I just don't it's unreasonable to ask for org-only anomalies. The only real reason to oppose this is because you don't like the idea of something you can't get.
Please point out anywhere that I opposed it. Please. I would really like to know where you're coming from, because what I want are improvements to the system whereas you just seem to want to snipe.
I didn't say you opposed it. I meant "you" in a general sense.
Where I'm coming from is this thing where many of us have explained that we're really interested in having some sort of way to get anomalies for less-populated orgs. You say you're looking for improvements to the system, and this would be the best place to start: having everyone able to actually participate and have informed, valid information on what tweaks need to be made. You have a headstart, and you're focusing on that and how you can get ahead further as opposed to making sure everyone else can take part. Not only that, but you're trying to cushion any mistakes you make during this trial period, when some orgs can't even get anomalies right now.
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.
I just don't it's unreasonable to ask for org-only anomalies. The only real reason to oppose this is because you don't like the idea of something you can't get.
Please point out anywhere that I opposed it. Please. I would really like to know where you're coming from, because what I want are improvements to the system whereas you just seem to want to snipe.
I didn't say you opposed it. I meant "you" in a general sense.
Where I'm coming from is this thing where many of us have explained that we're really interested in having some sort of way to get anomalies for less-populated orgs. You say you're looking for improvements to the system, and this would be the best place to start: having everyone able to actually participate and have informed, valid information on what tweaks need to be made. You have a headstart, and you're focusing on that and how you can get ahead further as opposed to making sure everyone else can take part. Not only that, but you're trying to cushion any mistakes you make during this trial period, when some orgs can't even get anomalies right now.
This is still part of the problem, the "you in a general sense" thing. You're making it partisan. Improvements do not need to be locked to just one aspect. You can, and should, bring up all things that need to be looked at. Ignoring them helps nobody.
I do agree that there are things that should be done to look into the gathering of anomalies, because I'm not super keen on how they currently are. A lot of my ideas are "in the box" though, revolving around tweaking the gathering inside the rift, and I completely acknowledge that that does not address your concerns... which is why I'm not pushing them. If I'm pushing ideas revolving on the mechanics that you specifically are objecting to, and they don't address your concerns, then I can see you being upset. But when I'm intentionally trying to avoid undercutting your concerns you're getting all aggressive about it. C'mon.
If I was looking into "getting further ahead" I would be doing more along what Ayisdra is, trying to cut comm cost levels. I think they're too high, but at the same time, it's something that can be reviewed going ahead. They're one-time costs, so we can live with them as-is for the time being. Upkeep costs, however, do nothing about "getting further ahead," they're about maintaining whatever status quo you've reached. The upkeep costs affect everyone equally, they are a universal thing. Everyone fails upkeep equally, everyone pays the same cost, so addressing and fixing themhelps everyone. It just doesn't make sense to me for you to go "But Glomdoring!" to that, when theoretically by your own logic these upkeep costs will hurt everyone who is not Glomdoring more (personally I think it will be an equal opportunity pain point, though).
And frankly, it's not really partisan to think that it's acceptable that an org occasionally fails at something it can't just pour money into. If an org forget to upkeep something because of human error, that org deserves it.
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.
And frankly, it's not really partisan to think that it's acceptable that an org occasionally fails at something it can't just pour money into. If an org forget to upkeep something because of human error, that org deserves it.
It's partisan to say "You oppose things in a general sense."
How about reviewing the rest of the post and responding to that?
Since it hurt someone's feelings, I've went ahead and edited a majority of my posts to make sure they don't single out any particular org or alliance.
Sorry, fixed this too. All better?
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.
As I was saying. I think it's important to get everyone on board with anomalies before we start trying to change things around. I don't think it's acceptable to start tweaking things when only a fraction of the game is able to have informed input from ingame experiences.
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.
As I was saying. I think it's important to get everyone on board with anomalies before we start trying to change things around. I don't think it's acceptable to start tweaking things when only a fraction of the game is able to have informed input from ingame experiences.
Thank you. This is something I can understand from a logical standpoint. I still disagree on the upkeep end for the reason I stated earlier. I do agree on the upgrade cost end, if people aren't feeling like they can participate in the upgrading of things relatively equally then making tweaks there does advantage the "haves" much more than the "haven'ts". Having people feel like they can have some participation is incredibly important in my mind too.
They were talking about having anomalies available on the gnome traders. What do you feel about that? From my end I don't think that this will help a whole lot, because of how the traders work.
