Reducing the Number of Player Orgs

1246721

Comments

  • edited April 2019
    Ayisdra said:
    Orael said:
    I think it's a mistake to say that the reason we're making this change is just to reduce the workload for balancing. While that is certainly a pro, it's not the only pro.

    Reducing orgs by half would mean we would double the divine patrons per org. This would mean more divine attention per org, as well as things like patronrequests being done faster and easier because more people are sharing the load. If we're doing special events, that's only 3 orgs we need to plan for rather than 6 etc. 

    On top of that, we probably average ~30 players at our more popular times, so that'd be more people per org, meaning more people to greet newbies, help out with quests, join in fights etc.

    I'm sure there are other pros that I'm missing, and I'm aware there are a whole host of cons that go along with it as well. I just don't want people to be focused on one aspect as the sole reason for the change.
    You make it sound like that this is a 100% for sure thing that is happening, while the initial post by Estarra made it sound like "maybe, not sure yet"

    This is a long long ways from a sure thing happening. I'm just trying to make sure people don't get stuck on a singular aspect of our thought process here. 
  • I appreciate you are saying all of this. Which essentially means nothing. I could sit here and tell everyone what I think might happen. It would be nice to hear it from @Estarra. Because until then, all we are left with is hearsay. 
    Doesn't really sound like an appreciation, but easier to overlook. These were discussed with admin present in the channel, and some of it being said by them. Hopefully they get around to confirming so everyone can feel like they're getting questions answered.
  • Makai said:
    I have some 'what abouts' 

     * Divine
     * Families
     * OrgBixes
     * Org flavoured designed beasts/artifacts (Are people going to be forced to pay to change these?)
     * Racial/Class benefits
     * Cartels
     * Libraries
     * The majority of an org just moving to an allied org and tipping the balance. 
     
    Things like that...because you say it is -just- discussion.  But none of us believe that. You have seen how quickly people retire based on loss. Look at what happened with the 'glitch' about retire value. Severing what little attachment some people have left to this community is going to isolate organisations further. 
    Some discussions have come up in other avenues as well, so I'll give ya what has been said thus far to further the conversation:

    1) Divine would shift around to the new orgs, or just bow out (Helps filter out the Divine that are just inactive)
    2) Families would probably just settle in a new org and become a GreatHouse there
    3) Orgbix is kind of a loss, I'm sure a compensation could be made if properly asked for. (Bringing awareness to it like this helps)
    4) Things can be reskinned, I'm sure they'll be willing
    5) Most of those are based on environments and skillsets, assuming a skillset is being removed entirely that is required for a race benefit, it can be changed
    6) Org-based cartels can be made public or the cartel-specific be merged into the new cartel
    7) Same as the cartel designs
    8) Population imbalance is going to be a thing unless players decide to rectify it themselves. But as it has been numerously stated in this thread, friend groups will just migrate together and this will be an issue going further irregardless unless people step up and fix it.
    I appreciate you are saying all of this. Which essentially means nothing. I could sit here and tell everyone what I think might happen. It would be nice to hear it from @Estarra. Because until then, all we are left with is hearsay. 
    His answers are pretty spot on.
  • I thought I had mentioned that one of the things we had discussed was allowing players either to migrate their players to a new org or an option to transfer their credits/artifacts/etc. to a new character. Anyway, I pretty much agree with Makai's thinking on approaching the specifics.
    image
    image
  • Estarra said:
    I thought I had mentioned that one of the things we had discussed was allowing players either to migrate their players to a new org or an option to transfer their credits/artifacts/etc. to a new character. Anyway, I pretty much agree with Makai's thinking on approaching the specifics.

    Ah sorry you have to remember that a fair few people left the discord your talking in due to the abusive behavors displayed there. If your coming up with stuff there it would be handy to have it posted here so everyone can be involved.
  • edited April 2019
    I think it is important to remember that a lot of players who are proposed to be affected aren't in your special Lusternian discord so all this conversation you are having about the game that affects players that don't even have the right to engage in these conversations is not conveyed until we ask. If you want to have a discussion with your players you should ensure that it is on the official forums where all players can speak without the bias and abuse that comes with that particular discord server. 

