mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Jul 31, 2018 20:02:40 GMT -5
I would argue it's pretty obvious that the game is designed for hardcore gamers, and that most MUDs and MMOs are, if not all of them.
The game's design still runs counter to just about all efforts to acquire new players for the game, and as such there are still places in the game where there should be some leeway for casual players. Like establishing that it's wrong for clan leaders to fire people from a clan because they couldn't log in for a few days.
My problem with the casual/hardcore divide on Arm is not that it exists, but that it is completely antithetical to any attempt to mass recruit players for Armageddon. Most people aren't hardcore gamers. Most people like the ability to pick up a game for a bit and drop it for a few days. It gives them time to do other things.
Essentially, if an Armer casts a wide net, and they mostly catch casual players, they wasted their time. Which is why the new account retention rate has always been so low, whenever staff publicized it.
Besides that, there's really nothing to be done short of limiting how long every player can log in to a certain amount of time per day. And what kind of game would survive after doing that?
|
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Jul 31, 2018 21:43:00 GMT -5
I knew this was going to cause some butt hurt.
That’s ok, I’m not knocking the hardcore playstyle. If you’re putting in 6+ hours a day in the game I’m not judging you.
What I’m pointing out is the fire that comes out when someone that doesn’t play as much says “what about me?” Obviously playing five hours a week isn’t going to get you much of an experience. To tell someone “Then this game isn’t for you” because they play less is stupid and not conducive to the game itself.
What I’m pointing out is if you play the game from a competitive standpoint, yeah playing more means something. Here’s a thought though: it’s not a competitive game, it’s a role playing game with some competitive elements. When you play up the competitive side and neglect the other sides, that’s all you’re going to be left with.
|
|
jkarr
GDB Superstar
Posts: 2,070
|
Post by jkarr on Jul 31, 2018 23:20:11 GMT -5
I knew this was going to cause some butt hurt. That’s ok, I’m not knocking the hardcore playstyle. If you’re putting in 6+ hours a day in the game I’m not judging you. What I’m pointing out is the fire that comes out when someone that doesn’t play as much says “what about me?” Obviously playing five hours a week isn’t going to get you much of an experience. To tell someone “Then this game isn’t for you” because they play less is stupid and not conducive to the game itself. What I’m pointing out is if you play the game from a competitive standpoint, yeah playing more means something. Here’s a thought though: it’s not a competitive game, it’s a role playing game with some competitive elements. When you play up the competitive side and neglect the other sides, that’s all you’re going to be left with. he also said 'lower the expectations of what a five hour a week char can do' where coded strength is one of the things the op was talking about when they were referring to making a 'viable' char a la age-based skillups ur just talking abt different shit that isnt affected as much by limited play times as coded strength and plot involvement which is all that poster was addressing |
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Aug 1, 2018 6:47:41 GMT -5
The poster also discusses "rewards" in a general sense, which could mean more than coded strength and plot involvement. It could mean karma, it could mean something as simple as a little roleplaying time in a bar with other characters.
While it's acceptable that casual play won't gain you much coded strength, casual players shouldn't be left out of plots. Again, that goes back to what I said about the point of recruiting for the game. Ostensibly, people who want more players on Arm want more people to roleplay with. If they get more players, but shut them out of the plots that supposedly exist and make up Arm, then those players leave. It's that simple.
Casual players shouldn't be left out of gaining karma. Yet it happens all the time. When active hardcore players have the biggest share of karma, that's when people believe that the game is flooded with mages and other high-karma characters, because that's how it actually looks. Because those players are putting in 6-12 hours a day playing their sorcerers and gemmed, their half-giants and magicker raiders, whereas the random slobs pop up for an hour or two every other day. Hardcore players tip the balance of power in a way that affects everyone, not just themselves. And it's almost never in a way that a casual player could stand a chance against.