I think the real question from my end is: Do you want more ways to get anomalies that are not in a rift, or do you want more ways to compete inside an existing rift? Or a mix of both?
I'm more interested in showing orgs that they can compete, and even if they don't have the numbers, they can still work on research, albeit at a slower rate. I'm not saying the admin should just hand anomalies out, but they should be more accessible. I feel like an anomaly forming on the elemental planes for cities and ethereal reflections for forests would be great. A rift only that org can get into, maybe open for 30 minutes (as opposed to an hour for the contested ones, like the old Nexus Weakenings?), but happening slightly more frequently ). I feel like if an org (let's say, Serenwilde) were to see that they could actually participate, and get used to how these work, it might empower them to try to compete and get more. Success empowers people and raises morale. Yes, competing in contested rifts should get you ahead, because we really shouldn't punish success.
I'd love to see anomalies at gnome traders, but I'd also like to see the gnome traders available for more trades. Right now, there are a slim handful of people who are able to instantly get to traders, track them, trade, and get back out within seconds. The people who can do this are generally people who already have bubblixes, as opposed to people who would have to find a ship, or buy a button, get there, stumble around, hope they don't get attacked by the earlier person who is obviously both better prepared and better equipped/trained, trade, and get back out. I'd also like to see the ability to form anomalies out of goop. Maybe 2k goop (100 credits, according to the Admin) for an anomaly. Maybe even let org leaders form anomalies for power right out of the nexus.
I have no personal opinion on upkeep costs at this time. I feel like it should be left as-is until we see that it's really detrimental to growth and org reserves.
What I do not want is for orgs who are currently militarily and population-wise well stocked to get just that much further ahead of the curve with new powers and new abilities, and demoralizing the orgs who aren't as well off and able to compete, and giving people a reason not to log in. I feel that while people -should- look at losing as a reason to try harder, this isn't going to happen except in a few cases, and it tends to turn into people leaving the game entirely because they don't feel they can overcome the current "leader" org, or quitting playing their characters and rolling alts in said org(s). I personally enjoy playing in underdog orgs and trying to bolster them and help them. Most people don't.
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.
What would you think of orgs getting an anomaly-catcher? A device that can catch / harvest an anomaly out of a timequake when one happens. Some examples might be:
A device that automatically generates 1 anomaly for the org of the type of timequake that just happens (the "lowest involvement" route).
A device that you feed 50 essence motes into to empower it. If you do, it will automatically harvest one anomaly from the next timequake that forms of that timequake's type (theoretically orgs that think they will get lots from a timequake may not bother, if your org is concerned you can go empower your machine).
A device that has to be attuned to a specific type of timequake (you can change the attunement 1x per IC year), and whenever that type of timequake occurs it harvests 1 anomaly (a "slower" way of passive generation, maybe more palatable to admin since the generation rate is 25% of an "every time" thing?).
I kind of like #2 because it requires the org to actively be involved in the generation instead of just letting it build up without trying.
I'm not sure if they'd go for "this org only" timequakes. It is an interesting concept at least, but probably more work than some alternate way of generating things...
Any and all of those would help, but I agree that the second choice would be best.
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.
There are some good ideas here, I do want to make sure we're fostering an environment where people feel like they can compete.
I don't like lockout mechanics. I don't think they promote competition but instead, actually stifle it. They remove the incentive to compete because they ultimately punish someone for winning and reward someone for losing (or not even trying). I think we see that with domoths.
The other suggestions by Shaddus and Xenthos are both good, and I'm going to think over them. We've certainly already considered having gnome traders being able to trade anomalies as well.
One other thing I do want to point out is that deaths in timequakes don't cost any XP. You're not losing anything for dying (other than curatives and power) when competing in them. We specifically did that to encourage people to put forth effort despite the odds, because they don't have anything to lose and everything to gain.
re: Upkeep costs. I don't think we're going to do anything now. We'll wait and see how it goes but it isn't anything urgent. I mentioned that silk stockpiles were really high, and to note, silk isn't the only comm that Nature path uses. Gold and marble stocks are in similar states.
I think something that is either overlooked entirely or just not clear -- There is no incentive to compete. XP loss isn't why people go, "Oh darn, don't know if I should go into that fight." XP loss is such a negligible thing that people will throw themselves at dangerous mob hunts etc. I want a show of hands, who thinks it is fun to keep going into fights where you are completely outnumbered in every conceivable way? Raise those hands! There are people that do it sheerly due to boredom and find mild success, but those are raids. When conflict events happen, we the minority show up and make a honest effort, only to get quite literally steamrolled out of any sense of competition, in EVERY SINGLE one. Sure we have the ultra rare occasion of winning by the grace of whatever God someone holds holy, where we actually lose our minds, "Holy hell! We finally got something!"
