Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Jan 24, 2017 22:23:21 GMT -5
I'd actually be interested to go through the announced changelog and compare it to the metaguide to rangers... There was a joke/theory back when this was publicly released and discussed that once the techniques and thought processes were documented and agreed on by enough people that the staff would design around it... Which actually isn't a bad thing, but if they have then you'll get mixed probably counter-productive results.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Dec 29, 2016 21:06:02 GMT -5
Beginning a point with "You wouldn't run a D&D campaign where..." is normally fraught with regret. You would be shocked the kind of crazy homebrew rules D&D campaigns are run on. But cool I'm to unreasonable to talk to and thus can be ignored. Ignore the fact there were people that had 0 issue with the progression system (even less of an issue than me). Also ignore the fact no one else ever bothered to document or report their issues with it, just said oh no this is bad =(
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Dec 29, 2016 20:52:44 GMT -5
You mean it's not mathematical proof that at the beginning of the game the difference between a 160 character posts and not 160 character posts was only 40 minute a day to reach the soft cap that lowered everything to 10-20 a cycle? Pretty sure at the time of those posts that was a factual representation of how the system worked.
As for defensive argument, it's more observation that they continued to fine tune the system while the game ran. I think it's a pretty wild claim to say that progression via posting is unacceptable for RPIs. While it's not the system I had slotted for the game I was developing, it's not an invalid system. At worst it's not someone personal preference and/or they hate it with a burning passion.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Dec 29, 2016 20:21:55 GMT -5
Although it is shutting down the concept of XP per emote was pretty well discussed on the forums of that game. I even mathematically proved the variant between a padded emote and a regular emote was more or less nil. carrierrpi.mudhosting.net/forums/index.php?topic=40.0They even took player feedback on the system and further tuned it overtime. The concept of providing universal XP for progression over the ARM system of rewarding spamming an individual skill is just as valid and it wasn't the only RPI to try a system similar to it. See Burning Post II and the Inquisition.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 28, 2016 0:22:39 GMT -5
He could have been referring to me... Even though I posted here for like 2-3 years before doing Optional Realities or attempting Project Redshift.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 5, 2016 14:48:26 GMT -5
I don't even care about punishment content as I'm not part of the playerbase for the game anymore (haven't been for years). My point is solely in the false claim that metagaming "ruins" plots in the sense that they must be shutdown or ended for any real reason.
Real Conversation
Me: *copy paste my post from this thread* Friend: I have information as a former staffer that could spoil a plotline or two. It could even spoil plots I'm unaware are being run. Me: Okay give me an example of something you can spoil which cannot be changed so that the players you spoiled it for would no longer have the advantage of the metagame. Friend: I know the ultimate origin of a core component of the gameworld (lore explanation and reason behind templars in Nak and who is running the joint now) Me: Changeable. There is like... almost nothing (very very very nearly nothing) that you can reveal oocly to a player that cannot be changed by the staff/storytellers so that the metagame knowledge becomes useless/wrong. Friend: But this is the basis of animations and actions of NPCs VNPCs and some character actions. Me: If there is not widespread knowledge of the "truth" among PCs than changing it to something else which also accounts for the past actions/plots involved is 100% doable. Literally no one but the staff would know the difference.
Things which cannot be changed are like.... Rape doesn't occur in Zalanthas... Well you need it to have occured unless you retcon the normal source of half-breeds and blah blah blah. But even that can be changed if you go in and re-write enough and say this point forward this is the new history and new approach. It won't be popular, but it's totally doable and that's something everyone knows versus something no one knows or no one knows is 100% factual.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 4, 2016 22:31:03 GMT -5
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 4, 2016 0:20:28 GMT -5
1. OOC discussion happens all the time by staff and leadership roles and people who don't even play. I personally have spoken with 3 Armageddon staffers, 5 leadership roles, and something like a dozen players during their ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN THE GAME.
2. Discussion of IC events does not predetermine a "spoiler" result. I had a character killed once and the person who killed me was on AIM. All I said was oh I went to the laundry because the dryer beeped and set an afk roomtitle. They're like yeah sorry the other person was bloodthirsty, I would have waited otherwise. Despite communicating OOCly this player never told me of my impending death. Even if they had, I knew and they knew that their clan was looking to kill me. I didn't care and neither did they.
3. I think the shadowboard and even the GDB show that player mentality isn't unique. Players often come to the same conclusions. Even opposite sides of a situation often have several other people more or less on the same wavelength as them.
4. Why didn't Nergal indicate the actual collusion actions taken which provided an unfair advantage? Killing people off with the false assumption (if this is even true) that it will quell the truth is not collusion that's just a bad plan. His primary point in the story is that they sent in similar request tool notes. He did not indicate the # or even specific instance of them metagaming in the game itself.
5. As I have so often said. I have violated the Armageddonm policies as written. I was even banned years after I quit playing because of Nergal attacking me on TMC. If these players have so clearly violated the rules, ban them, adjust storyline elements to keep the metagame information from being viable, move on.