As usual, this is an issue where the game can't change much, but the community can adapt and change quite a bit. I have no expectation that the community will actually change, because it would have done so long ago. Again, hardcore players have no interest in changing the game. Lowering expectations as a casual player isn't enough; it's better and easier in the long run to leave the game entirely.
|
|
jkarr
GDB Superstar
Posts: 2,070
|
Post by jkarr on Aug 1, 2018 8:18:25 GMT -5
The poster also discusses "rewards" in a general sense, which could mean more than coded strength and plot involvement. It could mean karma, it could mean something as simple as a little roleplaying time in a bar with other characters. While it's acceptable that casual play won't gain you much coded strength, casual players shouldn't be left out of plots. Again, that goes back to what I said about the point of recruiting for the game. Ostensibly, people who want more players on Arm want more people to roleplay with. If they get more players, but shut them out of the plots that supposedly exist and make up Arm, then those players leave. It's that simple. Casual players shouldn't be left out of gaining karma. Yet it happens all the time. When active hardcore players have the biggest share of karma, that's when people believe that the game is flooded with mages and other high-karma characters, because that's how it actually looks. Because those players are putting in 6-12 hours a day playing their sorcerers and gemmed, their half-giants and magicker raiders, whereas the random slobs pop up for an hour or two every other day. Hardcore players tip the balance of power in a way that affects everyone, not just themselves. And it's almost never in a way that a casual player could stand a chance against. As usual, this is an issue where the game can't change much, but the community can adapt and change quite a bit. I have no expectation that the community will actually change, because it would have done so long ago. Again, hardcore players have no interest in changing the game. Lowering expectations as a casual player isn't enough; it's better and easier in the long run to leave the game entirely. and were back to square one arm is not and never was designed for casual players to reap the most benefit from the game so if ur gonna play less than some amt of time u should adjust ur expectations or gtfo like a good bunch of us already have and play a game that isnt designed around such a massive timesink |
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Aug 1, 2018 9:30:57 GMT -5
The poster also discusses "rewards" in a general sense, which could mean more than coded strength and plot involvement. It could mean karma, it could mean something as simple as a little roleplaying time in a bar with other characters. While it's acceptable that casual play won't gain you much coded strength, casual players shouldn't be left out of plots. Again, that goes back to what I said about the point of recruiting for the game. Ostensibly, people who want more players on Arm want more people to roleplay with. If they get more players, but shut them out of the plots that supposedly exist and make up Arm, then those players leave. It's that simple. Casual players shouldn't be left out of gaining karma. Yet it happens all the time. When active hardcore players have the biggest share of karma, that's when people believe that the game is flooded with mages and other high-karma characters, because that's how it actually looks. Because those players are putting in 6-12 hours a day playing their sorcerers and gemmed, their half-giants and magicker raiders, whereas the random slobs pop up for an hour or two every other day. Hardcore players tip the balance of power in a way that affects everyone, not just themselves. And it's almost never in a way that a casual player could stand a chance against. As usual, this is an issue where the game can't change much, but the community can adapt and change quite a bit. I have no expectation that the community will actually change, because it would have done so long ago. Again, hardcore players have no interest in changing the game. Lowering expectations as a casual player isn't enough; it's better and easier in the long run to leave the game entirely. and were back to square one arm is not and never was designed for casual players to reap the most benefit from the game so if ur gonna play less than some amt of time u should adjust ur expectations or gtfo like a good bunch of us already have and play a game that isnt designed around such a massive timesink What benefit? The benefit of playing the game? The benefit of having a tuff character? What is a casual player? Where do you draw the line between casual and hardcore anyway? That's the point. You don't get to judge that. All the one hour a day person was saying was they want to be included a little more and not brushed off. Then they got a brush off. Let me put it another way. The average person works an 8 hour day. 8-5, 9-6, 10-7 whatever...they have a job. Some people don't have transportation, that means travel time. Those that do...still have travel time. So let's just say that's another hour...minimum. They get home, oh they need to eat. There's another hour. Let's give them another hour just because...life. Even if you get off at five it's 8 o'clock now...if you get off at 5. Again...you don't get to judge that. They're choosing to spend the remaining time they have playing Arm. You don't ever tell someone "Then this game is not for you." because you don't know their situation. So their expectation is they want to be included more...that's something