A reasoned discussion of the current state of Armageddon vis-a-vis Olden Times

[Marauder Moe]

Armageddon used to be a game that if you put in the effort, went about it seriously, got people involved and Staff thought it was a cool idea, they'd go along with it and build what you needed and you could leave a permanent mark in the game world.

No it didn't.

Players/characters who left a permanent change in the world have always been a very rare exception.

Now it's all automated and bureaucratic with an endless amount of forms to fill out and rules to follow and checkmarks that turned the mud into the static world that I feel it has turned into.

Navigating a "bureaucracy" is better than the old way where you had to know the right staffer and socially tickle their fancy just the right way or, in many cases, simply BE staff running a player avatar or otherwise having personal game agendas to get change done.

[Eyeball]

Speaking of barriers, here's a perception:



We all know who is at the top, watching for little peons trying to carry their little requests across the plains of pits and ashes.  

One does not simply submit into RequestTool. Its black gates are guarded by more than just Storytellers. There is Ginka there that does not sleep. The great Producers are ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire, ash, and dust. The very air you breathe is a poisonous fume. Not with ten thousand applications could you do this. It is folly.

[Case]

I can call myself whatever I want

[Jave]

My interpretation of the response to nauta's request is that she could have endlessly emoted planting the seedling and caring for it, even setting out arranged seedling objects if such things exist in the world, yet each reboot there would be an empty pot. This response about not doing a plant at all just reinforces that.

Ugh, that's not the right interpretation.  I did some emoting, asked staff if it took, and staff explained the lore and history and why it was probably a bad idea.  So I stopped, but I wasn't told to stop.  Staff handled it fine, Eyeball.  Just, I dunno, pick another example.

I should say, though, that the room descriptions and the 'look north' off Caravan's suggests that there are such plants there, especially the 'look north', but Jave said she'd take care of it.  No big deal.

Eyeball's point about the room descriptions for the road leading to the temple being an orgy of green still were spot on and as I said I would, I threw that up on the staff board to ask what the deal was with that. The answer: oversight.

We're people. We overlook stuff or miss stuff even with the quality control processes we have in place to try and minimize it.

I'll be toning down those room descriptions to reflect a more modest amount of flora and bring them in line with the way the temple itself is described. Thanks for bringing that to our attention.

... ... oh right. I'm also a he 

[Majikal]

On the topic of changing the game world, I've been part and kicked off starting plenty of change. Some as minor as a room descriptions, others such as designing and rebuilding a wagon, a garden, a statue, designing nearly all of the crafts for a clan while not playing a crafter, I've removed a tribe from the game with my own plot, I've torn rifts between dimensions, I've travelled between dimensions, I've started a plague, I've joined my 'soul' with another pc, I had the element of Ruk (like, all of it) chase me through the desert and try and bury me beneath tidal waves of sand until a whiran saved my life (gamechanging for those that got to witness)... the list goes on and on and on.  I find that when I am proactive, communicate my intentions with staff, get players involved and aim to make the game enjoyable for those around me and my clan or indie group or family or whatever... shit tends to happen, shit tends to happen well, and shit tends to happen with staff support.

Someone said something about not being able to do a plant in a temple or something, honestly I didn't scroll back and read to see the full scoop, but here's my take...

Say I wanted to put a pymlithe/baobab whatever in the Vivaduan temple, I'd talk with my templemates about it, hire some crew to go and claim a sapling or whatever, virtual sapling, who cares. Bring it back. Nurture it. Maybe fail to keep it alive, try to figure out why, realize my pc hasn't ever really seen a tree like this, it's a northern plant so maybe you want to talk with a northern expert! Hire that Fale aide you know that mingles with that filthy northern necker, maybe that necker knows a Dasari, maybe he chats with said dasari.. brings you back information about how to care for a Pymlithe! Now we're cookin! Hire the crew again, get another sapling but make it a real healthy one cause now you got some dasari lore to weigh in on, drop that pot the mercs give you with the ldesc of having a dink ass sapling in it. Rp around the sapling, maybe a jaded mage steals it! PLOT! Maybe someone is secretly poisoning the plant and changing the ldesc to reflect it, plot! Maybe your sapling goes undisturbed and you make it a side project to keep taking care of it. None of that took staff support, but you created fun for people. Keep the staff updated on the plot with your monthly reports, maybe one day it becomes a hardcoded part of the gameworld. Tada. Way cooler than get plant, drop plant, request for room change. Which added jackshit to the game that revolves around storytelling.


I've been told no, but when I'm told no on something it's often with a response as to why which makes sense. Sorry, we can't wagonz cuz of game limitations. Sorry, this wouldn't make sense because of this. I've NEVER just been told no, without explanation, or with a dickish reply.

