Maybe Glom is lacking in using supermobs as RP tools, but go visit Celest or Magnagora, even alt there, and you'll see their teachings, symbolism, and other aspects of the Supernals and Demon Lords. Seren has some pretty deep insight and RP with their aspects too, can't say much for fleshpots and spheres, they're not really RP devices to my knowledge.
I strongly believe that if the admin are unwilling to make Spheres/Fleshpots stronger, they should make generating motes/butterflies much faster compared to other orgs.
Killing fleshpots and spheres halves the petals and facets. Illuminati also can't use a fleshmound if the fleshpot is dead.
Gaudiguch can grow 3-10 petals per nexus world entity fed to the fleshpot, growing more petals the more petals the fleshpot already has so it's best to keep them above 10k. The entity respawn rate limits the rate you can replenish them. I don't know how Halifax's spheres work.
We don't have surpluses on all types of flesh now that people feed them less, though we still do for most. It's easier to generate power by bashing elemental or birthing butterflies so folk do that instead. The vortex exits slow you down moving around to find the vortex creatures.
I try to keep the fleshpots around 15k petals so it's faster to bring them back up to 10k when they get killed. It takes quite a lot of effort.
Combat is only motivating when it isn't ridiculously one-sided for long periods of time. There are already people getting tired of the endless slog of seeing no reward for their efforts, and leaving for other games. Increasing the amount of one-sided conflict - which is what any raiding/smob system will do, by the nature of it - will only exacerbate this problem.
If you really want *more* conflict, the solution would be to force, either by player choice or game design, smaller scale combat between a limited number of people/orgs. Prevent alliances on some events, limit an area to only allowing an equal number of combatants from opposing sides.
It is demotivating to lose org-loyal mobs and know that you can't do the same thing to the other side. It doesn't matter what the mechanical loss actually is, I still don't want to sit in game and listen to those spheres screaming for help and know that if I wanted to jump in, it'll be 3 vs 10. Again. I speak as possibly the only person in the last Hallifax/Serenwilde/Magnagora smob raid who actually enjoyed the process and gathering essence - to a point. We have only *just recently* started making a net positive gain on recovering from the damage that caused.
No matter how much positivity I want to try to shovel into that hole, it's just not possible. Even if I could be as willfully ignorant as some seem to be about the problems, I can't help but notice that fewer people are showing up from "my side." I can count. Fix raiding mechanics and find ways to force smaller-scale conflict, please and thanks.
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
Combat is only motivating when it isn't ridiculously one-sided for long periods of time. There are already people getting tired of the endless slog of seeing no reward for their efforts, and leaving for other games. Increasing the amount of one-sided conflict - which is what any raiding/smob system will do, by the nature of it - will only exacerbate this problem.
If you really want *more* conflict, the solution would be to force, either by player choice or game design, smaller scale combat between a limited number of people/orgs. Prevent alliances on some events, limit an area to only allowing an equal number of combatants from opposing sides.
It is demotivating to lose org-loyal mobs and know that you can't do the same thing to the other side. It doesn't matter what the mechanical loss actually is, I still don't want to sit in game and listen to those spheres screaming for help and know that if I wanted to jump in, it'll be 3 vs 10. Again. I speak as possibly the only person in the last Hallifax/Serenwilde/Magnagora smob raid who actually enjoyed the process and gathering essence - to a point. We have only *just recently* started making a net positive gain on recovering from the damage that caused.
No matter how much positivity I want to try to shovel into that hole, it's just not possible. Even if I could be as willfully ignorant as some seem to be about the problems, I can't help but notice that fewer people are showing up from "my side." I can count. Fix raiding mechanics and find ways to force smaller-scale conflict, please and thanks.
This. Absolutely.
And as to mentions of "off-peak" raiding, I would consider this to depend on perspective. There are a lot of people who have the time in their lives to raid whenever people are gone in an org and vice versa. I don't think it's really a reason to adjust SMOBS, as some have stated through this thread. People do it. People can change that on their own if they want to. We don't need a mechanic in SMOBS that forces them to. Again, we know people in general won't because that's how PVP is at the moment.
But we do need is conflict mechanics, as Keth says that limits some alliances or the number of people depending on what conflict event is going to occur. Maybe this could be tested in Timequakes, so that it's not a complete runaway arm's race.