But that rare occasion isn't a driving force, there is no competition in this game. There hasn't been for quite a while, and stating there has been really needs to be investigated more closely. The only competition in this game right now, is the Envoy Wars. The people of Mag, Seren, and Halli put up with this on a daily basis, still trying to offer PvP when we can even muster a small force, and it is usually met with a deluge of people, easily doubling and often tripling the number we bring. Back to the original point though, people aren't sitting back to protect their precious XP levels, they're sitting back because quite frankly the power invested in the defences is worth more to us than making the 'attempt' and instantly getting murdered by a fortress.
If numbers are an issue and we want mechanics to help filter them out.
In additon to the normal timequakes you also have arena quakes. Basically normal timequakes but only three people from any one org can enter at a time. EG Three mags, Three Serens, Three Gloms etc can enter.
There you go and now you have open quakes that every can take part in and arena quakes where there are limits to the numbers who can join to restrict it.
Do they also stop the exp loss from praying, or phoenixing, or reincarnating? I never tested that 'cause I didn't know that was the intent.
I told Orael about phoenixing costing essence (and costing xp from timequake ending death) and he asked if it always did. Not sure if they decided to remove the xp loss from those too for timequake deaths.
Do they also stop the exp loss from praying, or phoenixing, or reincarnating? I never tested that 'cause I didn't know that was the intent.
I told Orael about phoenixing costing essence (and costing xp from timequake ending death) and he asked if it always did. Not sure if they decided to remove the xp loss from those too for timequake deaths.
I hope so, because that's where the true death cost lies. Just dying itself only costs 50k, so removing that is pretty meaningless imo. The real death hit comes with whatever revival method you use.
Do they also stop the exp loss from praying, or phoenixing, or reincarnating? I never tested that 'cause I didn't know that was the intent.
I told Orael about phoenixing costing essence (and costing xp from timequake ending death) and he asked if it always did. Not sure if they decided to remove the xp loss from those too for timequake deaths.
I hope so, because that's where the true death cost lies. Just dying itself only costs 50k, so removing that is pretty meaningless imo. The real death hit comes with whatever revival method you use.
Xp loss from phoenixing has been removed. Not sure about the timequake ending.
I think something that is either overlooked entirely or just not clear -- There is no incentive to compete. XP loss isn't why people go, "Oh darn, don't know if I should go into that fight." XP loss is such a negligible thing that people will throw themselves at dangerous mob hunts etc. I want a show of hands, who thinks it is fun to keep going into fights where you are completely outnumbered in every conceivable way? Raise those hands! There are people that do it sheerly due to boredom and find mild success, but those are raids. When conflict events happen, we the minority show up and make a honest effort, only to get quite literally steamrolled out of any sense of competition, in EVERY SINGLE one. Sure we have the ultra rare occasion of winning by the grace of whatever God someone holds holy, where we actually lose our minds, "Holy hell! We finally got something!"
But that rare occasion isn't a driving force, there is no competition in this game. There hasn't been for quite a while, and stating there has been really needs to be investigated more closely. The only competition in this game right now, is the Envoy Wars. The people of Mag, Seren, and Halli put up with this on a daily basis, still trying to offer PvP when we can even muster a small force, and it is usually met with a deluge of people, easily doubling and often tripling the number we bring. Back to the original point though, people aren't sitting back to protect their precious XP levels, they're sitting back because quite frankly the power invested in the defences is worth more to us than making the 'attempt' and instantly getting murdered by a fortress.
Honestly, I've been ignoring this point because as far as the first timequake goes, that just wasn't the case. But if you're going to keep pounding on it, I'm going to respond.
During the first timequake, which I personally observed, the one that you ran to forums to complain about overwhelming numbers, the numbers were 10 for Glom/Celest and 7 for Mag/Choros. You're making claims here of 'double or triple our number' when the instance that triggered this complaint wasn't even double.
Even your claim that had we included everyone, you'd still be outnumbered isn't true either. The numbers on the game at the time of the first timequake were 18-16. They had 2 people on you.
I'm not saying this to be all 'git gud' or 'try harder' but to be frankly honest and critical about the situation. What I observed is that you felt like you couldn't compete, so you just didn't. That's what I want to combat. That feeling that you can't compete, the feeling that you're going to throw in the towel because you just feel like you don't have a chance without giving it an honest to god shot.
