, so why drag everyone else into it? At least they have come as far as to realize that they need to remove the karma from people that don't play in a coorperative way (which is pretty much the gist of the posted list of requirements) - they STILL need to not whine about having to use their backbones and just HAVE those tough discussions without squirming about it. That sort of reluctance leads to overt and behind the scenes abuse, and if they won't enforce rules, then their every effort is pointless.
It must be frustrating to the players still there, and I'm sorry that they deal with that in a hobby they love, in a game they cherish. Reading the feedback thread was like watching people collectively go through the Five Stages of Grief. It was a bit painful. Reaching goals, then having the goalposts constantly moved back is COMMON in that game. Love to the folks that are sticking it out in hope for better.
Staff should stop making the behavior of a few troublesome players suddenly everyone else's problem. Just CONFRONT them, for god's sake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Azerbanjani on Nov 7, 2023 13:45:23 GMT -5
The change is dumb and bad but at the end of the day 90% of karma is just for roles I don't play so...am I bothered?
Not really.
|
|
|
|
Post by blahblahblah on Nov 7, 2023 14:19:53 GMT -5
The change is dumb and bad but at the end of the day 90% of karma is just for roles I don't play so...am I bothered? Not really.
This, too. At first, I was obsessed with karma and wanted more so I could try new things. The first and only time I played a mage, it ended up being an experience that soured the game for me. Even if I were still playing... just no. Never again. Them making all the mundane otions open at 0 karma is pretty nice, though. No need to special app mundane skills and classes, hooray.
I note that most of the full guild mages have to be gemmed which... oh, god no. (NOOOOOOOO.gif) Being a mage is bad enough, but having to be a GEMMED mage? Ugh. I hope the clan lead over mages has actually started viewing them as worth as much attention and oversight as the rest of the AOD. Last I was informed in the request tool... nah.
I see hope in that Templars may recieve more scrutiny, but they'd have to show rather than tell on that one. If it means the game is less "Templars Gone Wild", then it's better than nothing.
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by mehtastic on Nov 7, 2023 14:23:23 GMT -5
At the heart of it, it does show their complete unwillingness to censor or punish the people that are causing issues. Even Brokkr said so, stating discomfort in dealing with hurt feelings. They'd rather the hurt be shared around, or other people be hurt rather than the people causing an issue. And they're STILL gonna have to have those tough conversations, so why drag everyone else into it? At least they have come as far as to realize that they need to remove the karma from people that don't play in a coorperative way (which is pretty much the gist of the posted list of requirements) - they STILL need to not whine about having to use their backbones and just HAVE those tough discussions without squirming about it. That sort of reluctance leads to overt and behind the scenes abuse, and if they won't enforce rules, then their every effort is pointless. [snip] Staff should stop making the behavior of a few troublesome players suddenly everyone else's problem. Just CONFRONT them, for god's sake. Yeah, never going to happen. The staff are usually conflict-averse to an almost absurd degree when it comes to their high-karma players, because they know what will happen is they will lose that player, who will then tell their friends what happened in private, post here, post on Reddit, and so on. And they will rail against Armageddon every chance they get at worst, or never look back at best.
The funny thing is, the game actually loses more players at the cost of keeping a single obvious problem. I imagine what the game would have looked like if the rest of the staff didn't basically threaten to rebel when Nergal tried to ban Shalooonsh in 2018, or if the feckless and inattentive producers alongside Nyr didn't just let him do whatever he wanted with Tuluk because they simply didn't care enough to actually do their jobs. Compare to an administration like the one that runs Arx, which obviously is not perfect either but at least they can usually do math. Ban one fucker being an idiot to 10 players, or keep the fucker and lose 10 players? Only Armageddon struggles with this question.
It's not like staff are entirely afraid of conflict with other players. Obviously they're happy to be confrontational as long as they get to punch down, or target people they personally dislike. The Shalooonsh Incident showed that well enough with the influx of former players posting here. |
|
|
|
Post by uncoolio on Nov 7, 2023 20:23:39 GMT -5
The weirdest thing about it is how much their new karma system hinges on staff watching players frequently and keeping tabs on what they do, while anyone who plays Armageddon knows that staff pays very little attention to the game. Maybe if you're playing a sorcerer or templar or something, but they don't give two shits about ordinary characters. Plenty of clans have absentee staff who take a week to respond to any clan-related requests and absolutely never do any animations or otherwise provide a staff presence to the clan. People get away with obscene twinking because nobody cares. Suddenly we're to believe that they're going to monitor and bookkeep all aspects of every player's performance? Bullshit.