[Majikal]

Armageddon used to be a game that if you put in the effort, went about it seriously, got people involved and Staff thought it was a cool idea, they'd go along with it and build what you needed and you could leave a permanent mark in the game world.

No it didn't.

Players/characters who left a permanent change in the world have always been a very rare exception.

Now it's all automated and bureaucratic with an endless amount of forms to fill out and rules to follow and checkmarks that turned the mud into the static world that I feel it has turned into.

Navigating a "bureaucracy" is better than the old way where you had to know the right staffer and socially tickle their fancy just the right way or, in many cases, simply BE staff running a player avatar or otherwise having personal game agendas to get change done.

And what Moe said. Though 'very rare exception' may not have been my word choice. The game was more of a free for all sandbox for all staff back in the day and it caused problems which the new system of staff management has completely nulled. I'm much happier with this new setup. Not that I didn't have fun in the olden times.

[Jave]

Maybe I'm not grokking this correctly but I'm confused by what you wrote. I'm not sure in what way you think I was being unfair.

Sorry, it was a simple point about the 'telephone' comment you made.  Basically, you said something like: and this is what happens when players play telephone, they misrepresent the facts terribly.  But, really, he got all the facts right (except the kind of tree) he just didn't know what the staff response was or would be (he didn't know - or was playing coy - that there had been a riot, etc. etc.).  I can explain privately if you want.

Ah, I understand now. I suppose that did come off as more accusatory than it was meant to be. I wasn't trying to admonish anyone, I just wanted to make a broader point, and that is as follows:

If you hear stories about staff refusing to let a player do something that sounds so incredibly benign and harmless as to redefine stupidity ... odds are it's made up entirely, or you are missing some choice bits of information that would make that story sound a whole lot different from what you've currently got in your mind.

What "red tape" and "bureaucracy" that we have is basically there for quality control, and it's not nearly as foreboding as some people seem to envision it.

[Inks]

I have never been denied doing anything by staff, to be honest. I have been denied by superiors from seeking bloody retribution, but I still could have. I will try creating something on a pc and see how it goes, I feel staff response the last couple of pages is very reasonable, if it actually works like this.

I guess we could always give it a go rather than talking about how X will never happen.

[Taven]

Thread Ideas and Suggestions Not Addressed Yet

I updated this post with all the stuff that staff did address. It's a pretty neat list. Also, I think it's pretty awesome that Jave is going to edit some room descriptions based on this thread. Great stuff!

Staff doesn't have to address everything on this list my any means, but if they do want to, this is intended to make it easier to do so.

• Staff Communication - Improve staff communication by having standards of polite and courteous behavior; possibility of developing guidelines/requirements staff-side

• Requests and OOC Communication Requirements - Either streamlining processes that require requests, or making it clearer why steps are needed, enabling players to feel more productive about requests. Possibility of making guidelines for how long typical requests take (and having staff contact to say that they're working on it, if it's taking longer). Perhaps a way to include better separation/clarity of IC/OOC on results ("You are free to pursue this in game. However, your character would have heard...")

• Advertising Plots Better - Enabling more wide-spread advertising of plots, perhaps cultivating a presence on other MUD forums to do so (ex: voting forums). The goal is to capture some of the interest and player involvement that HRPTs or larger plots have had, or enable those not currently involved with Arm to see how active it is (and thus get interested in participating)

• Staff Initiative on More Plots (Small Scale) - The sense that not all staff plots need to be big, sometimes staff can just take an idea and roll with it. The sense that more spontaneous or small-level staff-initiated plots or "things to do" would be welcomed. Possibly including more low-level animations, or possibly enabling things that could lead to larger plots if players chose to pursue them.

• Make Playtimes More Available (Better for Offpeakers) - Some way that allows people to see what locale/clans are active during their playtimes. One possibility would be to publish "peaktimes" and "highest offpeak numbers" of areas per month. Note that that may not capture full numbers for areas that are traveled through, or have temporary visitors.

• Announce RPT Type and Location in Newsfeed Upon Completion - When an RPT is over and done with, stick it in the newsfeed of Armagedon that a specific area had an RPT, as well as what type (social, combat, magick, high-class, low-class, etc). Goal is to better draw attention and interest, and make it more obvious what sections are more active or what types of RPT needs are being filled.

• Adding in titles and other accomplishment-rewarding small perks - Something for PCs to accomplish and gain that may not have a huge impact. An example is a fancy title or the like, or specific higher-end seating in the arena, and so on. Possibly something staff could work to develop, alternatively something that PC leadership may be able to utilize more in their play, at their discretion.

