Are there too many settlements (i.e., cities/communes) in Lusternia?

Versalean

Question kinda speaks for itself. Are we spread too thinly in the Basic? Or is the number of players-per-org about right? Or are the numbers less important than the good ideological diversity that having X orgs allows?

Tell us what you think if you like. The poll is anonymous, so if you prefer to do the one-click wonder, go ahead.

Much love

Yehn

Hmm. I'll just say, if Hallifax wasn't here, I wouldn't be playing the game... (I think I've even heard some stories from back when Lusternia was a total of... 3 orgs? Sounded ick)

I kind of understand the argument about being spread thin, and definitely some of them really seem to be struggling with population... but, well, without a place to 'fit' that would be GG for me personally. I bet there are others that really like their org, populated or not, and just wouldn't have interest in joining another...

Deichtine

Probally too many. We often have orgs with only enough folks to almost maybe fill the ministry positions.

Aetolia has a similar population and only four orgs. Imperian dropped their orgs to reduce the numbers as well.

Issue Lusty has is it cant drop orgs as easily as other IRE games due to the class mechanics and story. Nexus power and all that.

Sylandra

Possibly, but deleting an org at this point would be difficult. People are pretty invested in their cities and communes. I know I'd be upset if mine were chosen to get the axe. Also what Veyils said.

Chirbi

I think there *are* too many orgs for the population, but I know if push came to shove there's a big likelihood mine would get the boot so I'm not exactly eager to recommend something goes on the chopping block.

I played Aet through it's roughest years, and they did decide to cut out a city and I think ultimately most players agreed it was a good decision. (After years of back-and-forth developer churn.) I don't think Lusty is uniquely unable to drop orgs though. Every game has different mechanics, stories, and player attachment to organizations. Just because Lusty has its own variants doesn't mean it can't trim the fat nor does it mean that it's "easily" done in other IRE games.

I think that there are several city positions that we could completely do without, and I think many guilds would benefit from smaller leadership structures as well. Relying more on the alliances for RP purposes and not  just domoths might also make the game feel a little more close-knit. People clearly make their own friends within the alliance, but more inter-dependence will make our orgs feel larger/closer.

Just my two cents of course!

Cyndarin

People lost their ever flipping minds over losing guilds, I can't imagine erasing a whole org would go any better.

Versalean

I feel as if a good many people are saying "Yes, but..." and I get that. I'm literally just interested in the specific question about whether there are too many orgs - for whatever reason - rather than i) Which should get chopped or ii) What would happen if chopping started. And it's not as if the godmin are going to make any decisions based on a random Versapoll, because I'm sure they agree with @Cyndarin's point. Heck, if a 'bad' promo is all it takes to create a multi-page flamewar, nobody's got time for the fallout from deleting an org.

Yehn

I think it also depends a little on how you look at it...

Too many orgs in terms of population support? Yes, probably...

Too many orgs in terms of different flavors/playstyles? No, not at all... (<-- I voted from this standpoint)

Tekora

The difficulty in making the decision to remove orgs in Lusternia stems from the fact that Lusternia's base concept centers around duality and counter-balances. If you were to remove an org, you would be required to remove the corresponding opposing org as well in order to maintain parity. And after 8+ years, the lore and playerbase is far too set to handle such a large change in the game's design. 

Sylphas

I'm in the "yes, but…" camp. 

Kerith

Yehn said:

I think it also depends a little on how you look at it...

Too many orgs in terms of population support? Yes, probably...

Too many orgs in terms of different flavors/playstyles? No, not at all... (<-- I voted from this standpoint)

Good point. I voted from the first standpoint.

Versalean

Tekora said:

The difficulty in making the decision to remove orgs in Lusternia stems from the fact that Lusternia's base concept centers around duality and counter-balances. If you were to remove an org, you would be required to remove the corresponding opposing org as well in order to maintain parity. And after 8+ years, the lore and playerbase is far too set to handle such a large change in the game's design. 

See I'm not sure that this is the case. Now I'm not saying this would be remotely ideal, but there's nothing to stop Opposing Org X being a mob city. Or you could have it out of balance and have a yearly event where people had to go and deal with what that did to the Basin. Or (I'm reaching here, actually, and not sure if this would break the lore) having a City which represented the balance between two dual concepts. Point is, there's ways and means which is why this thread isn't to settle whether it would/should work. It's one very specific question which is about whether people believe the number of orgs is presently a good or a bad thing for Lusternia.

Xenthos

What is with your polls and ties?  13/13/2 right now.

Tekora

Versalean said:

Tekora said:

The difficulty in making the decision to remove orgs in Lusternia stems from the fact that Lusternia's base concept centers around duality and counter-balances. If you were to remove an org, you would be required to remove the corresponding opposing org as well in order to maintain parity. And after 8+ years, the lore and playerbase is far too set to handle such a large change in the game's design. 

See I'm not sure that this is the case. Now I'm not saying this would be remotely ideal, but there's nothing to stop Opposing Org X being a mob city. Or you could have it out of balance and have a yearly event where people had to go and deal with what that did to the Basin. Or (I'm reaching here, actually, and not sure if this would break the lore) having a City which represented the balance between two dual concepts. Point is, there's ways and means which is why this thread isn't to settle whether it would/should work. It's one very specific question which is about whether people believe the number of orgs is presently a good or a bad thing for Lusternia.