I'm all for changing this perception, for trying to promote combat and that feeling that you do stand a chance. We need to look at each situation critically, and as you say 'investigate it more closely' but that's going to require you to realize that you are not always vastly outnumbered. It's going to take some acknowledgment on both sides to move forward.
To clarify, I'm not saying that you never are outnumbered or even that in most situations you are not outnumbered. I'm saying in this one situation - that you claimed you were - you were not really. We're on the same team here, and we're going to need to be honest and critical about what's happening, why it's happening and what we can do to fix the situation.
I think something that is either overlooked entirely or just not clear -- There is no incentive to compete. XP loss isn't why people go, "Oh darn, don't know if I should go into that fight." XP loss is such a negligible thing that people will throw themselves at dangerous mob hunts etc. I want a show of hands, who thinks it is fun to keep going into fights where you are completely outnumbered in every conceivable way? Raise those hands! There are people that do it sheerly due to boredom and find mild success, but those are raids. When conflict events happen, we the minority show up and make a honest effort, only to get quite literally steamrolled out of any sense of competition, in EVERY SINGLE one. Sure we have the ultra rare occasion of winning by the grace of whatever God someone holds holy, where we actually lose our minds, "Holy hell! We finally got something!"
But that rare occasion isn't a driving force, there is no competition in this game. There hasn't been for quite a while, and stating there has been really needs to be investigated more closely. The only competition in this game right now, is the Envoy Wars. The people of Mag, Seren, and Halli put up with this on a daily basis, still trying to offer PvP when we can even muster a small force, and it is usually met with a deluge of people, easily doubling and often tripling the number we bring. Back to the original point though, people aren't sitting back to protect their precious XP levels, they're sitting back because quite frankly the power invested in the defences is worth more to us than making the 'attempt' and instantly getting murdered by a fortress.
During the first timequake, which I personally observed, the one that you ran to forums to complain about overwhelming numbers, the numbers were 10 for Glom/Celest and 7 for Mag/Choros. You're making claims here of 'double or triple our number' when the instance that triggered this complaint wasn't even double.
I don't disagree with this, but can you give a general idea of the various strengths of the people involved?
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.
My statements of double and triple are often times the case, not meant specifically for just this one time. In fact, I even tried to make that abundantly clear with how this is a daily basis thing when we try to offer PvP. The first timequake was shaky, pun intended, but it wasn't nearly as close as being let on. Even the timequakes happening now after the random room are just changing where the fortress is made and the proverbial Gandalf stake their claim. So we're going to try this again.
First, I'm not going to let that slip where what I've said is taken completely out of the context. I didn't run to the forums to complain about the numbers. The post you're soft-quoting is in response to 'the perception' in which I quote
The perception is based in fact, that when any kind of conflict happens, there is an actual overwhelming number of participants from the Celest/Glom camp. Even if everyone that was logged into Mag tried to help, they'd still be heavily outnumbered, and I'm counting the novices in that Mag total. Maybe if these timequakes stay off twitter people have a chance at sneaking them, but realistically speaking, if you're not getting the rift type you want in those possibly off-hours then it just feels extra grating. I'll sit out and let the side that can even contest them test the waters. Let me tell you how much fun it is to sit in an Aquamancer meld with multiple Gloms just effortlessly killing someone is!
ANY KIND OF CONFLICT, no where is 'first timequake' mentioned. Hard to see it, but I also bolded a period, the grammatical sign for HARD STOP. Meaning that sentence and thought are indeed separated from what follows. What followed it was the hope we keep Timequakes off Twitter.
Second, the 'trigger to my complaint' was what we just covered, not the timequake. If you feel this is a false statement, feel free to quote me where I specify the timequake. When I stated if I counted all of Mag, including novices, that AGAIN ties back into the ANY KIND OF CONFLICT.
Third, you observed that we felt we couldn't compete? That we just decided "Screw it."? No no, you're absolutely correct, none of us showed or made an attempt at the event, we just sat back so that we could complain and further the status quo. Here's a simple question: How many times are you willing to def up, die, and repeat before you shrug your shoulders and just walk away? It's almost insulting that you think we don't give things a shot, actually no, it just is down right insulting. We give absolutely every event that we can even muster a small group, and I do mean small, a honest attempt. The feeling that we can't compete comes from the fact that is it just so thoroughly beaten into us, that we're just starting to accept it. You know, the bullied kid who starts to believe what the tormentor says. Putting it nicely, PvP isn't fun for us, most of us anyway, but do it because the game mandates it to get anything.