• Enable more options for Gemmers/Magickers - Giving gemmers and magickers more options for play, or making the role less isolated. Possibilities include having more people able to hire, enabling a GDB clan for gemmers to coordinate, or enabling more hang-out spaces. Balanced with desire to keep magickers scary and unloved.

• Flexible PC skills - Ability to have give and take on your PCs skills, less limited to guild and more open to change as your PC and their interests develop. Would likely need some sort of system behind it.

[nauta]

Thread Ideas and Suggestions Not Addressed Yet

I updated this post with all the stuff that staff did address. It's a pretty neat list. Also, I think it's pretty awesome that Jave is going to edit some room descriptions based on this thread. Great stuff!

Staff doesn't have to address everything on this list my any means, but if they do want to, this is intended to make it easier to do so.

• Staff Communication - Improve staff communication by having standards of polite and courteous behavior; possibility of developing guidelines/requirements staff-side

• Requests and OOC Communication Requirements - Either streamlining processes that require requests, or making it clearer why steps are needed, enabling players to feel more productive about requests. Possibility of making guidelines for how long typical requests take (and having staff contact to say that they're working on it, if it's taking longer). Perhaps a way to include better separation/clarity of IC/OOC on results ("You are free to pursue this in game. However, your character would have heard...")

Great list. 

I would also say something along the lines of cultivating a climate of positivity and encouragement, rather than a climate of negativity and discouragement.  It's subtle, and it's not about 'no': staff has to say 'no' to a lot of things, but they can say 'no' in more encouraging ways, ways that make us want to develop characters and roleplay in Armageddon.  It is, after all, a kind of collaborative story we're telling here.  If something doesn't make sense about what a player wants, or what a player is doing, perhaps staff can be proactive about working with the player about what would make sense, in a way that is encouraging -- inspiration is something that Armageddon offers in its rich documentation but it is not something I've encountered with ... the stuff behind the veil with the people upstairs.

I would also add on the subject of small-scale plots: it would be neat if staff would check into the stories that players themselves are running and encourage those stories -- nothing big, just little animations now and then.  A lot of plots feel like they come to us from the outside, and our own stories get set aside as a result.

[Lizzie]

I have previously and still disagree with the notion that characters could have skills added as their interests grow. The skill lists for guilds/subguilds provide your character with what they are, and will be, capable of doing in life. Why would anyone expect that someone should be capable of learning and being competent at every skill, just because that's what they want to do? Hey I'd love to be an astrophysicist - but I suck at math. I don't have the capacity to learn astrophysics. I can play piano, as a novice - but I won't ever be at apprentice level because I'm just not that coordinated. I'm equally uncoordinated enough that I'd make a lousy pickpocket and would likely get caught every single time, forever. I'm also not very graceful, and so I can just put the thought of becoming a ballerina to bed.

Such it is in fantasy. Not everyone is, or should be. capable of being everything. If that was possible, there'd be no need for multiple players. You'd just have one player playing one character that's good at everything, they win, game over.

Armageddon is cooperative fiction, it's not a first-person shooter. As such, it requires people working together to make it work. In order to create enough interest for that to happen, you need some people who suck at some things, and some people who suck at other things - so they all actually have some use for each other.

And so - you have guilds and subguilds, and now extended subguilds. There are so many variations of possibilities already, that you have people trying to be the best at everything and totally self-sufficient so that they don't have to rely on anyone else. I am convinced that this is one of the reasons why there are sometimes such long-lasting lulls in the playerbase. It's a phase when people think "I can do all these things, yay, I'm uber!" and then realize they have no one to interact with anymore because everyone is able to do their own thing and no one needs anyone else. That get really boring, and it only hurts the game.

I'm not saying there should be more limits, but I am saying that the guild/subguild/ext subguild should be enough to satisfy without crossing over into 1-shot wonders who burn out from boredom after they max out all their skills.

[Taven]

Not everyone is, or should be. capable of being everything. If that was possible, there'd be no need for multiple players. You'd just have one player playing one character that's good at everything, they win, game over.

Armageddon is cooperative fiction, it's not a first-person shooter. As such, it requires people working together to make it work. In order to create enough interest for that to happen, you need some people who suck at some things, and some people who suck at other things - so they all actually have some use for each other.

And so - you have guilds and subguilds, and now extended subguilds. There are so many variations of possibilities already, that you have people trying to be the best at everything and totally self-sufficient so that they don't have to rely on anyone else. I am convinced that this is one of the reasons why there are sometimes such long-lasting lulls in the playerbase. It's a phase when people think "I can do all these things, yay, I'm uber!" and then realize they have no one to interact with anymore because everyone is able to do their own thing and no one needs anyone else. That get really boring, and it only hurts the game.