they shouldn't want? Let me put it another way. So you're the clan lead of some shitty mercenary company or whatever. You have have this job to...kill spiders, no gith. no....whatever. Present you have the guy that plays twelve hours a day, the guy that plays four hours a day and inexplicably...the guy that logs on every once in a while. Who do you take? The correct answer is all of them. Random guy is probably going to die. He knows he's probably going to die. He already accepted that...he just wants to go. What you don't do is kick him out of shitty mercenary company and tell him "Go play somewhere else, go read a book." Enjoy the time you have with him, make him a funny story for your character after he dies. That's it. He's probably playing another character elsewhere doing the same thing with someone else. They're called flavor characters. Now apply that to any clan or independent group. Everybody wins. As far as what the game was designed for. How do you know what the game was designed for? As far as I know it was designed for: That's the first paragraph. One hour a day man knows that. He doesn't know there's a time requirement to play, because there isn't one! He's putting in what time he has available. Still don't see the design of play more, play all the time. That's what some of you choose to do and you choose to project that onto players that play less than you. So what that means to me is you're telling someone they aren't up to snuff because they don't put in as much time as you. But putting in as much time as you could mean something like you play three hours a day, he plays one hour a day or you play twelve hours a day and he plays three. How do you decide that person isn't playing enough? How do you decide when you're playing too much? This isn't a lifestyle it's a game. Some of you have forgotten that. There is nothing in the design of the game that says play more. In fact, if you look at the code, the code discourages people from playing more to skill up. That's all the information you need to know right there. Some of you just decided that playing more gets you tuff and you moved the goal post for everybody else that plays less and at the same time, you created a cycle of who's tuff. That's not what the game is about, it's what you made the game mean. |
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Aug 1, 2018 10:16:25 GMT -5
Let's set aside for a moment how absurd and sad it is that there's a handful of people who are throwing their lives away to play a character, sometimes apparently playing or being logged in for every waking moment of their lives. While MUDs often attract disabled people who have little to do for fun besides playing a MUD, that's not the type of player we're talking about here. Anyone who's talked to people in the Armageddon community or logs in sparsely throughout the day knows who spends most of their time playing the game.
Sure, it's their choice to do what they want to do with their lives, and if they choose to do nothing but play Armageddon, they have the freedom to do so.
But the game simply isn't designed to handle people who use all day trying to "win" the game through grinding skills, grinding money, building connections with every possible PC, etc.
Armageddon has a cult mentality in its community, where people who spend more time on Armageddon are honored whereas people who spend less time are disregarded, both by the community in general and the staff in particular. The only way to break the cult mentality is to walk away. And people who want to play Armageddon casually just about always walk away.
|
|
|
|
Post by yourvisiongoesblack on Aug 1, 2018 13:29:29 GMT -5
Nah, I think that there are plenty of players who play a LOT yet are not held in some "revered" status.
When I play Arm, I feel like, the longer I play, the less I'm inclined to emote or otherwise act in a way that really brings the world alive for others. This is in contrast with times where I log in for a couple of hours and feel inspired and "fresh" enough to portray my character more efficiently.
With longer hours in the game, especially outside of clans, comes the tendency to do more hard-coded things, like fighting or crafting a lot. And I feel that doing this can easily be perceived as "bad" by some staff members.
Putting a lot of time into the game doesn't necessarily mean you're viewed as a "Really Good" player. On the flipside, especially if you aren't playing a very social or clanned character, it could even lead to that player more readily being labeled as a twink.
As far as what the staff has done to make the game more friendly to new players?
They got rid of Tuluk, which was a big step in a needed consolidation of the playerbase. It's far more rare now to walk into a bar completely empty of PCs. When Tuluk was open, especially during Nyr's time, walking into an empty bar during non-peak hours was often par for the course.
Another thing they've done is the new class system. Not only have they added defensive skills like parry and shield use, they've also, from my observations, made the classes stronger from the onset than the original ones. If you put a 0 day "legacy warrior" against a 0 day "Fighter" with equal stats, then the latter would wipe the fucking floor with the former. So, not only have skills been added, but I feel like other "hidden" attributes, like "vs humanoid/animals" or "def/off" were raised to make it easier for new characters to start off with better odds. From what I've seen, these boosts to new characters with new classes have been very significant and very noticeable, to the point of maybe 5-10 days played, depending on stats.