Fourth, if we want to change the perception, give the person on the ground the ability to actually stand up, get a drink of water, and actually remember what anything other than the floor feels like. Want us to feel like we have a chance? Give us the actual chance, you'd be amazed at the results. I've never stated that we are always outnumbered, that it just happens too frequently, and that is the case. There is a difference between total population and population willing to engage in PvP, do not mix those numbers.
To clarify, I am saying that we are quite often outnumbered. I'm saying in this situation, I didn't lodge that complaint. If we're on the same team, then we really do need to start looking at options that alleviate the stress levels and let players that are constantly kicked to the ground feel like their actively participating and being allowed to progress, rather than be told, "Your total population is equivalent, why aren't you engaging?". The better question is, "How do we make players engage in conflict that isn't just PvP?". I cannot remember a single time in my many years of playing where PvP was actually fun or engaging, it was just a mandatory requirement if you wanted to progress in anything ever.
So timequakes given orgcredit points out. What are the limits and such on this? For earning points, I assume it is get an anomaly or spend 10 minutes in the timequake? Is this limited per timequake, that an org can be earning 3-5 participation ticks(5 points each) every RL day?
I'm sorry, I thought 'the first timequake' fit into the category of 'any kind of conflict'. I figured counting novices and the like for that first timequake, again, fit into that category of 'when any kind of conflict' happens.
The trigger for the complaint was the timequake, given by your first post immediately after the timequake stating something along the lines of 'I was hoping this would get addressed, we couldn't even get our foot in'. Which prompted this entire thread of conversation.
I'm not really sure where you're going with your third point. You're basically saying the same thing I am? Here's exactly what I observed. 4 of you (Avurekhos, Kalnid, Choros and yourself) ran in, three of you died and the previous 3, plus 3 more grouped up outside the rift (minus yourself at this point), and then decided not to give it another go. Again, I'm not trying to say 'try harder' or 'git gud', I'm simply saying what I observed and the feeling I got is that you threw in the towel because you didn't think you had a chance. I agree that the perception that you can't compete is deeply ingrained. That's why I want to address it!
Your fourth point, again, I'm with you, we're on the same page there. I'm glad we can find some common ground there.
I feel like for the most part, you're agreeing with me here. I am asking the question 'populations were close, why aren't you engaging?' That's exactly the question I want to answer and solve. I want to know that answer, but when you're saying one thing, but I'm observing something else, something has to give.
So timequakes given orgcredit points out. What are the limits and such on this? For earning points, I assume it is get an anomaly or spend 10 minutes in the timequake? Is this limited per timequake, that an org can be earning 3-5 participation ticks(5 points each) every RL day?
An org can earn up to 50 points per year on timequakes.
It triggers when the first citizen of that org gets dailycredits.
I'm sorry, I thought 'the first timequake' fit into the category of 'any kind of conflict'. I figured counting novices and the like for that first timequake, again, fit into that category of 'when any kind of conflict' happens.
The trigger for the complaint was the timequake, given by your first post immediately after the timequake stating something along the lines of 'I was hoping this would get addressed, we couldn't even get our foot in'. Which prompted this entire thread of conversation.
I'm not really sure where you're going with your third point. You're basically saying the same thing I am? Here's exactly what I observed. 4 of you (Avurekhos, Kalnid, Choros and yourself) ran in, three of you died and the previous 3, plus 3 more grouped up outside the rift (minus yourself at this point), and then decided not to give it another go. Again, I'm not trying to say 'try harder' or 'git gud', I'm simply saying what I observed and the feeling I got is that you threw in the towel because you didn't think you had a chance. I agree that the perception that you can't compete is deeply ingrained. That's why I want to address it!
Your fourth point, again, I'm with you, we're on the same page there. I'm glad we can find some common ground there.
I feel like for the most part, you're agreeing with me here. I am asking the question 'populations were close, why aren't you engaging?' That's exactly the question I want to answer and solve. I want to know that answer, but when you're saying one thing, but I'm observing something else, something has to give.
It does fit into those categories, but the post of hoping this would get addressed, was in response to Xenthos' post about how it could be problematic to not just be forced out. That got addressed, in a manner of sorts, by making it random entrance. I did agree it was in the right frame of mind, but doesn't solve the problem. The problem is that we (the playerbase) are able to just fortress this and as I'm starting to get attached to the phrase, proverbial Gandalf their way to victory. The first quake was enter and walk into a stack. I got out of that initially with Stealth but then eventually found myself trapped thanks to things that seem to interact weirdly and ultimately taken down. I left after that, because I'm trying not to spread negativity and be a jerk. As I stated in one of my posts, most of the players were against this being implemented. Funnily enough, made an alt on the 'other' side and found the mechanics semi enjoyable when you're not feeling oppressed. I know we're in agreement, and I'm glad you see past the 'ranty' tone, that is actually appreciated, don't let my tone undersell that.