5b. I have said several times that OOC discussion if discovered to "spoil" a story or NPC can be easily overcome with minutes of effort. The staff so often like to point out PCs are not privy to all actions taken by other PCs or NPCs or VNPCs. This mean that players should rarely (if ever) have a full view of a storyline to such an extent that staff cannot retcon portions of it to protect it from perceived "spoiler" effects.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 2, 2016 14:35:41 GMT -5
I don't know, I certainly think cumulative toeing the line does matter when finally an infraction is made. At least in my experience there is a pretty hard to resist bias to that effect. Like when OR 1.0 was running along with activity there were a few people that were unpopular with the team. I'm like yeah they're shitheads or annoying or whatever but they haven't actually violated a rule. So every once in awhile someone on the team would raise a post or thread to me and be like. Okay what about now? I'd look at it, shrug and say I didn't see anything wrong but since I appointed a community manager let him look at it.
Eventually the disliked person(s) did break the rule and they got a warning and then very quickly a temp ban. It's just a fact that once they cross the line from a policy perspective even if it's tiny, then you finally have an outlet for all the near the line stuff they've done. So it tends to be swift and merciless implementation of whatever rules are going on in the background. Because of that built up posting history of the user. Then you have someone who crosses the line, it's their first time, you kind of warn them, then they cross the line again and you're like well it's not a big deal. Maybe you don't give them a temp ban right away because they've only fucked up two posts with no other "close calls"...
TLDR - I think it's hard to get away from cumulative posting affecting policy enforcement. Now if they never make a post that actually violates a policy and it's always just on the edge, then yeah suck it up and leave them alone. If they do finally break a policy that they've been teasing for awhile then bring the thundah. As long as it's written in your public policies what the THUNDAH is.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 2, 2016 14:08:47 GMT -5
=( is Nergal really pof Raleris? We straightup discussed IC active plots once upon a time on AIM. How could such a rule violator and conspirator like pof Raleris who played MTG with me online and discussed IC THINGS (OMG) be staff nao? Surely there is favoritism in the Armageddon Justice Department.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 2, 2016 13:44:24 GMT -5
Having just looked through the Next Prez thread (or whatever)... Not really sure how you standout compared to others. Also from the few pages I read, it's primarily left leaning commentary at the end so... I'm not sure where the hostile disagreement is.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Nov 2, 2016 12:26:03 GMT -5
I also found the mention of your wife to be super weird. Especially as it positioned any inconvenience as "her husband's" fault. They could have simply said. If you are not X player and are being caught by this IP ban please appeal blah blah blah. Salty staffer is salty.
EDIT
Also asking you to pick between 2 accounts, then later coming back and saying that one of the two wouldn't be unbanned regardless seems generally... Iunno wasteful? Wasteful of time and setting up for the ol, but you just said X, now you're doing Y complain.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Oct 31, 2016 19:27:07 GMT -5
PS - In addition the kind of logic behind the do not discuss IC rules doesn't really hold up.
If I go onto a Wheel of Time (book series) forum and say how cool and immersive Armageddon is and reveal who I play and post a log to convince people to join. What happens? If the staff find it will I somehow be punished? For posting on a non-related board to people who probably do not play?
What about if I go to one of those fanfiction websites and turn a log of my Armageddon character into a short story. I use the same name as my GDB login and I don't alter any of the character names. If someone finds it and reports it, I get punished? What if I never linked it on the GDB or forums like this with clear association to MUDs?
Where do you draw the line on telling people they can't share something they enjoy?
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Oct 31, 2016 19:21:16 GMT -5
I feel like people very much missed the point of my post. To super duper clarify it for those who missed it.
History on multiple games of staff and player actions point to subverting rules privately. Specifically, the rules related to restricting people's ability to discuss their experience with the game. Whether this is the threat of being censured for a dissenting opinion or a rule about not revealing current events, recent events, whatever events. The off-game and off-board methods of communication freely flow with such discussions. The reason is people like to talk about things they like. It's not hard to understand. I even asked for someone to provide another means of entertainment where people do not discuss it.
TLDR - People have never followed the do not discuss IC rules. There are exceptions but of course if you don't want to risk spoilers, then do not engage in the boards that discuss that stuff or talk with the people who enjoy talking about it.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,481
|
Post by Jeshin on Oct 31, 2016 9:02:17 GMT -5
Rules. No Rules. The no conversation of IC elements is ridiculous and I know immersions and plot integrity are important but... Name one other game/movie/entertainment where you cannot discuss or share your experience with others? Like it's human nature to discuss and share opinions and experiences about things as a way of forming a community and bonding. That is why almost all MUDs/MUSHs/MU* with a policy restricting the ability to do this just have AIM/SKYPE/DISCORD/SHADOWBOARDS that do it anyway. Sometimes (most of the time) even the staff of these games indulge in it.
No IC discussion ever is basically like illegal weed. Everyone's doing it and it's mostly harmless. May as well legalize it and give some common sense rules on the really super bad stuff you should avoid doing. Like blatant metagaming. Not telling someone how quickly you killed a bear and it was so cool because you forgot your sword so you had to do it with a dagger and you were scared you were going to die because you were so forgetful hahaha... You know, harmless shit.
|
|