Recently whenever we are attempting to defend, sometimes alone, there are always more people who can be assisted on the current "opposing" side. While it is our choice to be defensive or offensive, no matter the number, most of us really want an even match of people when we're defending our planes, shrines, and a variety of other things that are RPly worthy of defense. However, they are not worth the time now OOCly due to how group fights happen on a general basis, and the techniques used to draw out people to defend.
The cool night-time breeze shivers in the arid caress of the streets of the capital city, brushing the earthen taste of dust across your lips.
*
A blessed silence falls upon the city for the moment, most activity confined to the towers and the theatre due to the snowy weather.
*
Pinprick points of light twinkle in the deep black overhead, their brightness full of a cold, hungering malice.
Maybe Glom is lacking in using supermobs as RP tools, but go visit Celest or Magnagora, even alt there, and you'll see their teachings, symbolism, and other aspects of the Supernals and Demon Lords. Seren has some pretty deep insight and RP with their aspects too, can't say much for fleshpots and spheres, they're not really RP devices to my knowledge.
Excuse me?
Viravain, Lady of the Thorns shouts, "And You would seize Me? Fool! I am the Glomdoring! I am the Wyrd, and beneath the cloak of Night, the shadows of the Silent stir!"
Maybe Glom is lacking in using supermobs as RP tools, but go visit Celest or Magnagora, even alt there, and you'll see their teachings, symbolism, and other aspects of the Supernals and Demon Lords. Seren has some pretty deep insight and RP with their aspects too, can't say much for fleshpots and spheres, they're not really RP devices to my knowledge.
Excuse me?
Pretty sure that's sarcasm.
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
I think you're missing the point, this isn't about lore, which we have in spades, and no one is saying we don't. It's about making the smob conflict mechanics relevant. Whether we want to do that or not is debatable.
It's not sarcasm, it's a response to the question: why does the OP feel like their org smobs are pointless and therefore need this revamp?
Ah, so it's an answer to a question that wasn't really asked, in a manner that suggests it wasn't intended to be taken seriously.
"Chairwoman," Princess Setisoki states, holding up a hand in a gesture for her to stop and returning the cup. "That would be quite inappropriate. One of the males will serve me."
It's not sarcasm, it's a response to the question: why does the OP feel like their org smobs are pointless and therefore need this revamp?
I've taken a bit of a step back on this thread at the moment to let discussion flourish between others but i'll just clarify the direction since it seems to be misleading.
=============================================
I do not dislike anything related to Superbosses, nor does their current lore displease me, nor do I find it lacking.
==============================================
I would appreciate that line of thinking ended here. Every org has a wonderful lore tied to their superbosses, though I do not know all of it.
The objective of this thread & discussion:
-To revitalised a system that is currently unused and even drove people away.
Suggestions on how to do this after a - lot - of discussion:
- Enrich revival quests by adding wonderful stories & callbacks to new or historical events. Not just - gather essence & done.
- Limit & even tie in quests to the slaying of the superbosses witouth making the opposing org feel miserable during the process. EX: Superboss becomes invincible for 1-2 in game years, extremely large commune wide effort required to slay, empowerement story wise for the commune that does it.
The skies the limit everybody, what I really wish to do here is take from everyone's creativity and - build - something amazing. Each of you knows things I do not and i'm certain we can bring forth what we would LIKE to see in these.
...Or just watch them forever as untouchable until someone gets 30+ people in one room and the cycle starts again. Are you really going to miss your chance to create something that could be amazing if redone well ?
It is your decision, I'm just getting the ball rolling.
-Spinner Afollia
ps: This target ONLY revival vs slaying mechanics, not the thousands of other quests tied into them.
Also, I really feel like this is starting to read like: I failed in my Demon Lord raid with my fellow Glomdorians, and I think it needs to be easier!
Like Tarken (or someone in this thread) mentioned, DLs and Master Crystals are already well within Glomdoring and friends' grasp to take if they just organized. You really don't need to make this process easier.
I think our current system can't really be improved upon unless you address the mechanics of raiding in general. Smobs are a distant topic until we can address hit-and-run raiding, off-peak raiding (I don't really care what you think about time zones; smobs are supposed to be a PvP mechanic and the idea of striking when there's no opposition (whether intentional or not) is an exercise in PvE and therefore defeats the entire point).
The recovery from having your smobs killed is a godawful slog that nobody wants to do, especially if your opponents clear the smobs more than once in a small timeframe (I'm talking if they clear again within like a month even). I've been on both sides (fancy that, since Gaudiguch and Hallifax have the weakest smobs).