I'm not saying there should be more limits, but I am saying that the guild/subguild/ext subguild should be enough to satisfy without crossing over into 1-shot wonders who burn out from boredom after they max out all their skills.

While I agree with a lot of what you're saying, I also think it would be nice to have a way to change your character's skill set after you created them.

For me, I'd think some of the following could be interesting:

• A way to change your subguild or slowly convert from one to another, as interests changed -- Note that this process would take IC years, not an instant switch enabling someone to be uber at will. It could be done only very, very rarely--Maybe just once.

• Through role-play and learning ICly, having a PC that was not started as an extended subguild gain additional skills. This would require use of a Spec App slot AFTER creation, but also require RP logs. Likewise, it would take IC years. The new extended subguild would have to be based off of the original subguild. This could NOT be used in tangent with the above.

• Low-level skill gain to represent hobbies and tinkering. Likewise, take IC years, and staff approval. Maxed at no higher then journeyman, maybe just apprentice.

There're not fully fleshed out ideas, just a brainstorm of stuff that could be neat (I'm sure they have flaws, as presented). Do you have any interest in any of these ideas, Lizzie, or do you still think it falls too much into the category of "everyone being good at everything"?

[Jihelu]

I brainstorm neat stuff all the time.


After I make the character.

Then it's just like "Well okay

[Taven]

I would also say something along the lines of cultivating a climate of positivity and encouragement, rather than a climate of negativity and discouragement.  It's subtle, and it's not about 'no': staff has to say 'no' to a lot of things, but they can say 'no' in more encouraging ways, ways that make us want to develop characters and roleplay in Armageddon.  It is, after all, a kind of collaborative story we're telling here.  If something doesn't make sense about what a player wants, or what a player is doing, perhaps staff can be proactive about working with the player about what would make sense, in a way that is encouraging -- inspiration is something that Armageddon offers in its rich documentation but it is not something I've encountered with ... the stuff behind the veil with the people upstairs.

I've actually been blessed with incredibly encouraging staff for awhile. I have to say that when staff show enthusiasm, listen, and respond thoroughly, it really heightens my enjoyment of the game. It feels like they care about my little tiny piece of the game world. I've also been told "no" in my time by staff. I can tell you with 100% certainty that I agree that everything is in the delivery.

I've had staff say "no" in ways that felt accusatory and aggressive before, and it really made me angry and frustrated. It wasn't that they were wrong, because there were reasons for saying no. It was all about the presentation. More recently, when my staff has said "no" to things and it's disappointed me, and I've expressed that disappointment, they have been incredibly receptive. They've taken the time to listen to my points, what I was saying, and explain why it was a no. Even if it's a no, being able to engage with staff about it does make things feel better. A quote from one report: "We also appreciate you getting in touch instead of letting reservations linger."

I guess what my point is in all this is that I think staff has been doing a lot in the past, oh, nearly a year now to really work with players and try to develop a positive atmosphere. I think that it's a two-way street, also. We, as players, can try to avoid letting disagreements fester. It won't make it a "yes", but staff is willing to go over the whys of a decision when it's a "no".

There have been times when I've been really, really upset about staff. Now is not one of them. I feel like right now, our staff are incredibly engaged and active with the game, and with trying to respond to players in a positive manner. I mean--Just look at this thread! It's had a ton of staffers posting, trying to be reactive and responsive to player ideas, thoughts, and concerns.

I would also add on the subject of small-scale plots: it would be neat if staff would check into the stories that players themselves are running and encourage those stories -- nothing big, just little animations now and then.  A lot of plots feel like they come to us from the outside, and our own stories get set aside as a result.

I agree that little animations, or animations to support player initiatives can make a big difference. I've been happy in this regard lately, too. My advice to people who want support or comments on the little stuff is to include personal plots in your reports. I've included this in reports... Not every plot your PC wants to happen will (I've had a good number of plots not happen, and it still bums me out), but there's a good number that can and will, especially if you pursue them and get PC and staff support (I've had a lot of awesome things happen, too, that were thrilling).

So, yeah, that's my take on stuff.

[Lizzie]

While I agree with a lot of what you're saying, I also think it would be nice to have a way to change your character's skill set after you created them.

For me, I'd think some of the following could be interesting:

• A way to change your subguild or slowly convert from one to another, as interests changed -- Note that this process would take IC years, not an instant switch enabling someone to be uber at will. It could be done only very, very rarely--Maybe just once.