In that case, I can argue in favor of keeping the number of orgs the way it is now based on the fact that each organization that currently stands is unique enough that you're not really going to be able to find the kind of environment it provides in any other organization. This is why you'll see so many people claim that they would lose their desire to play the game if their org shut down, because they're here specifically for the experience that their chosen org provides. It's something that this game has always done very well for itself, the ability to create and nurture distinct cultures within its communities. And I say that as someone who was drawn to the concept of Hallifax even before it was released.

Really when it comes down to it, I don't think the question that needs to be answered is 'Is the number of orgs a good or bad thing for Lusternia?' I believe a more productive question would be, 'What can we do to increase the player population?'

Ess

What about a more leading poll - if you had to get rid of a settlement which would it be?

Xenthos

Then you get a bunch of people who would be happy to nuke some org they are not a part of and do not care about.

More telling would be a poll of people willing to nuke their own org.  I rather suspect the number of Yes votes would drop dramatically.

Rancoura

Ess said:

What about a more leading poll - if you had to get rid of a settlement which would it be?

I don't think we need that kind of turmoil on the forums, Godmins know we create enough as it is -- particularly since I'm 99% certain that Estarra & co. are not considering removing an org at the moment.

Deichtine

Also well remember with these things sometimes its not a simply case of dropping one or org. They could drop all orgs and end up just remaking three or four new ones for example. Kinda like they did with the guilds.

Daedroth

I will break the tie by saying no, there aren't too many. Mostly because they are all so unique, and it would be sad to see one of the elements such as fire, air, etc. become inaccessible again.

If I had to choose to get rid of an org, I'd go with Serenwilde. Celeste and Hallifax are already good matches, Gaudiguch is neutral and Glom/Mag are fairly buddy buddy.

Yehn

Ess said:

What about a more leading poll - if you had to get rid of a settlement which would it be?

This would only be an (un)popularity contest and...

Rancoura said:

Ess said:

What about a more leading poll - if you had to get rid of a settlement which would it be?

I don't think we need that kind of turmoil on the forums, Godmins know we create enough as it is -- particularly since I'm 99% certain that Estarra & co. are not considering removing an org at the moment.

Yes, this kind of thing wouldn't add anything...

(also, gib server side curing please!)

Versalean

Tekora said:

Versalean said:

Tekora said:

The difficulty in making the decision to remove orgs in Lusternia stems from the fact that Lusternia's base concept centers around duality and counter-balances. If you were to remove an org, you would be required to remove the corresponding opposing org as well in order to maintain parity. And after 8+ years, the lore and playerbase is far too set to handle such a large change in the game's design. 

See I'm not sure that this is the case. Now I'm not saying this would be remotely ideal, but there's nothing to stop Opposing Org X being a mob city. Or you could have it out of balance and have a yearly event where people had to go and deal with what that did to the Basin. Or (I'm reaching here, actually, and not sure if this would break the lore) having a City which represented the balance between two dual concepts. Point is, there's ways and means which is why this thread isn't to settle whether it would/should work. It's one very specific question which is about whether people believe the number of orgs is presently a good or a bad thing for Lusternia.

In that case, I can argue in favor of keeping the number of orgs the way it is now based on the fact that each organization that currently stands is unique enough that you're not really going to be able to find the kind of environment it provides in any other organization. This is why you'll see so many people claim that they would lose their desire to play the game if their org shut down, because they're here specifically for the experience that their chosen org provides. It's something that this game has always done very well for itself, the ability to create and nurture distinct cultures within its communities. And I say that as someone who was drawn to the concept of Hallifax even before it was released.

Really when it comes down to it, I don't think the question that needs to be answered is 'Is the number of orgs a good or bad thing for Lusternia?' I believe a more productive question would be, 'What can we do to increase the player population?'

Great question! Start a thread, my good man/woman/person!

Versalean

Ess said:

What about a more leading poll - if you had to get rid of a settlement which would it be?

This thread would be lucky to make to page 2, and the results wouldn't be too helpful. You might just as easily (and with fewer meltdowns) simply ask "Which settlement is your main in?". That will predict the answer to your question 99 times out of 100.

Cyndarin

Yes, let's discuss what org we'd delete and why. Be specific as possible, name who in that org made you feel that way, and what they did. 

I'll start. Glomdroing, @Xenthos, and constantly bugging me to "follow the rules" and "Blah blah it's the law," and "you aren't a queen anymore Celina," and "Because you said so is not a law, Celina."

Anita

I don't think it's very nice or fair to start pointing fingers at an org that you think should be axed - regardless of whether you have played in that org before / are currently in that org / had a bad experience in that org, there are always people in an org that want to make the best of what they have and work towards something. 

If it is the admin decision further down the line to do so, then so be it - but I doubt it would happen without some player input first (re: guilds)

Cyndarin

It was a joke. I can add a drag queen GIF if it'll help.




 

Xenthos

Hey, if it helps, I read it the way that it was intended.

Anita: Celina and Xenthos have had a long history together on an IC basis-- yin and yang in terms of viewpoints.  There were a couple of times when they agreed on things and when it happened it was basically Game Over for whatever the debate in question happened to be.

Rancoura

Xenthos said:

Celina and Xenthos have had a long history together

Right in the feels, Xen.

Yehn

(But I like the people still in Seren too...)

Anita

Er, my post wasn't aimed at the Celina/Xenthos thing. So you can take your gifs and posts back. It was aimed at the discussion above Celina's posts. 

Xenthos

I do not want to take my post back; you gave me an easy excuse to make a response poking back at Celina.

Shaddus

Whoa, whoa. What overzealous mod deleted my comment?