Your unfortunatly missing the entire point. Did you even take time to read what I wrote? (Instead of just the 1st post) Oh and because I actually - do - read what people write. Here Just for you == Superbosses ==. With Maligorn out of the way, I'll delightfully continue on what I was cut from earlier due to real life unfortunatly.
------------------ Continued from above Maligorn ------------------
The reasoning behind this thread is not to bring things back from the state they were prior to the buff. As it's been said several times by many people, many of which have more experience in this & current game design then I do, a situation where all Superbosses are slain by an overpowerful side will simply lead to a repeat of the previous situation. People leaving/feeling miserable/sides emptying out due to a feeling of being completly powerless. Even a skilled & passionate PvPer isn't neccessarily interested in constantly fighting by themselves while others turn around and say....Oh them again, dont bother. Underdogs lovers do exists, but we are a bit far from this.
I absolutly agree 100% this is something to prevent. I also agree the very first post was a poor first concept. I would Edit the 1st post if possible, but that is not possible for me. ( Should you know a way let me know i'll fix it) None of the above is debated.
The reason I continue writing & thinking up ideas is this:
Please do correct me if i'm wrong.
But with the current state of things, Superbosses are still killable. Just boosted and stronger. That means a solid/organised group of people - could - take them down. It's not too far fetched to expect that one day one side will end up reaching numbers that will simply completly overwhelm the other side. You think it's bad now? Imagine double those numbers. That's not many more people, but as folks grow on one side, the other dwindles and eventually things will simply be a landslide....or completly dead.
Wether any of us likes it or not.
Superbosses are in game Superbosses are still killable ( Please correct me if they have been coded to be immune to damage ) Superbosses being killed will make the victim side miserable, if they can ever get them back up in the first place. Superbosses encourage domination by a single alliance to the expense of the other.
All of this above is essentially what has been repeated, rewashed & rehashed by many people in this thread.
I agree on the following: 1.- It is the state the PvP side of superbosses is in right now 2.- It is not fun for the defenders, often outnumbered and giving up 3.- Revival is a painful and punishing process for the losing org, after - sometimes - having just been bullied. 4.- The power loss is huge.
I propose the following ideas to FIX it:
Mixed PVP & PVE - Preferred choice
1.- A wonderful organisation level quest system, with input from major NPCs from the orgs & even focused on. Story time & lore to enrich the already present backstory & questlines involving each of the superbosses. Both for Revival & Kill Window. Turning the Superbosses away from a PvP-Only focus. Instead pushing them to a mix of PvE & PvP. Yes they are still tied to an opposing faction, but the kill window would be extremely small. You couldn't just suddenly whipe out an entire alliance's bosses. Benefits would be awarded to the winning org, but also benefits awarded to the defending org in case of success. If you had to revive the bosses, there's no reason that there couldnt be once again benefits to the players themselves being involved or out of organisation NPCs getting in touch. Queen Maeve restoring the balance in the ethereal plane for example by reviving avatars of Night or Moon. In this example power drain & other penalties, pact loss comes to mind, would be removed from the - losing - organisation. It would be aimed at creating benefits from involvement, activity & storytelling instead of generating sanctions by punishing the ones that didn't have enough to stand up to the big orgs. PVP only
2.- War-style system. Organisations that heavily involve themselves in combat with each other. Glomdoring vs Magnagora for example. That always raid each other would earn Kill pts. Slaying loyals of the opposing org would slowly raise an invisible war meter until NPC leaders of the organisation , or declared by both Organisation player leaders in agreement, would trigger war status. In war status, Superbosses as PvP-only objectives would be restored to kill levels for teams of 5-7 people with full penalties currently in their current state on the losing Organisation. Slaying the Superbosses would end war status, both player city leaders may also agree to end it.
Punishment Style - Disliked choice
3.-I'm not even going to count how much Glomdoring hate i've found on the forums at large. I could be blind and still stumble into it. As such it's inspired this last system, which I feel would be a waste of a good element. I suspect however that some people may like it, therefor I am slipping it here also. Like the Avenger monitors PvP on the prime plane to prevent abuse, the Superbosses could be setup in a similar way. The largest organisation would find it's Superbosses weakened from attackers belonging to the weakest faction letting people being bullied retaliate & penalise those that prey on it. A determined small team of people would be able to slay the weakened superbosses of the opposing organisation, making it possible for the bullied to retaliate agaisnt the bullies and have a real impact on them. This would also cause people that enjoy playing alts to have a - flavor of the month - with the lowest organisation receiving an influx from those that wish to retaliate agaisnt the top org. Have a different idea ? Know something I missed ? Suggest it!