• Through role-play and learning ICly, having a PC that was not started as an extended subguild gain additional skills. This would require use of a Spec App slot AFTER creation, but also require RP logs. Likewise, it would take IC years. The new extended subguild would have to be based off of the original subguild. This could NOT be used in tangent with the above.

• Low-level skill gain to represent hobbies and tinkering. Likewise, take IC years, and staff approval. Maxed at no higher then journeyman, maybe just apprentice.

There're not fully fleshed out ideas, just a brainstorm of stuff that could be neat (I'm sure they have flaws, as presented). Do you have any interest in any of these ideas, Lizzie, or do you still think it falls too much into the category of "everyone being good at everything"?

I'd be fine with the notion that, as someone progresses, they'd be able to add skills that would show up as an extended subguild. But - that already is possible through the extended subuilds. That's what it's for.

My concern is the believable capacity to learn, vs. the fantastical capacity to learn. Not everyone has the capacity to learn everything. Even a genius sucks at something and will never have the capacity to learn it. There are just some things you can't do, period. That's believable.

On the other hand, I do believe that all skills that have on-off switches should be capable of being tried by everyone, even if they don't have the skill. So - someone trying to pick a lock should be able to try and pick it - and if they don't have the skill, they get an error message telling them they suck at it and fail. Miserably. Climb skill - the same (though I think everyone should have the climb skill at novice unless they've special apped a one-legged PC, in which case climb should result in failure every single time and increase the chance of catastrophic failure). Everyone should be capable of dual-wielding - but only people with the weapon skill should be capable of hitting their target - unless they have a special-apped one-armed PC, in which case they should not be capable of dual-wielding anything, and their "hold" ability should be taken away from them.

I think everyone should have the coded ability to "peek" and "steal" and "listen on" and "scan on" and "hunt," but if they lack the actual skill, then they should fail every time because they're just simply not perceptive enough. Their lack of perception equates with a lack of capacity to succeed at these particular skills. They should be able to try, and they should receive a message saying that they failed. A reminder that - their character is myopic. Or near-sighted. Or half-blind. Or too easily distracted to pay attention long enough to notice anything. Or mentally disabled in the perception processing area of their brains, or whatever.

As for low-level skills for hobbies and tinkering, I believe ALL characters should have some crafting ability, and if their chosen guild/subguild doesn't include specific crafts, then they should get some random craft set at novice, with no chance to improve. This would give everyone the -capacity- to do something for the hell of it that is creative. Not everyone has creative talents, but everyone can whittle wood. So - not everyone can whittle wood into anything useful - but you should be able to whittle it into a toothpick or sliver of wood (which is, in essence, what a toothpick is).

[Riev]

I don't remember who said it, off the top of my head (It might've been Blaze?)...


You want to work on pipes, but you aren't Mario. You're Joe the Plumber.

[Taven]

I'd be fine with the notion that, as someone progresses, they'd be able to add skills that would show up as an extended subguild. But - that already is possible through the extended subuilds. That's what it's for.

I think the main difference is just when it happens. Right now, the Armageddon character design system is set up that whatever guild you pick before you get IG, your character sticks with those skills, no matter what. If you want to have an ext subguild, you need to plan it out in advanced. Which, you know, can be fine. But it might also be fun to be able to (through use of a special app, and significant IC RP, which would make it more challenging then doing it out of the box), expand a PC's horizon's.

That's also why I think that changing subguilds (normal ones) through time and RP could be interesting. Maybe in their youth they really liked whittling wood, but now that they're older, they've gotten out of practice--But they're better at working with flowers, because they learned they really liked flowers (or whatever).

My concern is the believable capacity to learn, vs. the fantastical capacity to learn. Not everyone has the capacity to learn everything. Even a genius sucks at something and will never have the capacity to learn it. There are just some things you can't do, period. That's believable.

Yeah, I definitely am not advocating for people to be super skilled, so they don't need to rely on anyone else. I agree with your other post about how different skill sets helps encourage interaction and plots. But, I do like the idea of some flexibility.

As for low-level skills for hobbies and tinkering, I believe ALL characters should have some crafting ability, and if their chosen guild/subguild doesn't include specific crafts, then they should get some random craft set at novice, with no chance to improve. This would give everyone the -capacity- to do something for the hell of it that is creative. Not everyone has creative talents, but everyone can whittle wood. So - not everyone can whittle wood into anything useful - but you should be able to whittle it into a toothpick or sliver of wood (which is, in essence, what a toothpick is).

It could be neat to develop some more flavor-skills, with really low-level options. Like the guy who could craft not very well made wood figurines, to keep his hands busy, to use your example. The issue here would be looking at the current subguilds and making sure that giving "hobby skills" to those without them wouldn't lessen the strength of the subguild. A hobby skill should be just for flavor, and not get you anywhere, practically speaking.