    Edit: And if we do not know to ask how much are we being denied input on? That discord server is excluding not just some of your most active players but your newer ones as well. This is only serving to divide the community further. Which is certainly not going to help when you start deleting the reason some players even bother to play. 
  • MaligornMaligorn Windborne
    Class homogenization would make me more inclined to quit than my org being deleted and me rerolling a character. I love every single -mancy and their quirks and would hate to see them go.

    image
  • Guess what I did? Kept posting conversations pieces of importance from the Discord so that it could be added to the discussion here. Maybe going forward we won't just dismiss it because I'm not admin?
  • Read my posts, I promise I stated that it came from the Discord and/or backed by said admins. But that's fine, skepticism is what keeps things healthy. Also, unless you are actually banned from the discord, you're not being kept out. If the rules aren't being held up, that's an issue with the server, and as far as I can tell, even browsing far back into the history, not an issue.
  • Makai said:
    Read my posts, I promise I stated that it came from the Discord and/or backed by said admins. But that's fine, skepticism is what keeps things healthy. Also, unless you are actually banned from the discord, you're not being kept out. If the rules aren't being held up, that's an issue with the server, and as far as I can tell, even browsing far back into the history, not an issue.

    Yea I left after being called a cee you next tuesday a few times, experiencing some homophobic slurs and being told to kill myself. You can understand why we encourage our players to avoid it and stick to the better moderated discord channels.
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    Idea: If you want to get into the discussion of the Discord server here, I'm happy to!  But this isn't the thread for it.  Long-and-short is that the forums are better for inclusive game discussion, so the more info here in the thread, the better (regardless of who posts it).  If someone claims to be "quoting the admin" and are lying, the admin will state so, so it's worth giving a little benefit of the doubt on that end imo.  Having them post the information here to begin with would also be great.
    image
  • edited April 2019

    Deichtine said:
    Estarra said:
    I thought I had mentioned that one of the things we had discussed was allowing players either to migrate their players to a new org or an option to transfer their credits/artifacts/etc. to a new character. Anyway, I pretty much agree with Makai's thinking on approaching the specifics.

    Ah sorry you have to remember that a fair few people left the discord your talking in due to the abusive behavors displayed there. If your coming up with stuff there it would be handy to have it posted here so everyone can be involved.
    I think it is important to remember that a lot of players who are proposed to be affected aren't in your special Lusternian discord so all this conversation you are having about the game that affects players that don't even have the right to engage in these conversations is not conveyed until we ask. If you want to have a discussion with your players you should ensure that it is on the official forums where all players can speak without the bias and abuse that comes with that particular discord server. 

    Edit: And if we do not know to ask how much are we being denied input on? That discord server is excluding not just some of your most active players but your newer ones as well. This is only serving to divide the community further. Which is certainly not going to help when you start deleting the reason some players even bother to play. 
    I'm not sure where you got the idea that this was discussed on discord. Estarra mentioned this in her very first post here.
    Estarra said:
    One of the things I said I'd consider later in the year would be to reduce the number of cities and communes if the player population doesn't really support six orgs. However, rather than wait, I think we should at least open up discussion at this time since our population seems to have settled. Keep in mind that this is something I really am loathe to do and have been dragging my feet even thinking about it, but the reality is that we need to look at the health of the game and what we need to do to succeed moving forward. Another reason would be it would narrow development resources as balancing three orgs is easier with our limited coding resources than it is to continue to balance six.
    Thus, the current thought is to go back to the 'original three' organizations: Serenwilde, Celest and Magnagora, and allowing Glomdoring, Hallifax and Gaudiguch to go dormant. However, we know Glomdoring is a large organization so it would be tough on players currently there, but it may help bolster the remaining organizations. We have also considered other combinations of closings but if we want to grow in the future, I think new players look for familiar themes (nature/good/light) rather than what may end up having with other sets. Anyway, nothing is written in stone and I'm not even sure we'll go forward with org reduction, but I wanted to hear your opinions.
    Finally, we know there is a lot to consider, including possibly reducing the number of commodity-producing villages, allowing a way for players to transfer their wealth/artifacts/etc. to another character if they want to preserve the roleplaying integrity of their current character, updating the website, and many other things that will be challenging.
    Please keep the conversation respectful. We're looking to have a considerate and productive discussion.
    The only thing that's been 'discussed' on discord is answering questions similar to the ones asked here. The discussion is happening here and anything that is brought up is brought here as well. 
  • My opinion of this is two-prong, really.