Hopefully done for the rest of the week as this is discussed -Spinner Afollia
PS: I sincerly hope people now stop thinking i'm asking for a return to the old ways - Thanks P.PS: I'm probably dreaming.
I'm afraid you'll have to see it in your heart to forgive my words Maligorn. I do look forward to you discussing what I've presented though! With that, I bid you goodnight.
Your assumption is that people leave because they can't go around killing smobs.
That is incredibly misleading, if not entirely wrong.
People have left because they've faced their smobs being constantly slain, plus the opposing orgs constantly farming essence to prevent them from being reraised (up to the point where their nexus shields also get drained).
It's clear now that this whole thread is just another case of "Poor winners, we should help them win more and easier."
My calling them superbosses just comes from a force of habit. I've always kind of considered things that are that powerful to be bosses, and super just fits in. That's all it is really.
Thanks a ton for asking Lycidas I'm genuinly happy you did so.
It's not like I mentioned heavily penalising the winning org in, every, example or creating extremely conditional requirements to even create a kill window, with benefits & rewards for the defending org wether through revival or successful defense. Excluding the original post which i've already agreed was badly written and would have terrible consequences in implementation. It's not like I havent suggested either using the current penalties as a way to strike back at superpowerful organisation by letting smaller groups slay the biggest org's superbosses. Nor is it that - other people - not even me, pointed out that the consequences from the slaying have made others miserable at being helpless.
...Yup, this is totally all about the winners. ( -.- ), well done.
Sorry for popping in everyone, just couldn't let that slide. Please do not detract the conversation. If you dislike the subject, myself or other people. Just let the thread disappear instead of posting.
If you dislike the subject, myself or other people. Just let the thread disappear instead of posting.
Thank you.
Everiine said: The reason population is low isn't because there are too many orgs. It's because so many facets of the game are outright broken and protected by those who benefit from it being that way. An overabundance of gimmicks (including game-breaking ones), artifacts that destroy any concept of balance, blatant pay-to-win features, and an obsession with convenience that makes few things actually worthwhile all contribute to the game's sad decline.
People have managed to kill smobs as they're currently designed. The design of smobs is not the problem. The lack of people is.
And population problems will continue to persist so long as the mechanical imbalances in orgs exist. That is what needs attention, not another nebulous project with questionable foundations and even more questionable motives.
I think dls/sups are a pretty good level for smobs. I think we could do those now with thorough prep pretty convincingly, but it would take prep and that's important because losing your smobs can be a massive pain.
Avatars I'm not so sure on. Illusoryself changes made that one much more dicy, would be very tough with current game population to say the least.
I think smobs should die rarely though. If they're dying every week that's an issue. Once every couple months is pushing it given the level of fatigue it can cause in the affected orgs. Still suspect spheres/fleshpots may in fact be too weak, but its hard to say without testing the new format properly.
Perhaps the way to go is to make it the same difficulty to drop one and have the damage spill onto its neighbors making it easier to drop some of those? Make one fleshpot as hard to drop as one DL and it drops x more additional fleshpots.
Comments
Accountability is necessary.
Gaudiguch can grow 3-10 petals per nexus world entity fed to the fleshpot, growing more petals the more petals the fleshpot already has so it's best to keep them above 10k. The entity respawn rate limits the rate you can replenish them. I don't know how Halifax's spheres work.
We don't have surpluses on all types of flesh now that people feed them less, though we still do for most. It's easier to generate power by bashing elemental or birthing butterflies so folk do that instead. The vortex exits slow you down moving around to find the vortex creatures.
I try to keep the fleshpots around 15k petals so it's faster to bring them back up to 10k when they get killed. It takes quite a lot of effort.
If you really want *more* conflict, the solution would be to force, either by player choice or game design, smaller scale combat between a limited number of people/orgs. Prevent alliances on some events, limit an area to only allowing an equal number of combatants from opposing sides.