[The Silence of the Erdlus]

It could be neat to develop some more flavor-skills, with really low-level options. Like the guy who could craft not very well made wood figurines, to keep his hands busy, to use your example. The issue here would be looking at the current subguilds and making sure that giving "hobby skills" to those without them wouldn't lessen the strength of the subguild. A hobby skill should be just for flavor, and not get you anywhere, practically speaking.

I like this idea. I've always knitted, but I can only do squares and rectangle shapes for as long as I can remember. Some people don't get to advanced.

[seidhr]

Conceptually I wouldn't be opposed to the ability to gain a couple skills to the apprentice level for "hobby" purposes, but the thing is you can already RP doing that if you want to.  There's nothing that says you have to engage all your character's skills from day one and begin using them immediately.  The way the code for the game is set up, you have a tree of skills that is dictated by your guild and subguild.  You can't learn anything outside that tree, except for the few skills that are possible for everyone to learn - for example pilot.

Yes, it's true that staff can manually adjust what skills a character has - but we don't have time to be pouring over countless pages of "logs" to determine whether someone has invested sufficient time and effort to learn woodcarving or whatever.  It'd be rough for one person - but take into account that everyone would want to do it, and now you have to do it times fifty or one hundred.

People already try to attach these mega-logs sometimes to other types of requests just to show us how "X" went down, and they're always trying to be helpful - appreciated!  But.. the attempt to be helpful is misguided because the logs are such a pain to manage, and again from a time perspective it's just not possible for everyone to read through them.

[Jave]

Thread Ideas and Suggestions Not Addressed Yet

I updated this post with all the stuff that staff did address. It's a pretty neat list. Also, I think it's pretty awesome that Jave is going to edit some room descriptions based on this thread. Great stuff!

This change is done and already in game, by the way.  

Staff doesn't have to address everything on this list my any means, but if they do want to, this is intended to make it easier to do so.

I'll take cracks at different ones as time permits me.

• Staff Communication - Improve staff communication by having standards of polite and courteous behavior; possibility of developing guidelines/requirements staff-side

While I'm not sure if it's been codified anywhere in the staff resources, there is a culture of airing on the side of politeness even in the face of rude behavior among the staff. I can think of a few examples of staff blowing up on a player but it's always at the tail end of a long stream of abuse, and they're so few and far between I could probably count them on my fingers without ever needing to get to my toes.

We do have codified rules regulating how we interact with players in the game, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to have some drafted to guide conduct during correspondence as well, but overall I think communication is quite polite and courteous already, especially in light of some of the correspondence we receive.

• Requests and OOC Communication Requirements - Either streamlining processes that require requests, or making it clearer why steps are needed, enabling players to feel more productive about requests. Possibility of making guidelines for how long typical requests take (and having staff contact to say that they're working on it, if it's taking longer). Perhaps a way to include better separation/clarity of IC/OOC on results ("You are free to pursue this in game. However, your character would have heard...")

There are already guidelines for how long typical request turnaround should be, and new storytellers like myself who are on a 3 month probation period are assessed at the end of that time by how quickly we turned requests around, among other factors.

I agree however, that it would be more friendly if we dropped players a line every couple of days to let them know that their request is still being worked on. A lot of notes that players cannot see get added to the requests they submit by different staff members before a reply is ever given to a player so from our perspective a request can look like it's still busy with a lot of correspondence being had back and forth among ourselves while we might forget that from the perspective of the submitting player it's been radio silence for four to five days.

And every once in awhile, a request does honestly slip through the cracks and a week later someone will note something to the effect of: Crap I thought we replied to this person already! I'll write one up as soon as I get home from work!

It happens rarely, but it happens. We're human.

But odds are, if you don't get a reply the first few days of your request submission, it's not because it's being ignored, it's because it's being discussed, information is being researched/created, etc.

• Advertising Plots Better - Enabling more wide-spread advertising of plots, perhaps cultivating a presence on other MUD forums to do so (ex: voting forums). The goal is to capture some of the interest and player involvement that HRPTs or larger plots have had, or enable those not currently involved with Arm to see how active it is (and thus get interested in participating)

One of our staff members is actually already working on this, due to the feedback you all provided.

• Staff Initiative on More Plots (Small Scale) - The sense that not all staff plots need to be big, sometimes staff can just take an idea and roll with it. The sense that more spontaneous or small-level staff-initiated plots or "things to do" would be welcomed. Possibly including more low-level animations, or possibly enabling things that could lead to larger plots if players chose to pursue them.