I think the real question about numbers is that, in a pvp context, not all numbers are equal. A level 50 newbie goes down easier in a fight than a combatant who has been pvping daily for 2 years. It's possible to be numerically 8v8, for example, and still be "outnumbered" in a combat sense.
One of my complaints is the extent to which timequakes give org credits. Given the size of the timequake area and the current state of pvp, it becomes possible for orgs to shut out orgs they don't like entirely from the timequake area and prevent them from getting timequake orgpoints while allowing timequake orgpoints for their friends, making timequakes turn orgpoints (and, importantly, org credits) just another mechanism by which current "top" orgs can get more on top. I think a cap of 50 orgpoints for timequakes per year is a bit high, considering that winning a village, which happens roughly once per game year, only gives 15.
I feel like for the most part, you're agreeing with me here. I am asking the question 'populations were close, why aren't you engaging?' That's exactly the question I want to answer and solve. I want to know that answer, but when you're saying one thing, but I'm observing something else, something has to give.
@Orael - I wasn't at the first timequake, but the last time 'numbers were close' and Halli/Mag/Seren decided to pull out was the Ptoma revolt in the mountain wars, and we threw in the towel because no one wanted to fight a stack of three Shadowdancers with twist and balanceless asthma, much less in an aquameld. Not because people didn't want to die, but because people didn't see how, given the way they were being locked down, they had any chance of not dying the same way the next round.I don't want to derail this thread to be about skill complaints, and I realize that I am inviting accusations of 'git gud' from some, but if you are going to ask for an answer, then I am going to give one that is as honest as I can be.
(clan): Falmiis says, "Aramelise, verb, 1. adorn with many flowers."
These timequakes are roughly around 15 rooms in size, so any melder can have the entirety covered and immediately know when someone enters,regardless of the random room. Also, the orgcredit points function like they Domoth ones, aka a tic per unique one. Did you do three timequakes today? That's 15 total points. Just chipping in with data I've also been gathering.
Yeah, the orgpoints thing is pretty huge. I wouldn't mind if it were equally available to everyone to encourage participation, but it ticking only after 10 minutes is really rough. It's hard to stay alive for 10 minutes in a meld with a big group hammering away at you, so in practice it'll end up with 3/6 orgs with full orgpoints from fortressing during timequakes and others unable to get any. I would suggest either capping the orgpoints generated per year at a lower level, or lowering the threshold required to gain orgpoints during a timequake.
(clan): Falmiis says, "Aramelise, verb, 1. adorn with many flowers."
Comments
Where I'm coming from is this thing where many of us have explained that we're really interested in having some sort of way to get anomalies for less-populated orgs. You say you're looking for improvements to the system, and this would be the best place to start: having everyone able to actually participate and have informed, valid information on what tweaks need to be made. You have a headstart, and you're focusing on that and how you can get ahead further as opposed to making sure everyone else can take part. Not only that, but you're trying to cushion any mistakes you make during this trial period, when some orgs can't even get anomalies right now.
Sorry, fixed this too. All better?
I'm more interested in showing orgs that they can compete, and even if they don't have the numbers, they can still work on research, albeit at a slower rate. I'm not saying the admin should just hand anomalies out, but they should be more accessible. I feel like an anomaly forming on the elemental planes for cities and ethereal reflections for forests would be great. A rift only that org can get into, maybe open for 30 minutes (as opposed to an hour for the contested ones, like the old Nexus Weakenings?), but happening slightly more frequently ). I feel like if an org (let's say, Serenwilde) were to see that they could actually participate, and get used to how these work, it might empower them to try to compete and get more. Success empowers people and raises morale. Yes, competing in contested rifts should get you ahead, because we really shouldn't punish success.
I'd love to see anomalies at gnome traders, but I'd also like to see the gnome traders available for more trades. Right now, there are a slim handful of people who are able to instantly get to traders, track them, trade, and get back out within seconds. The people who can do this are generally people who already have bubblixes, as opposed to people who would have to find a ship, or buy a button, get there, stumble around, hope they don't get attacked by the earlier person who is obviously both better prepared and better equipped/trained, trade, and get back out. I'd also like to see the ability to form anomalies out of goop. Maybe 2k goop (100 credits, according to the Admin) for an anomaly. Maybe even let org leaders form anomalies for power right out of the nexus.