These new rules would work fine in a healthy game staffed by attentive, diligent people who really know their players and have the wherewithal to keep up with what goes on at the ground level. That may be more than anyone can reasonably expect of a game like this, but then a system that requires it is a system that doesn't work. It definitely isn't a system suited for a game where a decade and a half of staff apathy and absenteeism has conditioned players to ignore (and get away with ignoring) half of the criteria that Brokkr has listed as considerations for karma.
I mean, come on. Fair play? We have clan leaders who routinely spar for entire in-game days and are never corrected by staff. We have players who run around PKing strangers for the lulz without even the pretense of roleplay, and if the victims complain about it to staff, they're told that this is not against the rules and they have no grounds for complaint. And now those same players are expected to take the notion of "fair play" seriously?
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by mehtastic on Nov 8, 2023 4:23:25 GMT -5
Yeah, which brings it back around to the "staff know how much their max-karma players suck" theory. The new karma system provides a great justification for staff to tell their "best" players that they have actually sucked all this time and it is time to step up. It also gives other players a chance to shine, in theory, since STs no longer have to ask for permission before granting karma - they can just do it.
This all of course hinges on staff actually watching the players play. And since the high-level staff would rather play the game than do their job, as evidenced by the recent psi/multilogging discussions, my guess is this system is going to fail spectacularly.
|
|
|
|
Post by uncoolio on Nov 8, 2023 5:04:51 GMT -5
Makes you wonder about off-peak players in particular. While they've always been on the margins since Arm is an overwhelmingly US-centric game, it was still possible for them to gain karma because the process was kind of arbitrary. The new system is more like a concise checklist of criteria that must be fulfilled in order for karma to be given. Beyond just the issue of being noticed by staff in general, there's also an entire category for clan leadership, as well as one for "supporting the game" which mostly concerns things like helping newbies and running RPTs. Some player from the Middle East or Asia is unlikely to be able to even attempt to fulfill these requirements.
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by mehtastic on Apr 16, 2024 8:44:08 GMT -5
It only took one player, Delusion, asking one question -- "What is the purpose of karma?" -- to draw out responses from both producers and Valkyrja, all of which fail to pass muster. I like Valkyrja, and the answer is obviously colored by the kind of idealism common amongst new staff members, but this is just bananas. Point #1 suggests that the karma system is inherently flawed, but provides an "accurate enough" measure by past staff for future staff to look at and get caught up to speed on a player's abilities. The point is proven wrong by staff's own admission that past instances of the karma system were not accurate enough to do even this. Under every iteration of the karma system, too many bad RPers were on the high end of the scale, and too many good RPers were on the low end. The only advantage the 10-karma system affords is rapidity (players gain karma faster, but can lose it faster too), but that doesn't mean that the scale is perfectly meritocratic, or even "almost perfectly" meritocratic. It just means that bad players will be on the high end of the scale for a shorter time. Long enough, of course, to app an incredibly dangerous character and fuck up the game, which is the only window of time that actually matters. Point #2 brings up the point that the karma scale matches up with the power scale, which it doesn't. Anyone that's ever had their PC bludgeoned to death by a 0-hour dwarf can attest to this. The power scale is only managed by having a hygienic game culture where players have a common understanding that their fun does not take precedence over anyone else's. But hey, now dwarves are a 1-karma race, and all you have to do for that is have a total of 2 days played on your account. So that's certainly something! The additional note at the end at least shows that Valkyrja is trying to be thoughtful and well-meaning. Halaster just quotes back "help karma" at Delusion. If karma measured a degree of trust, maturity, responsibility, knowledge, and roleplaying skill, then Brokkr wouldn't have said way back in November 2023 that the staff are displeased by the effort put out by max-karma players. The only difference between the 10-karma scale and the 3-karma scale is... scale. Adding more numbers and more criteria doesn't magically make the system's failures go away. The staff granted karma and removed karma incorrectly in the past, and now they're going to be able to grant it and remove it even faster. Many RP MU*s larger than Armageddon do not use karma to grant players special roles. These games grant just as much ability, if not more ability, to leave an impact on the game world. The secret sauce, so to speak, is intercommunication. The players of these other games present a role concept to staff, talk about how they're going to play it, talk about what they think it will add to the world, and the staff of these games read all of this and ask insightful questions to get a sense of the player's attitude. Then the character is either approved, or not approved. What Usiku, and by extension the staff team, do not want is this dynamic where they are actually talking things through with players on a routine basis. They want to be robots where they run a line of code. if required_karma <= current_karma then approve() else reject(). Staff special attention is artificially scarce. They reserve it for sponsored roles and special applications only because they cannot be bothered with the finer details and minutiae of what other characters add to the game world, even though non-special characters make up the majority of all characters.  Halaster and Usiku defend the karma system (2024)
The staff know it sucks, but have to defend it anyway because it's the way it's always been and they are too lazy to do market research or come up with their own unique idea. This is the only true answer.