We already come up with these kinds of plots ourselves. There are 2 that I am already involved in, plus another 3 that players initiated and I'm supporting. But they aren't as quick and easy to roll out here as they are in a table top setting for obvious reasons.

[Taven]

I updated this post with all the stuff that staff did address. It's a pretty neat list. Also, I think it's pretty awesome that Jave is going to edit some room descriptions based on this thread. Great stuff!

This change is done and already in game, by the way.  

Staff doesn't have to address everything on this list my any means, but if they do want to, this is intended to make it easier to do so.

I'll take cracks at different ones as time permits me.

That's awesome. Thanks for taking the initiative on that change, and for taking the time to respond to this.

• Staff Communication - Improve staff communication by having standards of polite and courteous behavior; possibility of developing guidelines/requirements staff-side

While I'm not sure if it's been codified anywhere in the staff resources, there is a culture of airing on the side of politeness even in the face of rude behavior among the staff. I can think of a few examples of staff blowing up on a player but it's always at the tail end of a long stream of abuse, and they're so few and far between I could probably count them on my fingers without ever needing to get to my toes.

We do have codified rules regulating how we interact with players in the game, I suppose it wouldn't hurt to have some drafted to guide conduct during correspondence as well, but overall I think communication is quite polite and courteous already, especially in light of some of the correspondence we receive.

I think that in the last few years, staff has had a lot of good communication. I kind of rambled about it previously.

But, there's still player concerns that staff is snarky or rude at times (this came up on the very first page of this thread). I think some of that is because if you're treated rudely once, it lingers for a very long time, which can be part of it. I think the other part of it is when people only get part of the story, or only see when staff snap, instead of everything leading up to it. I get the idea that the OOC perception of staff behavior can be a lot worse then what's actually happening.

I don't think that guidelines to help staff in communication would be bad.

Personally, I also think that it wouldn't be bad for us players to also work on developing some expectations for how we address staff as well. Communication is a two-way thing. Maybe that's something us players could work on in the collaboration section, something of a "Guide to Communicating with Staff", if there's an interest in that.

• Requests and OOC Communication Requirements - Either streamlining processes that require requests, or making it clearer why steps are needed, enabling players to feel more productive about requests. Possibility of making guidelines for how long typical requests take (and having staff contact to say that they're working on it, if it's taking longer). Perhaps a way to include better separation/clarity of IC/OOC on results ("You are free to pursue this in game. However, your character would have heard...")

There are already guidelines for how long typical request turnaround should be, and new storytellers like myself who are on a 3 month probation period are assessed at the end of that time by how quickly we turned requests around, among other factors.

I agree however, that it would be more friendly if we dropped players a line every couple of days to let them know that their request is still being worked on. A lot of notes that players cannot see get added to the requests they submit by different staff members before a reply is ever given to a player so from our perspective a request can look like it's still busy with a lot of correspondence being had back and forth among ourselves while we might forget that from the perspective of the submitting player it's been radio silence for four to five days.

And every once in awhile, a request does honestly slip through the cracks and a week later someone will note something to the effect of: Crap I thought we replied to this person already! I'll write one up as soon as I get home from work!

It happens rarely, but it happens. We're human.

But odds are, if you don't get a reply the first few days of your request submission, it's not because it's being ignored, it's because it's being discussed, information is being researched/created, etc.

I think that suggestion/desire from the playerbase really had three parts: (Your answer mostly addressed point 2, so I'll respond there!)

• A way for the playerbase to understand what steps are needed, to feel productive about requests

• Guidelines for Request Turn Around

• Inclusion/clarification on if a refusal is OOC or IC

A Way for Players to Feel More Productive About Requests

I actually think that this is fine, myself. I've never felt that there's a lot of hoops to jump through to get from point A to B. For me, requests are about keeping your staff informed and updated on what you're doing, so they can help make the world react to what you're doing, thus helping assist with plots.

But a lot of people do seem to think that there's just way too much "red tape" (the first page of this thread, the very first post, is about this). I guess I'd be curious on what people would like to do to improve things?

Or did we kind of address that? I know that one example was Patuk's tribe, but he felt that things were fine--In fact, he felt that part of the issue was that his format was massive and unformatted. Nyr talked about how the guidelines that were established to clarify what staff needed, and make the process smoother.



Guidelines for Request Turnaround Time

(Responding to Jave for this section now, readers can refer back to the last quote if needed.)

First of all, I had no idea that new staff was assessed by how much time it takes them to do request turnaround. That's pretty neat.