    I think it has a lot of potential to be beneficial, consolidate the remaining people on the game to 3 central orgs thus allowing each of those orgs to be healthier, and I feel like maybe it could be refreshing as a change.

    Too, I'm not opposed to most genres of role-play, and something like this would be interesting and fun to role-play for me. I feel like a cataclysmic event (if that's your angle) could be really cool.

    I don't really care what orgs go, but I've said for months now that this game's population is too divided in too many orgs. If people were to give it a try, I think they'd be surprised at the potential role-play encounters and character development they find.
  • XenthosXenthos Shadow Lord
    Orael said:
    I'm not sure where you got the idea that this was discussed on discord. Estarra mentioned this in her very first post here.
    Makai said:
    Guess what I did? Kept posting conversations pieces of importance from the Discord so that it could be added to the discussion here. Maybe going forward we won't just dismiss it because I'm not admin?
    Makai said:
    Read my posts, I promise I stated that it came from the Discord and/or backed by said admins. But that's fine, skepticism is what keeps things healthy. Also, unless you are actually banned from the discord, you're not being kept out. If the rules aren't being held up, that's an issue with the server, and as far as I can tell, even browsing far back into the history, not an issue.
    ^-- That's where it's coming from.
    image
  • edited April 2019
    Xenthos said:
    Orael said:
    I'm not sure where you got the idea that this was discussed on discord. Estarra mentioned this in her very first post here.
    Makai said:
    Guess what I did? Kept posting conversations pieces of importance from the Discord so that it could be added to the discussion here. Maybe going forward we won't just dismiss it because I'm not admin?
    Makai said:
    Read my posts, I promise I stated that it came from the Discord and/or backed by said admins. But that's fine, skepticism is what keeps things healthy. Also, unless you are actually banned from the discord, you're not being kept out. If the rules aren't being held up, that's an issue with the server, and as far as I can tell, even browsing far back into the history, not an issue.
    ^-- That's where it's coming from.
    This might be true except the specifically quoted post from Estarra has been stated several times here from the get go, but made to seem like it only took place on discord, which is just not true.

    Anyway, the discussion isn't happening on discord, decisions are not being made on discord, the information is available to everyone here. 
  • So no discussion between admin and players about this subject has or is or will be happening on that server?
  • Yea I'm basing this off Makai saying thats what happened. So sorry if he got it wrong.
  • The only thing of any importance that was spoken of in the discord, and not here, was ideas for the Divine. Even then, it was just players discussing it. It is becoming such a pain to quote everything and it not being read, or just not understood. Discord conversations has been as follows:

    1) Number of orgs, 3 or 4
    2) Merge or no merge
    3) Combos of mergers, if
    4) Shrink Pantheons
    5) Soft-reset for players being offered

    The only thing on that list that wasn't in this thread already, was about the Divine. Anything else I answered with, either came from here or just thinking about it. Examples, it was stated in this thread that cartels should be merged, not going to go quote it, because nobody reads them anyway. Library follows the same assumption though nobody said anything about it until it got asked, but you understand (hopefully) where I'm going with this.

    I then went through three pages of chatter to isolate the ideas thus far so we could try to have a focused starting point and so far, that doesn't seem to be the case.
  • LavinyaLavinya Queen of Snark Australia
    I don't pay attention to the main discord very often, I don't feel like I'm missing out. Getting yourself banned from the forums or the discord is no one's fault but your own.