|
|
eugene
Clueless newb
Posts: 114
|
Post by eugene on Apr 16, 2024 13:46:53 GMT -5
Just as a point about game design, this brings up the issue of how the high flying fuck do you effectively and fairly reward good roleplayers.
At Shadows of Isildur, I pushed a reform for RPPs (the game's version of karma) where, basically, players got the first 3 by playing the game for three months and not causing any trouble. Most roles and races that people chose sat at 3. Getting anything above 3 basically amounted to a staff member really liking a scene you drove, being part of a big RPT, or being a good clan lead. Really simple stuff like that. The goodies available above 4 were special and usually required some form of work on part of the player; e.g., a race which required a demonstrated understanding of Tolkien lore, or a leadership position in a clan. These were usually things that most players were not interested in - they didn't want to be some super cool psionic elf lord. They wanted to have characters with good gear and skills. So, we allowed players to spend their RPPs on a myriad of things ranging from skill boosts, to liquid assets, to custom items, and even a limited number of attribute boosts. As long as people kept playing, their RPPs would refill monthly and - at least when I was on staff - I encouraged staffers every day to hand these things out like candy.
The end result was the players were happy. Everyone liked it. Other staffers were apprehensive at first, but it worked.
Why do RPIs make this sort of stuff so complicated? It blows my mind.
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,695
|
Post by mehtastic on Apr 16, 2024 15:32:34 GMT -5
Just as a point about game design, this brings up the issue of how the high flying fuck do you effectively and fairly reward good roleplayers. My off-the-cuff answer to that would be that games need to focus on intrinsic rewards, not extrinsic ones.
Extrinsic rewards make sense in business. We're used to extrinsic rewards because that's how our society generally operates: you work, you get paid. You suck at your job, you stop getting paid. Extrinsic rewards have a very short-term effect, because you have to keep doing something to keep earning them.
The problem with extrinsic rewards is they tend to have a "what have you done for me lately?" effect on the person doing the rewarding. If you're incredibly focused at work for several months, but you get sick over the weekend and you slack off for a couple of days, and your boss catches you staring at a blank Excel spreadsheet doing nothing, chances are pretty good he is going to chew you out. Armageddon has the same issue: you can be a great RPer, but if no one sees that, and only sees you fuck up once, you could see your karma docked. In fact, it's more likely in this new system of rapid give-and-take than it was in any other system prior.
So that leaves intrinsic rewards. In an RPG, experiencing the story is ideally its own reward. As is having that shared story with the people you played with, and being able to discuss it with them and with your friends who weren't a part of the game. In a multiplayer MU* some intrinsic rewards include plot support, and involvement in a metaplot. The problem with Armageddon and some other old RPIs is that it treats these types of things not as rewards, but as things to take away as punishment. And the players treat these things as entitlements rather than rewards, expecting these things even if they rarely/never interact with PCs or cooperate with other players in-game.