I know that personally, when staff has been taking longer on requests and just either keeps me updated or says why it took awhile ("sorry, I'm currently moving cross country!" or "sorry, I had to investigate about your question!"), I'm really understanding. We can all relate to life events, and if there's extra work to figure something out, I know I appreciate it.

I also always assume that any standard request takes at least a week, with more for the unusual ones (complaints, special apps, so on). When staff come in with a reply faster then a week, I'm always pretty impressed.



Inclusion/clarification on if a refusal is OOC or IC

What did you think about this point, Jave?

The suggestion/discussion of it was in regards to that whole pages and pages of using Nauta's tree as an example, with this as the primary post that informed the inclusion of it on the list. Basically, just a way for staff to better separate out if a response is IC or OOC.

• Advertising Plots Better - Enabling more wide-spread advertising of plots, perhaps cultivating a presence on other MUD forums to do so (ex: voting forums). The goal is to capture some of the interest and player involvement that HRPTs or larger plots have had, or enable those not currently involved with Arm to see how active it is (and thus get interested in participating)

One of our staff members is actually already working on this, due to the feedback you all provided.

Awesome! Could you elaborate at all, or is it still being finalized?

• Staff Initiative on More Plots (Small Scale) - The sense that not all staff plots need to be big, sometimes staff can just take an idea and roll with it. The sense that more spontaneous or small-level staff-initiated plots or "things to do" would be welcomed. Possibly including more low-level animations, or possibly enabling things that could lead to larger plots if players chose to pursue them.

We already come up with these kinds of plots ourselves. There are 2 that I am already involved in, plus another 3 that players initiated and I'm supporting. But they aren't as quick and easy to roll out here as they are in a table top setting for obvious reasons.

I will update the original post to reflect this. Thanks for the response!

[Nergal]

• Advertising Plots Better - Enabling more wide-spread advertising of plots, perhaps cultivating a presence on other MUD forums to do so (ex: voting forums). The goal is to capture some of the interest and player involvement that HRPTs or larger plots have had, or enable those not currently involved with Arm to see how active it is (and thus get interested in participating)

One of our staff members is actually already working on this, due to the feedback you all provided.

Awesome! Could you elaborate at all, or is it still being finalized?

I can elaborate on it. I'm going to be handling advertising efforts for our MUD on Top Mud Sites and Mud Connector. This will involve an initial posting for the game itself as well as advertisements for player and staff run RPTs and HRPTs. This will be targeted primarily toward gaining new players, though hopefully it will also get the attention of past players as well.

Here is our advertising thread on Mud Connector: http://www.mudconnect.com/SMF/index.php?topic=79536.0
I have been waiting about a week for approval on the TMS forum, hopefully that comes in soon. I am eager to advertise our game on these MUD communities.

[Taven]

I can elaborate on it. I'm going to be handling advertising efforts for our MUD on Top Mud Sites and Mud Connector. This will involve an initial posting for the game itself as well as advertisements for player and staff run RPTs and HRPTs. This will be targeted primarily toward gaining new players, though hopefully it will also get the attention of past players as well.

Here is our advertising thread on Mud Connector: http://www.mudconnect.com/SMF/index.php?topic=79536.0
I have been waiting about a week for approval on the TMS forum, hopefully that comes in soon. I am eager to advertise our game on these MUD communities.

Thanks for the update!

I have updated the list to reflect this. I also included the link you provided. If you want to update everyone when TMS finally approves you with a link to the thread, I'd be happy to include that as well. 

[Lizzie]

It's there for anyone to see.

Looks good too!

[Taven]

Conceptually I wouldn't be opposed to the ability to gain a couple skills to the apprentice level for "hobby" purposes, but the thing is you can already RP doing that if you want to.  There's nothing that says you have to engage all your character's skills from day one and begin using them immediately.  The way the code for the game is set up, you have a tree of skills that is dictated by your guild and subguild.  You can't learn anything outside that tree, except for the few skills that are possible for everyone to learn - for example pilot.

Yes, it's true that staff can manually adjust what skills a character has - but we don't have time to be pouring over countless pages of "logs" to determine whether someone has invested sufficient time and effort to learn woodcarving or whatever.  It'd be rough for one person - but take into account that everyone would want to do it, and now you have to do it times fifty or one hundred.

People already try to attach these mega-logs sometimes to other types of requests just to show us how "X" went down, and they're always trying to be helpful - appreciated!  But.. the attempt to be helpful is misguided because the logs are such a pain to manage, and again from a time perspective it's just not possible for everyone to read through them.

Hmmm. I could see where that would make a lot of extra staff work that would give very little back by way of results.

Maybe there could be more discussion on a better way to do this, that would have less intense staff work. For now, I have updated the post.

Thanks for the reply!