To me, that's a good thing. The boosts/enhancements to at least a couple of new classes seem equivalent to spending a couple of months of hard grinding in the Byn.
All in all, I feel, even as an experienced player, that being able to have a ranger/burglar equivalent with parry from the jump is a huge step forward when it comes to initial survivability with a new character. And, again, outside of coded skills, I feel like hidden stats were boosted as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by yourvisiongoesblack on Aug 1, 2018 13:42:44 GMT -5
To be clear, it seems extremely obvious that most of the new "Fighter" char will wipe the floor with or at least hold their own against 10+ day, heavily trained, nicely-statted "legacy warriors" right from the get-go - if you take skills like disarm out of the equation.
I mean, that's a big change. When they made these new classes, they didn't just change skills around. Even though it might not be spelled out in the updates or helpfiles, they made them a lot fucking tougher in other ways, in *significant, pronounced* ways if you play a character who is in a position to actually observe this.
Personally, I was surprised at just how much tougher "Fighter" is compared to "legacy warrior."
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Aug 1, 2018 13:45:54 GMT -5
I didn't say that everyone who plays a lot of Arm is honored. There's definitely a fatigue factor where people who play a lot, play lazily, and become unimpressive overall. But let's be honest with ourselves about which characters get approached the most with plot opportunities, whether it's something as simple as an item order or complex as political intrigue. When it comes between a casual player who logs 3 hours a week over a hardcore player who logs 6 hours a day, all other things being equal, leaders select the hardcore player almost 100% of the time.
After the closure of Tuluk, there was a measurable spike in players in the short term and a decline in players over the long term. That's easy enough to verify through the weekly updates. I'm not going to assert that correlation applies causation; it certainly doesn't. But if we assume that the closure of Tuluk and the long-term decline of the playerbase are linked, then there was a measurable amount of players that were interested in playing in or around Tuluk, or at least wanted the option to change up where their character was based for every new character. While the closure of Tuluk consolidated the playerbase, it also apparently sacrificed a chunk of players to do so. So the playerbase was consolidated, but it also shrunk at the same time. Is the trade-off worth it? I would argue that it was not.
As for the new class system, I agree that it was good to add some more defensive ability, but I'm not convinced that it matches up with the huge increase of offensive ability that some classes get. Also, it's apparently easy for many players to forget that the game is not entirely about combat. Although the game is very combat-centric, and newbies often get pushed to the Byn to learn about the game, there are other things a player might want to do. Avenues for social RP are terribly neglected by the class change, as well as RP centered around creative pursuits. Stealthy aspects of the classes seem to be thrown together at best. It's as if the staff behind the class change project were primarily familiar with the combat code, and interested in combatant roles, but were not as interested in other game aspects.
In the end, being happy that after three years of "constant" game development, you can start with a ranger with parry and no longer have Tuluk as a starting option, and get to play with 75% of the playerbase you had before, is like being happy with eating whatever scraps fall off the dinner table.
|
|
|
|
Post by yourvisiongoesblack on Aug 1, 2018 14:47:32 GMT -5
I think the clans that would be in a position to have a choice of whether or not to be selective in regards "hardcore" vs "newb" players have had that ability, for better or worse, stripped. People in leadership positions are way more curtailed now than they ever were in the past when it comes to even having the *option* to hire people.
Before Nyr took over Tuluk, I played a character called Sharlo Kadius. Back then, leaders didn't have caps on the amount of characters they could hire, so there was little reason to be exclusive. What this turned into, basically, was Kadius being the "Byn" equivalent in Tuluk. New characters would join that clan because they knew that there would be other players to interact with on a frequent basis. This can't happen now.
When the ability to hire whoever was interested in joining your clan was removed, well, I feel like that's when leaders in certain clans started to feel like they had to be more selective. The "hard cap" on clan populations is a policy I don't fully agree with for a number of reasons because, yes, among other things, it funnels new players into indie roles or the Byn.