But this is largely how TTRPGs operate, on a more personal scale. Before Usiku makes an account here to post about how Armageddon's bigger than a TTRPG, we can't do what TTRPGs do, blah blah blah, the TTRPG dynamic still scales up. An unusually large LARP can attract 100+ people, get them all involved in an intrinsically rewarding story, and leave them wanting to come back again next session. And that involves in-person interaction; Armageddon should be easier with asynchronous online communication. Frankly, the reason why the staff can't do it is because they're either unwilling or unable to personally connect with their players.
Weird desire for power over their players. One element to extrinsic rewards is that it opens the door for manipulation. As long as the karma system exists, a subset of players will be motivated by the possibility that their actions may cause them to gain or lose karma, and a subset of staff will use karma gain/loss to inspire certain behavior. There was a time where people had their karma docked for participating on the shadowboard or criticizing staff on the GDB. The unwritten criteria to the karma system is that you have to please the staff to gain karma and to avoid losing it. Displease the staff and they start to put extra scrutiny on you, and find or concoct reasons to screw you over.
Armageddon's karma system is a dumpster fire, and the only thing that could possibly fix it -- removing the karma system entirely -- is just a bridge too far for staff, who of course, are the only beneficiaries of the karma system.
|
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Apr 16, 2024 20:34:56 GMT -5
The thing about karma is it always was and still is arbitrary. 1-2karma really shouldn’t be that hard to get. The ability to play most things, really shouldn’t be that hard. 1-2 basically is saying you read the docs.
Karma is really just an indicator of how much staff like you. That’s it. Most of the magic stuff is locked behind the karma wall. Fair…most of them are extremely powerful. It’s just…the criteria for getting higher karma Is arbitrary.
I’m just going to point out some highlights:
“Keeps clan/game communications IC. Does not resort to OOC methods to relay IC or restricted information” C’mon now….I remember someone asked how do I do….ooc’ly and I told them and got a someone says.
“Roleplays appropriately around magickers as a mundane. (i.e. magick objects are not viewed as everyday objects, magick exhibitions are not seen as commonplace, shows proper caution, evidence of understanding the stigma of magick and magickers.)” Soooooo….with this new backdrop….being kinda ok with magic is fine….but this is here, so which is it?
“Makes use of the bio tool to flesh out their character and record their character development” Again….come on now. It’s giving….I wasn’t really watching. Tell me how your character has changed? What if I don’t like doing those? What if I feel it’s masterbatory. Cause it is.
“Has demonstrated a correct understanding of local culture in at least one game locations and the ability to research and then correctly apply lore, including class structure, social norms and behaviour” Do you know how many times I’ve played in an org and have seen other players wipe their ass with….any of that? High karma players.
Staff will have a conversation with you about your RP. I’ve had it happen before. The problem is, it’s still very arbitrary. I made a character that was super annoying. I’m talking “Oh shit, there she goes…” level. Voice, the way she talks, annoying little habits, the whole nine. The idea was a person who’s very presence makes your blood boil. I must’ve done a good job, because some crayon eater reported me. I had a nice conversation with someone on staff about it and they were cool with it. If I were slightly more unstable, I might’ve been offended though. I’m pretty sure I got an account note about it anyway.
Luckily, I had a run in with a mature staffer that I could have a conversation with. How many people can say they had that luxury or how easy it is for someone else’s misunderstanding to have a negative effect? Because it’s all arbitrary.
|
|
baron
Clueless newb
Posts: 119
|
Post by baron on Apr 17, 2024 1:11:05 GMT -5
There's actually a reasonable post from "Windstorm" on the GDB. His idea just plain makes sense: players are either trusted and can roll up absolutely anything (including templars, nobles, psyducks, and sorcs), or they are not yet trusted and are constrained to a subset of the options.
I mean, ideally a trusted player wouldn't want to rotate between being a templar/sorc/psion because they care about the integrity of the narrative.
My impression is, Halaster gets his fun out of inventing bureaucracy. Which is fine, even a desirable trait for someone running a LARP-like game. But its just not needed and not beneficial to a game with like 20 people logged on at peak.
|
|
Something about the staff team's track record makes me doubt that this positive conditioning will turn out positively.
