(Quote)
Yes, it is. Sure, I've joined more times than most people, but I'm still not the only person who's had problems with it. The problem is not the stated rules, it's attempting to get enough or the right number of people to give an answe…
(Quote)
This was not about ascension, though, as already stated. I am aware that that's all you're willing to consider at this moment - but game balance has been bad before, for completely unrelated reasons. Other players have pointed it out …
(Quote)
1. Rather than jumping immediately to defending Glomdoring, you could consider the observation in context with everything else. As it is, I mention it solely because someone else did. Before I brought it up, the requirements to be une…
Yeah, and it's a difficult problem to solve. Raw numbers aren't all that matters in combat when no one knows what to do. And if you don't know how to lead, why would you want to try leading what is likely a losing battle? And if th…
(Quote)
Thank you for pointing this out, because this is exactly the dilemma I have in thinking about these situations. And I don't know the answer in every case. If I did, I wouldn't lose sleep thinking about it. People should be allowed to …
(Quote)
What is the reality of what happens? Nothing you're saying here seems directly related to what I've said. Is your argument "never cause drama?" Then I want a definition for what you think that means, because
(Quote)
Well, the fact is, if the *only way* you believe you can enjoy the game is if nothing ever changes - you're not going to keep playing the game. That's not a realistic mentality to have, even if alliances were static. And it's no…
(Quote)
Hmm, I can understand that perspective. But this implies that only some people are able to take risks and learn from them. I wouldn't say it's good to constantly be causing drama either - I mean, I can still count on two hands the num…
(Quote)
Complicated question, Nepenthe. Most of those involved weren't aware of how much of it was based on ooc knowledge taken ic. I didn't realize it myself until a few months later, at which point it no longer mattered. As it is - the inci…
(Quote)
Well, there are 180 total possible points available that don't require combat or conflict outside of your org (designs, stage, library, psychodrama). I would go in the other direction, and give rewards for pk competitions.
(Quote)
.Sure, people should find things in the game they like outside of combat, especially if the don't like combat or conflict events. But there are people on the SL side that do. They should have some opportunity to participate in that part of …
(Quote)
This is also why I think more fluid and less restrictive alliances would be better, but I don't think we should base it solely on numbers. Those are going to fluctuate from week to week, and there should be some consistency about who …
(Quote)
The trouble is, the lower morale from losing battles also hurts the motivation to compete in orgcredits. They may not be directly related and a lot of it isn't combat, but consider: OrgA is winning the fights and has a lot of people s…
(Quote)
To some extent, sure. The point is not to tell people they aren't allowed to try and win, but to shift the motivations away from 15 vs 5, or to give those 5 some other way to compete. Both in pk, or in improving the org.
(Quote)
Eh, but that sounds like it would force alliances to be static. If one side is always going to be winning, I'm not sure this would help. I don't remember the details of the report, but I agree with the spirit of it.
(Quote)
I like the idea of this, but not sure how this would work for things like villages and flares. I think I or someone else suggested at one time the idea of making it harder to capture villages the more you have, with the idea that no o…
(Quote)
I mean, things can already get gamed with orgpoints. I really like the idea of making individual or small group combat linked to orgpoints. People should be encouraged to get better at combat, and to see some tangible benefit for it. …
(Quote)
I agree that the admin have done well to improve the game and the actual mechanics of combat. And the improvements going on in Celest and rp there is really cool and the volunteers deserve a ton of praise for it.
(Quote)
I can agree that having the admin force alliance changes arbitrarily would likely end badly. But as it is, players aren't terribly likely to change them organically themselves, which I do think is a bad thing.
(Quote)
I think you're demanding too much and too vague a solution from the admin. I have tried to be clear that this is not the fault of the players in my mind - everyone, on both sides, is playing to what they enjoy.
(Quote)
I think making it easier to change alliances would work better toward conflict and combat balance. And part of that could be to rework treaties so that they only cover conflict events. Rp-wise it could be that the orgs don't like each…
(Quote)
I hate the treaties more than I could probably coherently type right now. They're restrictive to a ridiculous degree, forcing orgs and players into positions that don't necessarily make rp sense, and I don't see why it's necessary. It…