I have no personal opinion on upkeep costs at this time. I feel like it should be left as-is until we see that it's really detrimental to growth and org reserves.
What I do not want is for orgs who are currently militarily and population-wise well stocked to get just that much further ahead of the curve with new powers and new abilities, and demoralizing the orgs who aren't as well off and able to compete, and giving people a reason not to log in. I feel that while people -should- look at losing as a reason to try harder, this isn't going to happen except in a few cases, and it tends to turn into people leaving the game entirely because they don't feel they can overcome the current "leader" org, or quitting playing their characters and rolling alts in said org(s). I personally enjoy playing in underdog orgs and trying to bolster them and help them. Most people don't.
- A device that automatically generates 1 anomaly for the org of the type of timequake that just happens (the "lowest involvement" route).
- A device that you feed 50 essence motes into to empower it. If you do, it will automatically harvest one anomaly from the next timequake that forms of that timequake's type (theoretically orgs that think they will get lots from a timequake may not bother, if your org is concerned you can go empower your machine).
- A device that has to be attuned to a specific type of timequake (you can change the attunement 1x per IC year), and whenever that type of timequake occurs it harvests 1 anomaly (a "slower" way of passive generation, maybe more palatable to admin since the generation rate is 25% of an "every time" thing?).
I kind of like #2 because it requires the org to actively be involved in the generation instead of just letting it build up without trying.There are some good ideas here, I do want to make sure we're fostering an environment where people feel like they can compete.
I don't like lockout mechanics. I don't think they promote competition but instead, actually stifle it. They remove the incentive to compete because they ultimately punish someone for winning and reward someone for losing (or not even trying). I think we see that with domoths.
The other suggestions by Shaddus and Xenthos are both good, and I'm going to think over them. We've certainly already considered having gnome traders being able to trade anomalies as well.
One other thing I do want to point out is that deaths in timequakes don't cost any XP. You're not losing anything for dying (other than curatives and power) when competing in them. We specifically did that to encourage people to put forth effort despite the odds, because they don't have anything to lose and everything to gain.
re: Upkeep costs. I don't think we're going to do anything now. We'll wait and see how it goes but it isn't anything urgent. I mentioned that silk stockpiles were really high, and to note, silk isn't the only comm that Nature path uses. Gold and marble stocks are in similar states.
But that rare occasion isn't a driving force, there is no competition in this game. There hasn't been for quite a while, and stating there has been really needs to be investigated more closely. The only competition in this game right now, is the Envoy Wars. The people of Mag, Seren, and Halli put up with this on a daily basis, still trying to offer PvP when we can even muster a small force, and it is usually met with a deluge of people, easily doubling and often tripling the number we bring. Back to the original point though, people aren't sitting back to protect their precious XP levels, they're sitting back because quite frankly the power invested in the defences is worth more to us than making the 'attempt' and instantly getting murdered by a fortress.
In additon to the normal timequakes you also have arena quakes. Basically normal timequakes but only three people from any one org can enter at a time. EG Three mags, Three Serens, Three Gloms etc can enter.
During the first timequake, which I personally observed, the one that you ran to forums to complain about overwhelming numbers, the numbers were 10 for Glom/Celest and 7 for Mag/Choros. You're making claims here of 'double or triple our number' when the instance that triggered this complaint wasn't even double.
Even your claim that had we included everyone, you'd still be outnumbered isn't true either. The numbers on the game at the time of the first timequake were 18-16. They had 2 people on you.
I'm not saying this to be all 'git gud' or 'try harder' but to be frankly honest and critical about the situation. What I observed is that you felt like you couldn't compete, so you just didn't. That's what I want to combat. That feeling that you can't compete, the feeling that you're going to throw in the towel because you just feel like you don't have a chance without giving it an honest to god shot.
I'm all for changing this perception, for trying to promote combat and that feeling that you do stand a chance. We need to look at each situation critically, and as you say 'investigate it more closely' but that's going to require you to realize that you are not always vastly outnumbered. It's going to take some acknowledgment on both sides to move forward.
To clarify, I'm not saying that you never are outnumbered or even that in most situations you are not outnumbered. I'm saying in this one situation - that you claimed you were - you were not really. We're on the same team here, and we're going to need to be honest and critical about what's happening, why it's happening and what we can do to fix the situation.
I don't disagree with this, but can you give a general idea of the various strengths of the people involved?