    I'm kinda down with Malarious here. If you're going to consider culling orgs, and I think it's a good idea with a smaller playerbase - make it an epic cull entirely. Blow up everything. Rebuild in a new way - then everyone is in the same position of cut ties and a fresh start. I seriously don't think something this big should be done with baby steps. Go nuts. Shake it all up entirely. 



  • Just to clarify something, not everyone has dismissed the original three orgs concept. Makai and a couple others did. I am for the original three orgs and have said as much, as have others.

    #don'tmisrepresent
  • edited April 2019
    I love this idea, if we have to move forward with deleting orgs (Referring to Malarious & Lavinya)

    We can't do new orgs but we can't keep the RP history of old ones, especially for people that want to keep long therm characters or orient them in a new direction. This could provide motivation to let people into old orgs from an IC point of view.

    Possible tangents that cross my mind to build on Malarious & lavinya:

    -Active Divines undergoing transformation during world breaking
    -Orgs gain strenght & bonuses the more survivors flock to it.
    -Safety from ''The Calamity'' only available in cities & orgs
    -Orgs would keep names & past but be forced for IC reasons to change values to thrive.

    Hope it helps?
  • Pysynne is right, he does support the original three, though I don't think I read anybody fully onboard with it, merely stating that if it has to be that way they'd do x.
  • @Estarra in this hypothetical scenario, would there be an option for someone to keep the character they have but treat them as having been ousted, with a lesson refund on org-specific skills? Because honestly as long as I can keep my character I'd go with whatever
  • also I support the classic mag/celest and Seren/Glom setup
  • edited April 2019
    Another big concern that is being discussed in multiple threads now, is what this fresh-start of sorts will include, and how it will be handled. We have some fringe cases where people want to keep the character and just move (so refunded skills and free classflex) to outright new character with all things transferred. So maybe lets work out what this will include?

    1) All class skills are forgotten and refunded with lessons, even if said skillsets will exist in the new setup
    2) All class/skill artifacts will be refunded at full price, even if said class/skills will exist in the new setup
    3) A voucher tied to the account via registration email to allow either:
    a) A new character given all the possessions of the retired character, and artifacts refunded at credit/goop value (full) to spend as they choose
    b) A new character given a full value refund of all artifacts in credit/goop with no other possessions (manses, special items, etc)
    c) Transfer the possessions of the retired character, and artifacts refunded at credit/goop value (full) to spend as they choose
    d) Transfer the full value refund of all artifacts in credit/goop with no other possessions (manses, special items, etc)

    I'd be more partial to 3a, but this allows for those to do all options. They can try to see if their character can thrive in another org, and if that doesn't work, pop the voucher. Or just skip that step and pop the voucher and move along. For clarity, I'm asking for 1, 2, and 3 whether it's a/b/c/d chosen.
  • oh I forgot about manses. That's another reason I'd want to keep my character
  • Makai said:
    Another big concern that is being discussed in multiple threads now, is what this fresh-start of sorts will include, and how it will be handled. We have some fringe cases where people want to keep the character and just move (so refunded skills and free classflex) to outright new character with all things transferred. So maybe lets work out what this will include?

    1) All class skills are forgotten and refunded with lessons, even if said skillsets will exist in the new setup
    2) All class/skill artifacts will be refunded at full price, even if said class/skills will exist in the new setup
    3) A voucher tied to the account via registration email to allow either:
    a) A new character given all the possessions of the retired character, and artifacts refunded at credit/goop value (full) to spend as they choose
    b) A new character given a full value refund of all artifacts in credit/goop with no other possessions (manses, special items, etc)

    I'd be more partial to 3a, but this allows for those to do all options. They can try to see if their character can thrive in another org, and if that doesn't work, pop the voucher. Or just skip that step and pop the voucher and move along.
    Or what if you have a character in a deleted org who is arti'd to the nines but whose RP won't let them survive outside that org, but another character in a surviving org who you want to play more but they don't have all the bling so this is their chance? Could they use the 'transfer voucher' to get all the artis from the retired first character?
  • A good question, Keahi, going to edit that post a bit, so expect an update.
This discussion has been closed.