If you're playing a noble who can only employ two minions, you likely will choose the ex-Bynner who you've been seeing for IC years over an obvious newb. You will pick the player who you feel will help you more/be around to interact with/plot with more over a character who seems "new." Before "hard caps" on clan populations were in place, this was not the case, and, at various times, you could join Kadius/Salarr/Kurac and have just as good of a chance at sparring or... whatever... as you do in the Byn.
So, I believe you're right about "social" characters, like crafters/aides, being more limited now than historically in what they can "do" with their characters, but the policies that made it this way have been in place for a long time, now.
The thing about new players being pushed into the Byn? Well, it's not BynMUD, no. But, especially with the implentation of these clan population caps I've referred to, the Byn seems like the best way for new players - and even older/returning players - to readily find themselves involved in Cool Stuff, or, more importantly, log in and have people to interact with towards a common goal, even if it's just sparring. Having said that, I feel like this has been de-emphasized since when I started playing.
When I started playing, right after Krrx revamped the Byn and turned it into what it is now, there were almost always 3 Byn sarges. This was just sorta the standard. When one Sergeant died, usually someone would be promoted to take his place. There weren't units - and the rules of the Byn as a whole were a lot more restrictive - so basically any Sergeant could recruit to add to a shared pool of people. Being recruited on my 2nd character into the Byn like this was really what made me stick with the game. Anyway, now, I don't think that having three recruiting Byn sarges will ever be a "thing" again. It's slightly harder to be recruited into the Byn than it was historically, which can be bad if the causes new players to wait around until a sergeant shows up; they might lose interest and be more likely to walk away in boredom with a lessened chance of instantly being thrown into plots/interaction/quests of sorts.
As far as the project centering around combat roles to the exclusion of non-combatant roles, I would say that the fact that they added crafting skills to so many guilds stands in contrast with what you're saying. However, for reasons mentioned above (hard caps on clan populations), it seems like these hybrid merchant/combat chars will still be mostly relegated to the Byn or independent work, the latter of which isn't going to keep new players around.
So, you aren't entirely wrong. The staff's response to this might be something like, well, there is House Terash/the Atrium, but I don't feel like that clan is a viable option save for a small selection of the playerbase; for me, it just encourages too many well-dressed, well-spoken types in what's supposed to be a dystopian, post-apocalyptic world.
RE:
"In the end, being happy that after three years of "constant" game development, you can start with a ranger with parry and no longer have Tuluk as a starting option, and get to play with 75% of the playerbase you had before, is like being happy with eating whatever scraps fall off the dinner table."
I don't think people should ever be perfectly content with the way things are. One of the main reasons the game has changed so much in the past few years compared to times before is an obvious result of people *voicing* their desire for change. Personally, I believe that a lot of the changes to the game, such as decisions to include previously highly-taboo shit like branching charts *in the main helpfiles themselves,* came about as both direct and indirect results of people pointing out where the game was falling short. To be sure, there's a distinct difference between pointing out flaws to hope changes occur and doing so just to, well, harm the game for harm's sake.