First, I'm not going to let that slip where what I've said is taken completely out of the context. I didn't run to the forums to complain about the numbers. The post you're soft-quoting is in response to 'the perception' in which I quote
ANY KIND OF CONFLICT, no where is 'first timequake' mentioned. Hard to see it, but I also bolded a period, the grammatical sign for HARD STOP. Meaning that sentence and thought are indeed separated from what follows. What followed it was the hope we keep Timequakes off Twitter.
Second, the 'trigger to my complaint' was what we just covered, not the timequake. If you feel this is a false statement, feel free to quote me where I specify the timequake. When I stated if I counted all of Mag, including novices, that AGAIN ties back into the ANY KIND OF CONFLICT.
Third, you observed that we felt we couldn't compete? That we just decided "Screw it."? No no, you're absolutely correct, none of us showed or made an attempt at the event, we just sat back so that we could complain and further the status quo. Here's a simple question: How many times are you willing to def up, die, and repeat before you shrug your shoulders and just walk away? It's almost insulting that you think we don't give things a shot, actually no, it just is down right insulting. We give absolutely every event that we can even muster a small group, and I do mean small, a honest attempt. The feeling that we can't compete comes from the fact that is it just so thoroughly beaten into us, that we're just starting to accept it. You know, the bullied kid who starts to believe what the tormentor says. Putting it nicely, PvP isn't fun for us, most of us anyway, but do it because the game mandates it to get anything.
Fourth, if we want to change the perception, give the person on the ground the ability to actually stand up, get a drink of water, and actually remember what anything other than the floor feels like. Want us to feel like we have a chance? Give us the actual chance, you'd be amazed at the results. I've never stated that we are always outnumbered, that it just happens too frequently, and that is the case. There is a difference between total population and population willing to engage in PvP, do not mix those numbers.
To clarify, I am saying that we are quite often outnumbered. I'm saying in this situation, I didn't lodge that complaint. If we're on the same team, then we really do need to start looking at options that alleviate the stress levels and let players that are constantly kicked to the ground feel like their actively participating and being allowed to progress, rather than be told, "Your total population is equivalent, why aren't you engaging?". The better question is, "How do we make players engage in conflict that isn't just PvP?". I cannot remember a single time in my many years of playing where PvP was actually fun or engaging, it was just a mandatory requirement if you wanted to progress in anything ever.
The trigger for the complaint was the timequake, given by your first post immediately after the timequake stating something along the lines of 'I was hoping this would get addressed, we couldn't even get our foot in'. Which prompted this entire thread of conversation.
I'm not really sure where you're going with your third point. You're basically saying the same thing I am? Here's exactly what I observed. 4 of you (Avurekhos, Kalnid, Choros and yourself) ran in, three of you died and the previous 3, plus 3 more grouped up outside the rift (minus yourself at this point), and then decided not to give it another go. Again, I'm not trying to say 'try harder' or 'git gud', I'm simply saying what I observed and the feeling I got is that you threw in the towel because you didn't think you had a chance. I agree that the perception that you can't compete is deeply ingrained. That's why I want to address it!
Your fourth point, again, I'm with you, we're on the same page there. I'm glad we can find some common ground there.
I feel like for the most part, you're agreeing with me here. I am asking the question 'populations were close, why aren't you engaging?' That's exactly the question I want to answer and solve. I want to know that answer, but when you're saying one thing, but I'm observing something else, something has to give.
It triggers when the first citizen of that org gets dailycredits.
One of my complaints is the extent to which timequakes give org credits. Given the size of the timequake area and the current state of pvp, it becomes possible for orgs to shut out orgs they don't like entirely from the timequake area and prevent them from getting timequake orgpoints while allowing timequake orgpoints for their friends, making timequakes turn orgpoints (and, importantly, org credits) just another mechanism by which current "top" orgs can get more on top. I think a cap of 50 orgpoints for timequakes per year is a bit high, considering that winning a village, which happens roughly once per game year, only gives 15.
@Orael - I wasn't at the first timequake, but the last time 'numbers were close' and Halli/Mag/Seren decided to pull out was the Ptoma revolt in the mountain wars, and we threw in the towel because no one wanted to fight a stack of three Shadowdancers with twist and balanceless asthma, much less in an aquameld. Not because people didn't want to die, but because people didn't see how, given the way they were being locked down, they had any chance of not dying the same way the next round. I don't want to derail this thread to be about skill complaints, and I realize that I am inviting accusations of 'git gud' from some, but if you are going to ask for an answer, then I am going to give one that is as honest as I can be.