It is demotivating to lose org-loyal mobs and know that you can't do the same thing to the other side. It doesn't matter what the mechanical loss actually is, I still don't want to sit in game and listen to those spheres screaming for help and know that if I wanted to jump in, it'll be 3 vs 10. Again. I speak as possibly the only person in the last Hallifax/Serenwilde/Magnagora smob raid who actually enjoyed the process and gathering essence - to a point. We have only *just recently* started making a net positive gain on recovering from the damage that caused.
No matter how much positivity I want to try to shovel into that hole, it's just not possible. Even if I could be as willfully ignorant as some seem to be about the problems, I can't help but notice that fewer people are showing up from "my side." I can count. Fix raiding mechanics and find ways to force smaller-scale conflict, please and thanks.
theatre due to the snowy weather.
hungering malice.
Accountability is necessary.
=============================================
I do not dislike anything related to Superbosses, nor does their current lore displease me, nor do I find it lacking.
==============================================
I would appreciate that line of thinking ended here. Every org has a wonderful lore tied to their superbosses, though I do not know all of it.
The objective of this thread & discussion:
-To revitalised a system that is currently unused and even drove people away.
Suggestions on how to do this after a - lot - of discussion:
- Enrich revival quests by adding wonderful stories & callbacks to new or historical events. Not just - gather essence & done.
- Limit & even tie in quests to the slaying of the superbosses witouth making the opposing org feel miserable during the process. EX: Superboss becomes invincible for 1-2 in game years, extremely large commune wide effort required to slay, empowerement story wise for the commune that does it.
The skies the limit everybody, what I really wish to do here is take from everyone's creativity and - build - something amazing. Each of you knows things I do not and i'm certain we can bring forth what we would LIKE to see in these.
...Or just watch them forever as untouchable until someone gets 30+ people in one room and the cycle starts again. Are you really going to miss your chance to create something that could be amazing if redone well ?
It is your decision, I'm just getting the ball rolling.
-Spinner Afollia
ps: This target ONLY revival vs slaying mechanics, not the thousands of other quests tied into them.
Your unfortunatly missing the entire point. Did you even take time to read what I wrote? (Instead of just the 1st post)
Oh and because I actually - do - read what people write. Here Just for you
With Maligorn out of the way, I'll delightfully continue on what I was cut from earlier due to real life unfortunatly.
------------------ Continued from above Maligorn ------------------
The reasoning behind this thread is not to bring things back from the state they were prior to the buff. As it's been said several times by many people, many of which have more experience in this & current game design then I do, a situation where all Superbosses are slain by an overpowerful side will simply lead to a repeat of the previous situation. People leaving/feeling miserable/sides emptying out due to a feeling of being completly powerless. Even a skilled & passionate PvPer isn't neccessarily interested in constantly fighting by themselves while others turn around and say....Oh them again, dont bother. Underdogs lovers do exists, but we are a bit far from this.
I absolutly agree 100% this is something to prevent.
I also agree the very first post was a poor first concept.
I would Edit the 1st post if possible, but that is not possible for me. ( Should you know a way let me know i'll fix it)
None of the above is debated.
The reason I continue writing & thinking up ideas is this:
Please do correct me if i'm wrong.
But with the current state of things, Superbosses are still killable. Just boosted and stronger. That means a solid/organised group of people - could - take them down. It's not too far fetched to expect that one day one side will end up reaching numbers that will simply completly overwhelm the other side. You think it's bad now? Imagine double those numbers. That's not many more people, but as folks grow on one side, the other dwindles and eventually things will simply be a landslide....or completly dead.
Wether any of us likes it or not.
Superbosses are in game
Superbosses are still killable ( Please correct me if they have been coded to be immune to damage )
Superbosses being killed will make the victim side miserable, if they can ever get them back up in the first place.
Superbosses encourage domination by a single alliance to the expense of the other.
All of this above is essentially what has been repeated, rewashed & rehashed by many people in this thread.
I agree on the following:
1.- It is the state the PvP side of superbosses is in right now
2.- It is not fun for the defenders, often outnumbered and giving up
3.- Revival is a painful and punishing process for the losing org, after - sometimes - having just been bullied.
4.- The power loss is huge.