|
|
jkarr
GDB Superstar
Posts: 2,070
|
Post by jkarr on Aug 1, 2018 15:58:19 GMT -5
and were back to square one arm is not and never was designed for casual players to reap the most benefit from the game so if ur gonna play less than some amt of time u should adjust ur expectations or gtfo like a good bunch of us already have and play a game that isnt designed around such a massive timesink What benefit? The benefit of playing the game? The benefit of having a tuff character? any and all of those. the fact is if u play less ull get less out of any of those and if thats a problem for u then just like mehtastic said u need to adjust ur expectations or gtfo What is a casual player? Where do you draw the line between casual and hardcore anyway? That's the point. You don't get to judge that. u can draw the line wherever u want, the fact is if ur not getting what u want out of the game due to not playing as much as others that is no one elses problem but ur own Let me put it another way. The average person works an 8 hour day. 8-5, 9-6, 10-7 whatever...they have a job. Some people don't have transportation, that means travel time. Those that do...still have travel time. So let's just say that's another hour...minimum. They get home, oh they need to eat. There's another hour. Let's give them another hour just because...life. Even if you get off at five it's 8 o'clock now...if you get off at 5. Again...you don't get to judge that. They're choosing to spend the remaining time they have playing Arm. You don't ever tell someone "Then this game is not for you." because you don't know their situation. yes u can and yes u do if theyre bitching about that lack of time affecting what theyre able to do in the game So their expectation is they want to be included more...that's something they shouldn't want? its their own problem if theyre not around to make the rpt Let me put it another way. So you're the clan lead of some shitty mercenary company or whatever. You have have this job to...kill spiders, no gith. no....whatever. Present you have the guy that plays twelve hours a day, the guy that plays four hours a day and inexplicably...the guy that logs on every once in a while. Who do you take? The correct answer is all of them. no fucking shit u take any meatshield who shows up whats ur point Random guy is probably going to die. He knows he's probably going to die. He already accepted that...he just wants to go. What you don't do is kick him out of shitty mercenary company and tell him "Go play somewhere else, go read a book." no thats exactly what u do when staff decide to impose a sudden pop limit on ur mercclan and five-or-less hour weekly offpeak chumps are hogging spots that would be taken by interested pcs with far more playtime and login consistency and its definitely been done before by playerleaders that u probably like and agree with on most other things but the above is more a case of the staff rules pushing player leaders to be picky via clan caps - otherwise u could always ignore some placeholder pcs that are never reliably around to get involved in plots when there isnt a limit to how many pcs u can hire and thats only looking at a much bigger clan with far fewer characters ure even supposed to be icly invested keeping alive - ud be an idiot to believe that any of the several smaller clans with much stricter caps arent limiting those roles as much as they can to pcs with consistent and frequent playtimes staff also blatantly apply this logic in their decisions if u dont believe me just ask what traditionally happens to just about any sponsored role who consistently logs in too little (u can ask staff what their definition of 'too little' is) to regularly interact with their clan and other pcs in a meaningful way (u can ask them how they define that as well) Enjoy the time you have with him, make him a funny story for your character after he dies. That's it. He's probably playing another character elsewhere doing the same thing with someone else. They're called flavor characters. Now apply that to any clan or independent group. Everybody wins. lol ur putting up and tearing down ur own strawman because no one but u even brought up the idea of leaving anyone out of rpts when theyre around to attend them now ur arguing with urself lol As far as what the game was designed for. How do you know what the game was designed for? As far as I know it was designed for: another strawman quit putting words in my mouth u clown i said 'adjust ur expectations or gtfo like a good bunch of us already have and play a game that isnt designed around such a massive timesink' if u have a problem with that then address that instead of rewording shit so u can have something to attack the fact is the design rewards u the more u play and its a simple fact that if u play less u wont get as much out of it than if u played more whether thats rp interaction plot involvement or coded power and if any of that is a problem for u then like anyone with sense u need adjust ur expectations or gtfo like mehtastic already advised |
|
eru
staff puppet account
Posts: 40
|
Post by eru on Aug 3, 2018 9:56:22 GMT -5
This is a pretty silly argument.
It all has to do with investment and return.
If you invest more time into Arm in an effective way - whether that be grinding, building a rapport and connections, or amassing a fortune - you will see more of a return.
There is no reason that grinding for 1 hour a day should benefit a PC to the same degree that grinding for 5 hours a day would.
There is no reason that 1 hour a day of effective socialization and networking should earn a PC connections equal to that of those earned from investing 5 hours into the same venture.
Trying to reconcile/lessen the gap between these differences of investments and returns is nothing short of employing socialist dogma into the game.
Unearned equality is shit. Either play the game and reap your rewards, or don't, and don't.
|
|
mehtastic
GDB Superstar
Armers Anonymous sponsor
Posts: 1,699
Member is Online
|
Post by mehtastic on Aug 3, 2018 10:07:25 GMT -5
|
|
eru
staff puppet account
Posts: 40
|
Post by eru on Aug 3, 2018 10:08:52 GMT -5
Iseewhatyoudidthere.jpg
|
|