I propose the following ideas to FIX it:
Mixed PVP & PVE - Preferred choice
1.- A wonderful organisation level quest system, with input from major NPCs from the orgs & even focused on. Story time & lore to enrich the already present backstory & questlines involving each of the superbosses. Both for Revival & Kill Window. Turning the Superbosses away from a PvP-Only focus. Instead pushing them to a mix of PvE & PvP. Yes they are still tied to an opposing faction, but the kill window would be extremely small. You couldn't just suddenly whipe out an entire alliance's bosses. Benefits would be awarded to the winning org, but also benefits awarded to the defending org in case of success. If you had to revive the bosses, there's no reason that there couldnt be once again benefits to the players themselves being involved or out of organisation NPCs getting in touch. Queen Maeve restoring the balance in the ethereal plane for example by reviving avatars of Night or Moon. In this example power drain & other penalties, pact loss comes to mind, would be removed from the - losing - organisation. It would be aimed at creating benefits from involvement, activity & storytelling instead of generating sanctions by punishing the ones that didn't have enough to stand up to the big orgs.
PVP only
2.- War-style system. Organisations that heavily involve themselves in combat with each other. Glomdoring vs Magnagora for example. That always raid each other would earn Kill pts. Slaying loyals of the opposing org would slowly raise an invisible war meter until NPC leaders of the organisation , or declared by both Organisation player leaders in agreement, would trigger war status. In war status, Superbosses as PvP-only objectives would be restored to kill levels for teams of 5-7 people with full penalties currently in their current state on the losing Organisation. Slaying the Superbosses would end war status, both player city leaders may also agree to end it.
Punishment Style - Disliked choice
3.-I'm not even going to count how much Glomdoring hate i've found on the forums at large. I could be blind and still stumble into it. As such it's inspired this last system, which I feel would be a waste of a good element. I suspect however that some people may like it, therefor I am slipping it here also. Like the Avenger monitors PvP on the prime plane to prevent abuse, the Superbosses could be setup in a similar way. The largest organisation would find it's Superbosses weakened from attackers belonging to the weakest faction letting people being bullied retaliate & penalise those that prey on it. A determined small team of people would be able to slay the weakened superbosses of the opposing organisation, making it possible for the bullied to retaliate agaisnt the bullies and have a real impact on them. This would also cause people that enjoy playing alts to have a - flavor of the month - with the lowest organisation receiving an influx from those that wish to retaliate agaisnt the top org.
Have a different idea ? Know something I missed ? Suggest it!
Hopefully done for the rest of the week as this is discussed
-Spinner Afollia
PS: I sincerly hope people now stop thinking i'm asking for a return to the old ways - Thanks
P.PS: I'm probably dreaming.
I'm afraid you'll have to see it in your heart to forgive my words Maligorn. I do look forward to you discussing what I've presented though!
With that, I bid you goodnight.
That is incredibly misleading, if not entirely wrong.
People have left because they've faced their smobs being constantly slain, plus the opposing orgs constantly farming essence to prevent them from being reraised (up to the point where their nexus shields also get drained).
It's clear now that this whole thread is just another case of "Poor winners, we should help them win more and easier."
thank u, next
Accountability is necessary.
Oh!
My calling them superbosses just comes from a force of habit. I've always kind of considered things that are that powerful to be bosses, and super just fits in. That's all it is really.
Thanks a ton for asking Lycidas
I'm genuinly happy you did so.
@Anaklusmos
It's not like I mentioned heavily penalising the winning org in, every, example or creating extremely conditional requirements to even create a kill window, with benefits & rewards for the defending org wether through revival or successful defense. Excluding the original post which i've already agreed was badly written and would have terrible consequences in implementation. It's not like I havent suggested either using the current penalties as a way to strike back at superpowerful organisation by letting smaller groups slay the biggest org's superbosses. Nor is it that - other people - not even me, pointed out that the consequences from the slaying have made others miserable at being helpless.
...Yup, this is totally all about the winners. ( -.- ), well done.
Sorry for popping in everyone, just couldn't let that slide. Please do not detract the conversation. If you dislike the subject, myself or other people. Just let the thread disappear instead of posting.
Thank you.
People have managed to kill smobs as they're currently designed. The design of smobs is not the problem. The lack of people is.
And population problems will continue to persist so long as the mechanical imbalances in orgs exist. That is what needs attention, not another nebulous project with questionable foundations and even more questionable motives.
Accountability is necessary.
Perhaps the way to go is to make it the same difficulty to drop one and have the damage spill onto its neighbors making it easier to drop some of those? Make one fleshpot as hard to drop as one DL and it drops x more additional fleshpots.